Same reason you don’t see tankies in this thread.
He’d give up on Ukraine. And call it a win.
“Winning the battle is worth losing the war”
(Trump, The Art of the Deal, pp. 179-181)
Yeah pretty much.
Aka appeasement. We tried it Donny. Though this time it’s Trump who wants to be dictator.
“I could make a deal with Hitler to stop this war tomorrow!”
He didn’t answer a single fucking question about anything, just ranted about illegals eating pets the whole time.
This is why I don’t watch the debate. I know it’ll just piss me off because he won’t say anything but crazy shit.
It was great seeing Kamala get under his skin. The reaction cams were really fun seeing Kamala react like a normal human to his insane rantings and him just smoldering and getting angrier and angrier when she hit back
My favorite was when she clearly (very clearly IMO) seemed about to say “…but this motherfucker…” and restrained herself.
Omg I forgot about that moment!
But it was so crazy that it was incredibly funny. I was doing paraphrases of a lot of his responses in the pinned debate thread in c/news if you’re curious.
The thing is, it isn’t actually funny. we can laugh at the old racist piece of shit criminal but it is actually quite sad and makes me angry that this is where we are.
Yeah I’ll look back and laugh if he loses
He is outing gop for eating pets. He just needs to do it under the radar.
Remember every blame the throw around is admission on their part.
Suddenly ol’ brainworrm endorsing Trump makes sense!
Let’s not forget: it appears that JD Vance may be the originator of that whole farce.
In which case, Trump touted it because either a) they honestly think it is good propaganda which will sway the campaign, or b) Trump is quite literally eating his own dog food, because there are too many lies to keep track of.
He also still refused to admit he lost four years ago, and admit any fault or regret for Jan 6th. And he showed zero remorse or awareness about the Central Park Five. Pure deflection for every single question.
This stood out to me. Do we know of anyone who Trump might be worried about upsetting if he said he wanted Ukraine to win? Anyone at all?
Do we know of anyone who Trump might be worried about upsetting if he said he wanted Ukraine to win? Anyone at all?
That question is awkwardly worded, why are you putin it that way?
Just not russian to any conclusions
Tsar right to know if he’s compromised.
What is confusing to me is why would it matter to Putin if Trump lied here? The Russian mode of government is lying and deception after all.
Does he actually think that his voters want Ukraine to lose? Oh fuck, do his voters actually want Ukraine to lose?
They’ve been listening to the Russian trolls and bots.
Their line isn’t that Ukraine should lose, it’s that America shouldn’t give them money while homeless vets, Ukraine is corrupt, biden crime family, nato expansion, etc. Which coincidentally are all Russian talking points.
Those damn russians, constantly bringing up recent history like that.
Didn’t Hunter get like millions of dollars from both Russian and Ukranian oligarchs? It’s so cool how the kids of politicans always end up with these sweet deals- and to think Trump is claiming to be the deals guy
Oh thanks, I forgot hunter Biden.
Now go and Google what the Budapest memorandum was.
Russia stated that it had never been under obligation to “force any part of Ukraine’s civilian population to stay in Ukraine against its will.” Russia suggested that the US was in violation of the Budapest Memorandum and described the Euromaidan as a US-instigated coup.
Yes, the CIA psyop’d over 70% of the country to support joining the EU, then forced yanukovitch to say “screw that we love Russia” and piss everyone off. And the totally organic resistance movement in the east that happened to have russian equipment and… Soldiers? Yeah just the people self determining or whatever.
So what about the ethnic Russians, and the rest of the non-Ukranian speakers?
There was a base of people (30% per your post) who didn’t support this and when the government cracked down on resistance, city centers ended up shelled with artillery for years.
Just a shitty situation to get caught in the middle of, frankly. Did you support NATO intervention against Serbia when it used its military on a breakaway region?
His boss sure as shit doesn’t want Ukraine to win.
His boss wants to stay in power, Ukraine is just convenient way of doing it.
Ukraine was a massive fuck up for Putin. He believes in the bullshit known as color revolution.
So he thought he’d pull one in Ukraine. A few years of some soldiers fucking around in the East, then he’d walk in and be welcomed.
Which is fucking stupid.
But Putin has long since killed anyone who would tell him that an idea is stupid, or that people don’t work the way a paranoid, backstabbing KGB trained psychopath thinks they do.
No, Putin fucked up hard due to the dictator trap.
Now he’s scrambling. He’s been killing off rivals and opponents at a breakneck pace the last few years, all because his position has never been weaker.
And he barely managed to diffuse a coup attempt.
He had to use treachery to do it, so the next time, the coup leader will not back down.
No, Putin is desperate to pull out some sort of win in Ukraine, because anything else is the end of his rule, and likely his life.
And he barely managed to diffuse a coup attempt.
Context?
Priggy’s aborted thunder run: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagner_Group_rebellion
Ohh, I forgot about that. Not sure if that coup would have made things better, but it was an interesting time.
That’s why he’s nothing more than vatnik kompromat.
Russian Asset. Better dead than Red.
russia isn’t “red” and never really was to begin with
That’s what annoys me the most. Tankies will go defend Russia like it’s the promised land of communism, when the only remnant of communism it has is rigged elections and propaganda.
Also wrong. Rigged elections would imply there ever was a communist Russia. There never was. It was (maybe at its best, in part) socialist and most of the time after the zars a military state. That is true for all states that were left leaning btw. No communists to be found.
No true Scotsman
Russia very much was communism in the real world.
Great argument. What do you base this on?
It’s like china calling itself communist right now.
Yes there was rhetoric in the USSR that suggested they were but it was an instrument to legitimate the horrible things that they did to their people.
From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_society
A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless, stateless, and moneyless,[3][4][5][6] implying the end of the exploitation of labour.[7][8]
That was not the case. It was state owned, as the transition from whatever system was there before to socialism plans. Communism is supposed to be something different.
I am not arguing that it would be good or better than anything we have today but am saying that we never saw communism in the modern world.
Change my mind with arguments and not down votes.
This is a semantic matter. No socialist state has ever claimed to have reached the stage of communism, including China. But some socialist states—including China—have been/are run by communist governments/parties, which claim to be working toward reaching that stage.
China doesn’t call itself communist. It’s Socialist with Chinese characteristics.
You are right, I mixed something up
Same argument though for socialism. They are a capitalist country that calls itself something else. You don’t seriously believe they are socialist In any other way than their name.
Communism isn’t about ideological purity. The USSR never made it to the global, total, Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society Marx describes as Upper Stage Communism, but the Soviets never argued that they had. What the Soviets did, was begin the process of working towards that.
Thanks for a proper response. More than others in this thread are capable of.
The clear distinction is hard, I accept that point. The phases at least how I learned it are clear. First state owned then truly society owned as a goal. They never got anywhere near that. Nor a classless society. It wasn’t the old classes from before 1900 but classes as in power structures were very much present.
And yes it was their expressed and I believe trat they were truthful about that to create a communist state. But there were power struggles and the clear ideas became unclear and what remained (intentionally or not) was the name of the goal justifying all the horrible things.
Again, I am not arguing against or for communism, just making the argument that there was never a communist country as in the sense they reached something resembling the idea of the word. Keeping in mind that there is not a clear line of demarcation, this much is clear to me.
This is incorrect. The USSR was Socialist, and was attempting to work towards building Communism.
Yes working towards as in socialism is the first stage to communism. But they didn’t get far thus my argument was there wasn’t communism in the USSR.
They got pretty far, they were Socialist for nearly the entire 20th century. They liberalized towards the end and were dissolved, but the narrative that they weren’t Socialist or that it wasn’t a real attempt at building Communism is nonsense.
Yes arguing that Russia was never socialist (or tried hard to be) would be nonsense. I am not arguing that though. I said that there was never communism. As in, archived and not used as veil to hide the failing government and society.
Yeah keep dreaming about the communist utopia that will definitely happen… somewhere… at some point… …maybe…?
Communism isn’t Utopian, it isn’t a “perfect model of society” that people simply need to agree with in their minds to adopt. It’s closer to a theory of historical development and analyzing what will come after Capitalism in that long chain of development.
Knowing about it can speed up the process of development, since you can better direct it, but modes of production emerge from what came before.
What is Red in this context?
C. All of the above.
Americans being so politically illiterate they think that the government they practically installed is somehow communist.
lol remember to vote I guess
Translation: He wants Russia to win the War and for America to be signed over to the Kremlin, but he knows he can’t say that aloud
It was obvious as hell that he wants Russia to win.
he will allow Russia to win yes, in exchange for favours probably
All we have to do is make him president elect! We don’t even have to inaugurate him!
You’ll get all the Logan act violations you seek if you act now!
Of course, he wants Russia to win, duh
And Kamala refused to say whether babies can be aborted at 9 months. Politicians being politicians.
EDIT: She didn’t respond to the Chinese tariffs question either. Stop glorifying politicians. None of them are being straight with you, because they’re playing the fence for votes. You can admit that politicians are bad AND you can still support and vote for them.
That’s an amazingly stupid take from someone who apparently didn’t watch the debate.
Trump claimed that babies were being aborted at 9 months and after they were born. This is a lie he repeats over and over at rallies that you apparently do watch. The moderators made it clear that that was illegal in all 50 states.
Why would Harris need to debunk something insanely stupid that the moderators already debunked?
Trump kept saying abortion after 9 months, they put the baby aside and decide it’s fate. They execute the baby. And the debate just kept going on… how in hell can the debate just keep going on after that?
Sane response would be to “wait what?!” Stop everything wtf are you talking about?
I found it interesting that Trump claims if he wins the election, he’ll have the Russia / Ukraine conflict resolved BEFORE he even takes office. I’m paraphrasing there, but that’s how I interpreted what he stated.
If that’s the case, then it seems like he could choose to end the conflict at any time. Why doesn’t he just end it now? Save countless lives. Minimize injuries. Prevent suffering. Save money. I’m sure that’d change some voters’ minds if he did it. Might even win him the election.
Yes, this is a rhetorical question. I have no doubt that he can’t actually end it without basically giving in entirely to Russia.
It’s not a mystery how he plans to do it. He’ll demand Zelenskyy cede taken territory to Russia. If Zelenskyy doesn’t accept those terms, then the funding to Ukraine will stop.
I found it interesting that Trump claims if he wins the election, he’ll have the Russia / Ukraine conflict resolved BEFORE he even takes office.
He’s invoking the Iran Hostage Crisis, I think. Reagan famously cut a deal with the Ayatollah to release the American hostages on the day of his inauguration, despite Carter having nailed down a prisoner exchange months earlier.
If that’s the case, then it seems like he could choose to end the conflict at any time.
He’s full of shit. This isn’t a hostage negotiation where Biden did 95% of the work for him already. This is an intractable siege spanning a third of the country’s land area which has been spiraling into long range bombings of the respective civilian capitals. Trump isn’t going to be able to leverage a ceasefire that’s already on the table, because Zelensky isn’t asking for a ceasefire, he’s asking for permission to use higher capacity long range missiles to force Russian troops off the southern front.
I have no doubt that he can’t actually end it without basically giving in entirely to Russia.
The siren song Trump sings is that he could have prevented the '22 invasion by playing nice with Putin before tanks crossed the border. And 100%, if there had been a detente prior to the outbreak of open conflict, hundreds of thousands of lives would have been saved. Even at a concession of territory, this arguably would have been preferable to the holocaust committed across the territory to date.
But the reality is that he was just as happy to sell advanced weapons systems to Ukraine in 2018 as Biden has been in extending military aid today. If anything, Trump was more responsible for the Ukraine/Russia war going hot than Biden. And not even for particularly noble reasons (MIC $$$!!!)
Trump falsely promised Ukrainian leadership his full support in the event of a Russian retaliation, sold them a bunch of tacti-cool military surplus, and then turned around and tried to cut the same fucking deal with the Russians.
In this sense, it also invokes Reagan who was famous for sending Rumsfeld to cut arms deals with both Iran and Iraq shortly before the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq War.
Promising both countries your support, goading them into conflict, and then pulling back to let them duke it out is textbook John Bolton foreign policy. And guess who was whispering in Trump’s ear all through that first term in office?
Putler is betting on trump to win. If Harris wins, it’s over for him.
Well, officially, Putin supports Harris, but who knows with that deranged man.
He endorsed her specifically so that Trump would say that in the debate. And he did.
And how do you, pray tell, know that?
Because I don’t live under a rock.
But you do since you just guess. I quote known sources, and you pull shit out your ass.
Please explain why Putin would endorse the person who says that Ukraine should win the war over the person who won’t say that.
I don’t need to explain anything. Again, I’m just citing facts, and you’re guessing. But honestly, how much do you think your armchair analytics are really worth? Or anyone’s for that matter?
Reminder that Zelenskyy basically called Trump’s bluff on his plan, encouraging him to share it now.
It’s hardly worthy of being called a bluff.
Everyone knows Trump would just force a Russian victory. He could do that just by refusing further support for Ukraine.
Everyone knows Trump would just force a Russian victory. He could do that just by refusing further support for Ukraine.
It would be great if we stopped spending money on foreign wars, but why can’t the democrats adopt an anti-war position rather than trying to out-warmonger the republicans?
If a country (Russia) has decided it wants to be aggressive, then there are really only two ways to prevent a war with them:
- Increase your own strength
- Decrease their strength
Usually, number 1 is the only feasible way for a country without outright opening up hostilities. However, Russia has given the world an opportunity, by attacking Ukraine, to enact number 2 relatively risk-free.
I fully believe that if Russia is given leeway then they’d just continue on. Appeasement, as World War 2 has shown, does not work with personalities like that. By supporting Ukraine in this conflict, number 2 can be accomplished.
And this war can be stopped, today! By Russia withdrawing from Ukraine. So please, aim your ire at Putin who started and stubbornly keeps this war going.
I would expect nothing less from a .de domain 😬
Thank you for that insightful rebuttal.
Sorry I just get a bit triggered when I hear Germans talking about needing to increase their strength due to aggressive outside threats causing internal economic strife.
It would be great if we stopped spending money on fighting Hitler, but why can’t we all just adopt an anti-war position and give Hitler what he wants rather than out-warmonger him!?
Genius plan.
You want the warmongering to stop? Then get on Telegram and starting telling that to Russians. Tell Putin.
Putin sucks but he’s no Hitler.
Also I can’t even get Putin to comp my rent why do you think he would listen to me?
Yes he is. He’s pretty much Hitler in every way. What, are you waiting for 1940s Hitler and literal gas chambers to pop up until the dots become connected?
- Invading foreign nation under the false pretenses of protecting Ethnic minorities.
- All the while actively purging dissidents inside Russia.
Seems pretty Hitler-like to me. You’re right, Hitler didn’t listen to calls for him to step down either.
You seem like you’ve got it all figured out
