Nope. Nobody who is crying was involved in the bombing of Serbia. I know I wasn't. Therefore, I am certainly not a hypocrite. I can also easily turn this around on the pro-Russia whataboutists: if the bombing of civilian infrastructure in Serbia was so horrible and such a war crime, that is an admission by the Russians that they are engaging in war crimes.
But I wasn't accusing you of being a hypocrite. I was accusing the Empire of Lies of being hypocrites. And I think the Russians would not object to bombing infrastructure specifically, but point out instead that the Yugoslavia war was completely unjustified and that the West defended what it attacks now.
It is easy to tell the difference because you can't point to a specific person engaged in a specific act of hypocrisy, such as citing a person who said the bombing of Serbia was totally good and legitimate, then turning around and saying blowing up Ukraine's electric grid was totally wrong and illegitimate.
Joe Biden.
It isn't up to America individually, it's a product of globohomo, which is primarily driven by the international media in the US, EU, and commonwealth countries (UK, Canada, Aus, NZ). The US doesn't dictate to globohomo, it instead is forced to abide by the "consensus" although Republicans are more likely to rebel against it
Like with the war in Iraq. Which wasn't exactly great. That said, the US suffered no international consequences for that. No one stole the reserves of the Fed.
I would ask "when have they ever supported it?" but I already know you will reply "the genocide of Russians in Ukraine because Ukraine put some restrictions on Russian language things" which is nonsense, so I won't bother.
Cultural genocide is a thing, and Ukraine is engaging in it, though I was talking about physical extermination. The US did absolutely nothing as there was a genocide in Rwanda, and Germany and the US handed Saddam Hussein chemical weapons and/or precurors which he used to "kill his own people" as they later called it. The EU is presently supporting the genocidal government of Azerbaijan, funding his war machine, and taking photo-ops with Aliyev as a "reliable partner". Going further back, the US and UK aided the Soviet Union in its cover-up of the Katyn massacre that it committed.
So yes, they are perfectly fine with genocide when it suits them. As are the Russians, obviously, The problem is that you are in denial about the people you support, or don't support as in the case of Biden, because you have convinced yourself that he isn't as bad as Whoever.
I thought the Right was better than that, but this sub proves they're not, at least to some degree.
It isn't exactly the cream of the crop that moved to this Win. But even they are better than the radical left, as they are far more tolerant of slight dissenters like you and me than the radical left would be of someone who disagreed with them on that much.
Another thing is that once I have committed one "sin", the same people downvote and talk shit very frequently. In my opinion, this is because these people are autistic. These aren't normal people.
Some of them definitely have issues, yeah. However, I think I can say with confidence that I have never downvoted you. Because even when I disagree, you generally post interesting and substantive stuff.
I was talking about the places I listed as exceptions, like Mariupol & Kharkiv. Also Bucha.
But it's odd for this to be 'exceptional' when Russia is doing it. After all, it's standard practice for the US in Yugoslavia and Iraq. Many people don't understand why. The pro-Russia explanation appears to be that the Kremlin isn't taking the war seriously.
And did you [sic] me on Kharkiv? lol dude https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv do your FSB regulations require you to only use the russian spelling of Kharkov? lololol. Your boys have to capture the city 1st to be able to spell it.
Like I told you, you generally post good stuff, but accusing random people of being FSB officers is pretty crazy stuff. And yeah, I do laugh at people who embarrass themselves by calling Kiev "KEEEEEEV", because it's ridiculous.
I don't support going after civilians. But things like infrastructure and satellites have dual use, so they can be considered valid military targets. The sooner this was can be brought to an end, the better. And as you perhaps remember, I supported making peace in the early weeks in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality, recognition of the People's Republics and Crimea, because I thought that long wars are rarely worth it.
His basic analysis here is that if you look at historical precedents for strategic bombing, it generally is not effective unless you can sustain it at very very high levels (Germany 1944, Japan 1945) which Russia cannot do. Russia blowing up a bunch of electric grid stuff twice a month isn't accomplishing much beyond pissing civilians off, because the grid is being repaired within a reasonable time much faster than the Russians can blow it up.
We'll see.
True only if they are not the aggressor.
With due respect to your country, and I think you often mistake criticism of its foreign policy as an attack on the country or its people, but when in the recent past has the US not been the aggressor? And I say that while being OK with Afghanistan, Vietnam and Korea.
Cultural genocide is a thing, and Ukraine is engaging in it, though I was talking about physical extermination.
I consider Xinjiang a cultural genocide, but Russians in Ukraine is just whining and being over-sensitive. Ukraine is fully within its rights to make Ukrainian the official language, yet it didn't go that far. It isn't like Xinjiang where the CCP makes it illegal to own a Koran or to even speak the Uyghur language in private. Ukraine doesn't regulate non-public/government use of Russian.
Russia forcibly relocating Ukrainians in occupied territories and resettling them around Russia is a well-known type of cultural genocide, though, and one the USSR has used many times in the past.
The US did absolutely nothing as there was a genocide in Rwanda
At the end of the day, even though the Democrats very much wanted to, they did not do so for 2 reasons: (1) the lack of US logistics and infrastructure necessary to even consider any kind large scale of military deployment there, and (2) the clusterfuck of Somalia was fresh in Democrat minds.
Not caring about a genocide in central africa enough to spend enormous money and risking US lives to stop it isn't the same as supporting it.
It isn't exactly the cream of the crop that moved to this Win. But even they are better than the radical left, as they are far more tolerant of slight dissenters like you and me than the radical left would be of someone who disagreed with them on that much.
True, it's unfortunate that there aren't more reasonable people who you can actually have a discussion with. Too many people have a more zealot type mindset and can't be reasoned with. I have had a few people openly try to "drive me out" but I just blocked them so I don't get them in my inbox. I can still see their comments, though, if I look manually, and they're still at it, unaware I can't see their comments usually.
Some of them definitely have issues, yeah. However, I think I can say with confidence that I have never downvoted you. Because even when I disagree, you generally post interesting and substantive stuff.
I don't think I've downvoted you. I generally upvote your comments when I see them because you're usually putting effort into your comments even though they come from a very different perspective.
And yeah, I do laugh at people who embarrass themselves by calling Kiev "KEEEEEEV", because it's ridiculous.
I agree, it was a virtue signal to be look "look how culturally sensitive I am! I am using the local dialect!" Here's a whole article about why the libs changed it because the dirty Russians use "Kiev". It's always been Kiev in English and that's all that matters. We don't call Germany Deutschland. We don't call VW "fow vey". We don't call Japan "Nihon". We don't call "french fries" Pommes Frites (actually some snooty restaurants here do).
Dugina
I don't think Ukraine was able to pull off a car bombing in Moscow, and there's no evidence it was Ukraine. [FSB says it was based on "trust me, bro, there was totally a chick but she ran away"] If they did it, I would have expected them to keep going and kill a lot more people, and more important ones than her.
But things like infrastructure and satellites have dual use, so they can be considered valid military targets.
But the military has plenty of generators and doesn't rely on the civilian power grid, so it isn't really serving any significant military purpose. Bridges in key military areas? Sure. But going after the civilian power grid really isn't going to affect Ukrainian military forces.
And as you perhaps remember, I supported making peace in the early weeks in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality, recognition of the People's Republics and Crimea, because I thought that long wars are rarely worth it.
Problem was Russia wouldn't agree to that back then because they felt like they were winning, and now Ukraine won't agree to it because they feel like they're winning.
With due respect to your country, and I think you often mistake criticism of its foreign policy as an attack on the country or its people, but when in the recent past has the US not been the aggressor? And I say that while being OK with Afghanistan, Vietnam and Korea.
I think Russia acts that way, not the US. People criticize the US all the time and we don't bomb or threaten them for it. Russia makes threats constantly over the smallest slights or perceived lack of respect.
Korea & Vietnam were purely defensive wars, to protect South Korea & Vietnam respectively.
Gulf War 1 was to liberate Kuwait, Iraq being the aggressor.
Kosovo was a NATO operation to protect Kosovo from a Serbian attack. While I disagree with NATO and think Serbia was justified, NATO was intervening to defend Kosovo not attacking unprovoked.
Afghanistan was in response to 9/11, which was an attack on the US launched by Al Qaeda, which was hosted by the Taliban.
Gulf War 2, continuation of 1 over WMD. More of a grey area.
Libya & Syria = yeah just bullying an unpopular (with the EU) dictator to take advantage of a moment of weakness.
But I wasn't accusing you of being a hypocrite. I was accusing the Empire of Lies of being hypocrites. And I think the Russians would not object to bombing infrastructure specifically, but point out instead that the Yugoslavia war was completely unjustified and that the West defended what it attacks now.
Joe Biden.
Like with the war in Iraq. Which wasn't exactly great. That said, the US suffered no international consequences for that. No one stole the reserves of the Fed.
Cultural genocide is a thing, and Ukraine is engaging in it, though I was talking about physical extermination. The US did absolutely nothing as there was a genocide in Rwanda, and Germany and the US handed Saddam Hussein chemical weapons and/or precurors which he used to "kill his own people" as they later called it. The EU is presently supporting the genocidal government of Azerbaijan, funding his war machine, and taking photo-ops with Aliyev as a "reliable partner". Going further back, the US and UK aided the Soviet Union in its cover-up of the Katyn massacre that it committed.
So yes, they are perfectly fine with genocide when it suits them. As are the Russians, obviously, The problem is that you are in denial about the people you support, or don't support as in the case of Biden, because you have convinced yourself that he isn't as bad as Whoever.
It isn't exactly the cream of the crop that moved to this Win. But even they are better than the radical left, as they are far more tolerant of slight dissenters like you and me than the radical left would be of someone who disagreed with them on that much.
Some of them definitely have issues, yeah. However, I think I can say with confidence that I have never downvoted you. Because even when I disagree, you generally post interesting and substantive stuff.
But it's odd for this to be 'exceptional' when Russia is doing it. After all, it's standard practice for the US in Yugoslavia and Iraq. Many people don't understand why. The pro-Russia explanation appears to be that the Kremlin isn't taking the war seriously.
Like I told you, you generally post good stuff, but accusing random people of being FSB officers is pretty crazy stuff. And yeah, I do laugh at people who embarrass themselves by calling Kiev "KEEEEEEV", because it's ridiculous.
Dugina.
I don't support going after civilians. But things like infrastructure and satellites have dual use, so they can be considered valid military targets. The sooner this was can be brought to an end, the better. And as you perhaps remember, I supported making peace in the early weeks in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality, recognition of the People's Republics and Crimea, because I thought that long wars are rarely worth it.
We'll see.
With due respect to your country, and I think you often mistake criticism of its foreign policy as an attack on the country or its people, but when in the recent past has the US not been the aggressor? And I say that while being OK with Afghanistan, Vietnam and Korea.
I consider Xinjiang a cultural genocide, but Russians in Ukraine is just whining and being over-sensitive. Ukraine is fully within its rights to make Ukrainian the official language, yet it didn't go that far. It isn't like Xinjiang where the CCP makes it illegal to own a Koran or to even speak the Uyghur language in private. Ukraine doesn't regulate non-public/government use of Russian.
Russia forcibly relocating Ukrainians in occupied territories and resettling them around Russia is a well-known type of cultural genocide, though, and one the USSR has used many times in the past.
At the end of the day, even though the Democrats very much wanted to, they did not do so for 2 reasons: (1) the lack of US logistics and infrastructure necessary to even consider any kind large scale of military deployment there, and (2) the clusterfuck of Somalia was fresh in Democrat minds.
Not caring about a genocide in central africa enough to spend enormous money and risking US lives to stop it isn't the same as supporting it.
True, it's unfortunate that there aren't more reasonable people who you can actually have a discussion with. Too many people have a more zealot type mindset and can't be reasoned with. I have had a few people openly try to "drive me out" but I just blocked them so I don't get them in my inbox. I can still see their comments, though, if I look manually, and they're still at it, unaware I can't see their comments usually.
I don't think I've downvoted you. I generally upvote your comments when I see them because you're usually putting effort into your comments even though they come from a very different perspective.
I agree, it was a virtue signal to be look "look how culturally sensitive I am! I am using the local dialect!" Here's a whole article about why the libs changed it because the dirty Russians use "Kiev". It's always been Kiev in English and that's all that matters. We don't call Germany Deutschland. We don't call VW "fow vey". We don't call Japan "Nihon". We don't call "french fries" Pommes Frites (actually some snooty restaurants here do).
I don't think Ukraine was able to pull off a car bombing in Moscow, and there's no evidence it was Ukraine. [FSB says it was based on "trust me, bro, there was totally a chick but she ran away"] If they did it, I would have expected them to keep going and kill a lot more people, and more important ones than her.
But the military has plenty of generators and doesn't rely on the civilian power grid, so it isn't really serving any significant military purpose. Bridges in key military areas? Sure. But going after the civilian power grid really isn't going to affect Ukrainian military forces.
Problem was Russia wouldn't agree to that back then because they felt like they were winning, and now Ukraine won't agree to it because they feel like they're winning.
I think Russia acts that way, not the US. People criticize the US all the time and we don't bomb or threaten them for it. Russia makes threats constantly over the smallest slights or perceived lack of respect.
Korea & Vietnam were purely defensive wars, to protect South Korea & Vietnam respectively.
Gulf War 1 was to liberate Kuwait, Iraq being the aggressor.
Kosovo was a NATO operation to protect Kosovo from a Serbian attack. While I disagree with NATO and think Serbia was justified, NATO was intervening to defend Kosovo not attacking unprovoked.
Afghanistan was in response to 9/11, which was an attack on the US launched by Al Qaeda, which was hosted by the Taliban.
Gulf War 2, continuation of 1 over WMD. More of a grey area.
Libya & Syria = yeah just bullying an unpopular (with the EU) dictator to take advantage of a moment of weakness.