Is Biden trying to start WW 3?

T. A. Gardner said:
Last week, Biden authorized Ukraine to start lobbing missiles and such deep into Russia. As of yesterday, he's now letting Ukraine use US manufactured anti-personnel mines despite a ban on their use and his own administration policy of non-use.


It's as if he wants to push Russia into a full-blown world war...
Click to expand...
As if Biden is actually doing that.
We know. He's not.
He's been a fucking potato since 2019.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
He should have stepped down in his last 6 months, if not sooner, and let Harris be president.
Click to expand...
8der4s.jpg
 
Dutch Uncle said:
^^^
Proves he's into homoerotica just like most MAGAts.
Click to expand...
Look bitchboi, you're probably into some really fucked up shit, and you're not doing that around me and mine.
No. Fuck You. I wouldn't want to sit next to you in a restaurant. You have zero class, zero grace, and zero integrity.
You are a fucking white dog turd.
 
Matt Dillon said:
Look bitchboi, you're probably into some really fucked up shit, and you're not doing that around me and mine.
No. Fuck You. I wouldn't want to sit next to you in a restaurant. You have zero class, zero grace, and zero integrity.
You are a fucking white dog turd.
Click to expand...
^^^
Notice the homoerotic language.
 
Damocles said:
Durrr.... There won't be a Russia or a Putin either. Even Ukraine isn't enough to get Russia to commit to worldwide death and destruction that would end their own existence along with the U.S. of A.
Click to expand...
Thanks to the idiocy of US hegemony neither you nor I will be around should you prove to be wrong.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
So? What's that got to do with Biden's response to Putin's actions?


For what reason? What does Ukraine bring to the table that it's worth the US dumping hundreds of billions in military aid into that country?


I don't think the US should be the world's policeman. The US dumped quite a bit of cash into pre-WW 2 China to help them fight Japan. Germany--Nazi Germany--did too (bet you didn't know that). China still got nearly completely overrun by Japan and we still ended up in a brutal war with Japan.

Appeasement, your example, makes a shitty comparison. We wouldn't be appeasing Russia by placing trade sanctions on them while not helping Ukraine particularly as but one example. Instead, we are really fighting a near proxy war at this point. That's bad. It's bad politics, it's bad policy, and it is dangerous. But then again, Joke Bribem does have a half-century track record of making horribly bad foreign policy decisions...
Click to expand...

Allowing Russia to take over Ukraine is appeasement even if you apply useless sanctions. Since you have already done sanctions, what is there to prevent Russia from taking over the next country it wants to until finally they invade Poland and we are right back to another world war.

As to the US helping China, do you have evidence of that happening prior to 1940? Japan invaded China in 1937. The US continued to provide Japan with materials like steel and oil until 1940. Where is all this money that the US supplied to China from 1937-1940?
 
Hawkeye10 said:
About 800,000 Ukrainians are dead because of this war we demanded to try to weaken Russia, which has instead made Russia stronger and helped to unite the world against us.
Click to expand...
So you are saying Putin has killed over 750,000 Ukrainian civilians? It must be great supporting a mass murderer.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Allowing Russia to take over Ukraine is appeasement even if you apply useless sanctions. Since you have already done sanctions, what is there to prevent Russia from taking over the next country it wants to until finally they invade Poland and we are right back to another world war.
Click to expand...

Is it "appeasement" if we allow the Palestinians to overrun Israel? How about the other way around? Russia has proven in their war with Ukraine that short of nuclear annihilation--which given their level of incompetence might not be possible for them to carry out either--the Russians aren't invading much of anything else successfully.

In fact, given the incompetence we've seen to date, I'd say it's arguable with or without US help Ukraine could have stopped the Russians at some point.
Poor Richard Saunders said:
As to the US helping China, do you have evidence of that happening prior to 1940? Japan invaded China in 1937. The US continued to provide Japan with materials like steel and oil until 1940. Where is all this money that the US supplied to China from 1937-1940?
Click to expand...

Actually, Japan invaded China in 1931 starting with the invasion and conquest of Manchuria, turning it into the puppet state of Manchukuo. The Japanese invaded Korea starting in 1910.

US direct support started in 1937. As early as 1915 the US was already growing opposed to Japanese expansion but saw Japan as a more important market than China. When WW 1 ended, the US wasn't thrilled that Japan took concessions, like German colonial territory in China, and retained control of areas they had occupied at the end of that war. In the 20's the US tried to use tariffs to influence Japanese actions in China. But it was in 1937 that the US started massive aid to China and openly opposed Japanese expansion.

An early example of US aid would be the establishment of CAMCO in Hangzhou. This US-Chinese company was set up to assemble US manufactured (shipped in kit form) military aircraft for China. Later, it did depot level repairs for AVG (Flying Tigers) aircraft before ending up having to relocate to India once the Pacific War started.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Is it "appeasement" if we allow the Palestinians to overrun Israel? How about the other way around?
Click to expand...
Deflection. Palestinians aren't about to invade Saudi Arabia if they conquered Israel. The other way around is we are supplying arms to Israel.
T. A. Gardner said:
Russia has proven in their war with Ukraine that short of nuclear annihilation--which given their level of incompetence might not be possible for them to carry out either--the Russians aren't invading much of anything else successfully.
Click to expand...
Supporting Ukraine actually helps to weaken Russia even further and would ensure they aren't invading anything else soon.
T. A. Gardner said:
In fact, given the incompetence we've seen to date, I'd say it's arguable with or without US help Ukraine could have stopped the Russians at some point.
Click to expand...
At this point it is a war of attrition which Ukraine can't win without supplies to help them have superiority on the battlefield.
T. A. Gardner said:
Actually, Japan invaded China in 1931 starting with the invasion and conquest of Manchuria, turning it into the puppet state of Manchukuo. The Japanese invaded Korea starting in 1910.

US direct support started in 1937. As early as 1915 the US was already growing opposed to Japanese expansion but saw Japan as a more important market than China. When WW 1 ended, the US wasn't thrilled that Japan took concessions, like German colonial territory in China, and retained control of areas they had occupied at the end of that war. In the 20's the US tried to use tariffs to influence Japanese actions in China. But it was in 1937 that the US started massive aid to China and openly opposed Japanese expansion.

An early example of US aid would be the establishment of CAMCO in Hangzhou. This US-Chinese company was set up to assemble US manufactured (shipped in kit form) military aircraft for China. Later, it did depot level repairs for AVG (Flying Tigers) aircraft before ending up having to relocate to India once the Pacific War started.
Click to expand...
CAMCO isn't evidence of US support. It is evidence of Chinese manufacturing using US parts purchased by China. US being opposed to Japanese expansion isn't evidence of the US providing financial support to China to fight Japan from 1931-1939. You seem to be arguing that the US could sell all the weapons that Ukraine needs as long as Ukraine is buying them.
 
Genocide Joe pushes us nearer to nuclear annihilation every day;

'

Dnipro rocked by explosions early this morningpublished at 10:12​

10:12​

Paul Adams
Diplomatic correspondent, reporting from Dnipro

The city of Dnipro was rocked by a series of explosions which began shortly after five in the morning and lasted for around three hours.

The city is used to the sound of missiles and drones, many of which are intercepted overhead.

If confirmed, this morning’s attack would mark the first time in this war that Russia has fired an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Military sources told the BBC the missile, which has a range of up to six thousand miles and can carry multiple warheads, had been fired from Astrakhan, close to the Caspian Sea.

It's not clear what it hit, although four explosions were heard in the area of a large industrial complex not far from the city centre. '
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top