The only thing I can hope for is more sensible leadership in America that will lift its boot from our necks.

Globohomo isn't spread by the US government, it's spread by the hollywood jews. I just watched a tv show "American Gods" based on a highly reviewed book. Seasons 2 & 3 the show totally departs from the book and engages in nonstop black-worship & gay-worship. There is a gay muslim character in the show who barely existed in the book, who had his role massively expanded in the show so he could serve as a vehicle for nonstop LGBT propaganda, culminating in this "pure" muslim as an audience stand-in being bombarded with LGBT propaganda until he finally participates in a gay orgy, which is portrayed in the most positive light possible. It was super obvious to me, watching it, that the intent of the writers to reach out to "questioning" members of the audience and encourage them to engage in gay sex acts. They even call the muslim dude out as being "ashamed to be his true self".

The show is also non-stop engaged in black worship. Even though it has nothing to do with the book's plot, the show massively expanded this whole false history of slavery and black suffering to an extreme degree. Black characters totally dominate the show even though they play a small role in the book.

I use this as an example. Your elites watch this show and they think "this is what is trending in America. this is what the coolest of the cool believe, the hottest of the hot, the most advanced and people I should most emulate in order to show how much better I am than my backward countrymen."

Your elites pick up the message from Hollywood's atheistic jews leftist culture warriors, and they act as its unpaid missionaries in your own countries. They emulate globohomo. They promote it. They are desperate to worship western brand, western IP, western cultural norms, instead of having any loyalty to their own country. This is globalism, and globohomo, and the US government has nothing to do with it.

You know full well that your buddy Senile Joe doesn't care about 'morally evil'.

He does, he just needs CNN to tell him what that is.

As for geopolitical threat, you didn't care when the USSR was in Berlin

Umm, yes we did. Ever heard of the Berlin airlift? Idk what else you mean. There was no evicting the USSR from Eastern Europe after WW2 without another war nobody wanted to fight except Patton. Patton ended up being right, but nobody knew that at the time, and it all worked itself out after 40 more years.

The USSR didn't make Ukraine the property of the Russian people. It was its own separate state within the Soviet confederation. The Russians specifically built their empire this way to avoid claims that the USSR was truly a Russian empire. Well, then they don't get to claim Ukraine was ever "theirs".

Also, you don't get to let Ukraine be free for 30 years then change your mind. There is a statute of limitations on these things.

(1) Britain wasn't occupying its own lands.

The British Empire was just as owned by the UK as Ukraine was ever owned by the Russians. Ukraine is not occupied by ethnic Russians. Ukrainians are a distinct ethnic group with a history of horrible treatment from the Russians, such as Holodomor. So whatever claim you think Russia has to Ukraine, it is only by conquest, same as the British claim to its Empire.

(2) You opposed it to strengthen the US at the expense of European powers.

No, we opposed colonialism out of principle, wrongly in my opinion. We gave up our own colonies, after all. If all the US cared about was power and not principle (you're projecting here) why would we give up our own colonies, especially the Philippines, after investing so much blood to reconquer it?

I would have supported the european colonial powers post-WW2 and allowed them to seize the Suez canal. The US government was too worried about being on "the right side of history" and made foolish decisions.

Balderdash. Ukraine was a constituent republic of the USSR, part of the Russian Empire since the 1790s, and wholly illegitimate as an independent state.

If true, then Russia gave up its claims by allowing Ukraine to be independent without contesting it in 1992, and thereafter from 1992 all the way to 2022: 30 years. You don't get to sleep on your supposed rights without losing them.

Also Russia would have similar claims on lots of other independent countries, including all the Stans, the Baltics, Belarus, and others. You didn't refute my point that Russia would simply stop conquering if we let it have Ukraine. You yourself have said the point of conquering Ukraine is to amass power. Well, what's the point of amassing power if not to launch further conquests?

Stalin knew Hitler was going to invade, he just thought that it would be after defeating the UK. If Germany lost fighting a USSR that was caught completely unawares, how would it have fared against a USSR that was armed to the teeth and expecting an invasion? Maybe Hitler could not have invaded. But then the USSR would have. Because countries don't tolerate a country that is growing in power and that may pose a security risk in the future.

1. The Soviet military under Stalin was a joke, saved only by its size, primarily thanks to the purges & poor leadership/doctrine. None of the reasons it was so weak in WW2 would have been fixed had Hitler delayed 1-2 years. All of these problems were only SLOWLY fixed, if they were fixed at all, after years of hard lessons in war. For example, the T34 tank was dog shit until late 1943. It took two full years of hard fighting to finally fix it into a decent tank. Without that combat experience, no "reforms" would have mattered. Even by the end of the war, Soviet doctrine was shit and Soviet troops were still being defeated by the Germans in battled with 4:1 losses for the Soviets. Communism fails at innovation.

2. If Stalin invaded Germany, the Soviet military would have been utterly obliterated. Just look at the Winter War. Offense is much harder than defense, and the Soviets were getting crushed badly throughout Barbarossa until the mud and then the Winter saved them. If Stalin had attacked 1st, his armies would have been encircled and crushed within months. Since offensive wars don't carry the same existential threat that Barbarossa did, Stalin would have been forced to sue for peace. Alternatively, the Germans could have counter-attacked and taken advantage of the fact that the Soviet armies had already been defeated to win the victory they could not win fast enough historically.

3. Germany benefit of surprise only lasted 1-2 weeks, tops. It wasn't that big of a benefit. As you said, Stalin knew and had lots of warnings, but he didn't trust them. Despite not trusting them, he was massively building up his military anyway, so it wasn't like he got caught with a small military.

4. If Germany had defeated and knocked out the UK, that would have freed up millions of troops and resources to divert to the USSR, AND Lend-Lease would not have been a thing. The US interest in Lend Lease was primarily to benefit the UK, not the USSR. Aid was only shifted to the USSR as a way to help the Allies. If the allies were knocked out and made peace, the US would not have launched Lend Lease solely to benefit the USSR. Without Lend-Lease, the Soviets would have had lots of problems with food, aviation fuel, logistics vehicles, and even ammunition production, not to mention lots of critical raw materials.

So I think Barbarossa was quite smart, if not completely in its execution.

Barbarossa was unfortunately predicated on the misguided assumption that Germany could win a quick war against the USSR because Hitler believed that the total size & equipment of the Soviet military was much smaller than it was. While Hitler was right that pound for pound, the Soviet military was lower quality and millions of Soviet troops surrendered without putting up much of a fight, he was wrong when the Russian troops came into the battle in force in the winter of 1941. The Russian troops were much more willing to fight than the Soviet formations made of occupied peoples like Ukrainians, and at this point the Germans were worn down, so the "easy wins" stopped and the war became more of a grind until finally Soviet numbers carried the day in Stalingrad against the overstretched Germans.

Great, when are we declaring war on the US for stealing half of Mexico?

The US never tried to build an empire. If it did, it would have conquered the world. And Mexico? Mexico got what it deserved. It lost a weak claim to empty lands primarily populated by Americans, not Mexicans.

Japan attacked the US because of the oil embargo.

That's not crying and playing the victim. It's some big balls. Very stupid, but big balls.

Hitler falsely claimed the USSR was about to attack

I don't know what you're talking about. I've read the histories of Hitler's private conversations, not state propaganda. Hitler did not believe Stalin was going to attack any time soon. His reasoning was that he believed German power was at its peak while the Soviets were lagging behind, so that he should strike now when he thought the disparity was at its highest and win a quick victory that would have a side effect of deciding the war against the allies, since if Hitler had beat Stalin as he hoped, the allies would have no hope of defeating the far larger and more powerful Axis empire that would result from the Soviet conquests.

Neither Hitler nor Tojo pretended that their wars of aggression were actually purely defensive, and they they were the true victims of aggression. This is a uniquely Russian thing. Barbarossa broke the Russian psyche. Ever since Barbarossa, Russians have this attitude of entitlement to bully and oppress and conquer in their name of their own supposed defense.