Both Bushes cannot be compared to Putin. I am not sure how to respond to the claim that they are worse, except to point out that none of the stuff Putin has done even over the last few weeks in Russia is comparable to moves conducted by US Presidents.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Both Bushes cannot be compared to Putin. I am not sure how to respond to the claim that they are worse, except to point out that none of the stuff Putin has done even over the last few weeks in Russia is comparable to moves conducted by US Presidents.
But it's military conflict yet the media are making seem worse than a holocaust...
European countries are not America's puppets - that's Russian propaganda speaking. They are voluntarily part of NATO and/or the EU, or closely associated with both. They include two independent nuclear powers and numerous democratic political systems.
Moreover, the European economy is larger than that of the USA - significantly larger if you include non-EU members.
Of course America has a lot of influence in Europe, being the largest NATO contributor and the biggest single economy within NATO. But having a lot of influence does not make you a puppet Master.
Dropping nuclear bombs on Japan was during a military conflict.
Both attacked Iraq under a false narrative and killed together more than 1 million people, I suggest you read some history books, should be good for you
Thread
Military conflict still has rules and that doesn't include shelling maternity hospitals, deliberately starving civilians, waving white flags then shooting or breaking ceasefires by targeting the pre-agreed safe zones.
Can someone please explain why it's WWIII if a NATO country joins in to help Ukraine, but not if Belorussia join in to help Russia?
Well then why didnt they mobilize Nato towards Ukraine? Who takes the final decision in the end? It's evident no move can be made unless washington gives the green light
In short because Belarus doesn't have nukes.
If a NATO country gets involved and gets attacked, Art 5 kicks in all mutual self defence means all NATO nations get involved, including the three with nuclear weapons.
Maybe if you learned to read, you wouldn't come out with such bs.
Okay then you are saying it would be okay for Putin to drop some of his 6500 nuclear warheads at the moment? Why didnt he do it then since it's also a military conflict now?
No, all NATO decision making is made through consensus.
You do realise NATO did just that?
Both the UK and US have thousands of troops in the countries boarding the Ukraine
Nope, did not say that.
What bullshit exactly? Why don't you give at least some arguments to prove as to why these two scumbags invaded Iraq let's see
Today has been pretty wild in here with the whataboutism and bothsideing
You honestly think GHWB & the coalition invaded Iraq under false pretenses, etc.?
Very good read. The Russian and Belorussian peoples are victims of their own authoritarian / dictatorial regimes.
fair playYou haven't yet twigged that Russian and Chinese totalitarian dictatorship is bad? Oh dear. Do not pass Go, do not collect £200.
Well, you tell me, scum bush junior invaded iraq after afghanistan for what reason? If it was the nuclear weapons as they claimed, well they found shit, they ended up tearing apart a whole country then established their companies in Erbil
Wow.
I am talking about the economical aspect, both are giants on that front but both are under the influence of the petro-dollar and they believe their coalition can change that, which is yet to be seen, that's what I meant
Depressing.
They are.
But they are also not North Koreans. They have had largely free Internet and possibility of international travel. Many do protest and don’t support their dictators. Many are indifferent though and bury their head in the sand, and many also support. The path to the Holocaust was paved with indifference.
Russia's economy is half the size of France's, and that's before the war.
We could also conclude from this that there is a much greater chance of democratic states emerging than in North Korea.
It's already been explained to you several times: NATO hasn't entered into Ukraine because of the risk of a nuclear WWIII
NATO takes collective decisions, which all members then abide by.
Wellllllllllllll.....a bit more than half us aren't
was just about to say the same thing.What a strange post. Has anyone on here implied that they were?
What were the false pretences that senior attacked Iraq?
Because NATO are a defensive alliance? And Ukraine are not a member? So many people seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what NATO actually is. You can argue about the morality but the reality of the situation is that NATO are not a world or European police force and exists to protect its members if they are attacked (and not if they initiate the attack even).
Of course, there would be nothing stopping France/Germany/Poland/ Italy/Spain mobilising if they wanted to?
You're also missing the rather important point that nobody anywhere has forced anyone to join NATO?
France economy isn't small though, I don't see your point, you don't consider Russia as one of top countries on that front?
Zelenskyy is now doing all his speeches in governmental offices and on the streets of Kyiv, so must feel fairly secure right now.
Indeed, it's smaller than Italy's. And if things carry on for much longer, Russia's economy will end up being smaller than Australia's.