She ran as a democratic because that was the only way she would get elected in her state and district. She has always been right wing just look at her upbringing and the weird homophobic cult she was in
The reason Tulsi stated that she endorsed President Trump is because he is the pro-peace candidate while Vice President Harris is the pro-war candidate.
The Ukraine war and Israel war started under Joe Biden. The Isis war started with Obama. You’re trying to gas light. Isis began the war in 2014. A full 3 years before Donald Trump took office.
There were no new "wars" under any president since Bush (dubya). Unless you're counting wars that started in other countries and I don't see how that relates to anything. If you're trying to say Trump didn't take aggressive action, don't forget he approved the assassination of Soleimani.
Here's a list of wars the US was part of during Trumps time as president.
Invasion of Afghanistan
War in Northwest Pakistan
Somalia and Northeastern Kenya
Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda
US Led intervention in Iraq
US led intervention in Syria
Yemeni Civil War
US intervention in Libya
Not to mention he moved the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Recognized the permanent Israeli annexation of the occupied Golan Heights. Got rid of the Iran deal which led to the election of a hardline government in Tehran which boosted funding to terrorist organizations. He also ordered the assassination of Qasem Soleimani which by some miracle didn't escalate to a war through no help of his own. He had the idea to nuke North Korea and blame someone else. He shredded the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty that ensured transparency between the U.S., much of Europe, and Russia, and failed to extend the critical New START Treaty with Russia. He had the largest number of drone strikes during his tenure. He even wanted to nuke a fucking hurricane.
True, Kamala is far stronger. She would handle folks like she did Brett Kavanaugh and Attorney General Sessions. Trump, unfortunately, showed us his "I'm a whipped dog" approach with Putin at the Helsinki summit. He did switch it up to "I'm a boot licker" with Kim Jong IL, so he has range, but the only people he alienated with regularity are our allies.
The way in which Kamala treated Kavanaugh was repulsive. Wish you hadn’t reminded me of this, that whole spectacle showed just how vile Democrats are and that there is no low they won’t sink to for the sake of power, but that’s what happens when one chooses to become a progressive — you think you’re morally entitled to such.
Trump made an earnest attempt to reset relations with Russia, but the Washington bureaucratic machine refused and he was lambasted for it.
A shame, considering what could’ve been avoided since then.
He reminded Kim Jong of who has the bigger red button… that’s hardly boot licking. More like a kindly reminder of where North Korea belongs on the world stage.
We've already seen what he wanted to do to solve the issue. There's no reason he would do anything else. Because what he did actually worked. He was slamming away the crutches that prop up Hamas. The foreign money flowing into Hamas hands was slowly throttled away by bilateral deals with hamas' main supporters like UAE or Saudi Arabia.
Once the money runs out, Hamas will be forced to talk peace, or will become irrelevant.
Trump is not pro war, he's a dealmaker. And if Biden had continued that policy this war would not be happening.
So Genocide is the pro peace stance as a final solution to a baseless hypothetical genocide. You're sick in the head and completely brainwashed. You missed the part about Israeli terrorism that started the whole thing, and 80 years of occupation, Aparthied, ethnic cleansing and oppression.
President Trump dropped that bomb on ISIS which President Obama had allowed to take over a third of Syria and two fifths of Iraq, and who turned women minorities into sex slaves, and who decapitated American hostages.
Trump was the first US president since the Carter administration to not start any new wars, or use US military interventionism to start or escalate foreign conflicts. Call it whatever you want, but that’s about as pro-peace as you’re going to get in this day and age.
That’s just not true, 2,243 drone strikes in his first two years most definitely escalated the wars. Upped air strikes in Afghanistan that led to 330% increase in civilian deaths. Also emboldens Israel and Russia , which led to where they are now. He didn’t send American troops to any new places , that’s pretty sweel. He wasn’t an anti war president and didn’t help make a more peaceful world.
Well Reuters, USA Today and Newsweek say it is; so forgive me if I take their word over Foreign Policy Magazines opinion that changing the rules of engagement to save our service members lives in wars that predate the Trump administration, count as an escalation.
I’m not here to support Trump or anyone else, just here to point out the person you’re accusing of moving goalposts isn’t the only one.
I’ll just comment real quick, they were moving goal post and your three articles didn’t help their case. Thread started off saying he was a pro peace candidate, it’s just not true. Than they moved the goal post to “no new wars” and now you backed them up.
OP said that’s why Tulsi endorsed Trump instead of Harris. However both of OP and my claims are factually accurate. And relative to all the prior administrations since the Carter administration, he is the least pro war candidate. You said what I said wasn’t true, but it is according to three independent sources of varying biases. So pointing to Trump changing the rules of engagement in wars started by previous administration to reduce American casualties by 500% as evidence of him being pro war is a lazy red herring.
Op said trump is “pro peace” that’s started it, that’s not true , you’r 3 articles didn’t help that statement any. No red herrings no funny terms, he’s not “pro peace”
The reason Tulsi stated that she endorsed President Trump is because he is the pro-peace candidate while Vice President Harris is the pro-war candidate.
Everything they said after that, was a defense of Tulsis position that Trump is pro-peace relative to Harris. Everything I said, furthered this argument by pointing out that he’s pro-peace relative to the presidents of the last four decades, and backed up that claim with sources you could not refute. Everything you said, was a red herring to distract people from the fact, that in this election between Trump and Harris, Trump is by far the most pro peace candidate.
That is your opinion. If you want to pipe up and cite statistics, at least have the humility to argue in good faith. Over half a million of our supposed allies are dead because of the policy decisions of the Biden-Harris administration, and believing it will be any different under a Harris administration is a leap of faith I’m not willing to indulge in a fact based discussion. I don’t think either of them deserve to be the president, but Trumps record on war is an indisputable fact. At least congress had the common sense to try and put limits on Trumps power when he was in office; but do you really think the same will be true if Kamala wins and gets a blue congress?
Some stats are in this thread , all the drone strikes in the first 2 years , the civilian death toll in Afghanistan tripled. Emboldened of Israel and Russia led to a less safe world , heavy support of the bombing of Yemen. He just wasn’t for world peace
Well Reuters, USA Today and Newsweek say he is the most pro peace president since the Carter administration; so forgive me if I take their word over Foreign Policy Magazines opinion that changing the rules of engagement to utilize more air strikes than ground forces, and decrease our own service members deaths by 500% in wars that predate the Trump administration, counts as an escalation, or make him more pro war than Harris.
Which part of "President Trump didn't start that war" are you not able to understand? Are you seriously saying that President Trump should have made a peace deal with ISIS?
Well he did negotiate the deal with the Taliban to leave Afghanistan. You know, that group that killed our Service members and treat women like shit. So if it benefited him I am sure he would have negotiated with ISIS as well. He’s pro himself and you refuse to see it.
You mean the deal that required the taliban to make peace with the Afghan national government, and had provisions for a complete pullout of the deal if the Taliban didn't make and keep peace?
The deal to hand Afghanistan to the Taliban that excluded the Afghani government from the deal and released 5,000 Taliban fighters to be ready to take over when the US withdrew it's troops? One of those prisoners is the new Taliban leader of Afghanistan.
Yeah. The same bad deal that forced the Afghan government to release 5000 taliban prisoners. Did they make peace with the Afghanistan government? No they took over the country again. Spin it how you want but it was a flawed deal that ultimately lead to more deaths of US troops, not that trump really cares about those troops, in his eyes they are all suckers and losers, and it lead to the oppression of afghans citizens.
You don’t even know what deflecting means
, you jumped into a conversation where a guy said trump was pro peace , I pointed out how he sent more drone strikes in his first 2 years than Obama did in eight , ramped up the war in taken and so on. And that guys only response was “ he didn’t start new wars” which wasn’t what the thread was about , that was them changing the conversation to fit their narrative, and you jumped in for some reason.
Am I not allowed to jump in? Do you own this subreddit? Did i violate dime sort of rules? People call President Trump a warmonger yet he stated no wars. Your condescending tone is noted but irrelevant.
Jump in wherever you want, don’t talk to me about something I’m not talking about, don’t tell me I’m deflecting cause you want to jump in and add your 2 cents which had nothing to do with the conversation.
Trump also order the assassination of a Iranian general. All the Maga people who keep screaming we're heading towards war with Iran because of the left yet Trump order an assassination of the head of a countries military we're not at war with. If you think Trump isn't pro war you're delusional Trump is pro whatever Trump wants to do that will benefit him. He suggested used the US military against US citizens
That’s because he made the mistake of listening to John Bolton. Today Trump admitted that he didn’t exactly hire the best people in his first administration…
Yeah the obvious inaccuracy of that statement has made my inkling of hope to support her in the future evaporate. That plus the endorsement of someone who has already proved how big of a threat to democracy he is…
Nice try, but I wasn’t comparing scales of conflict. Just pointing out the irony of lecturing about 'peace' when supporting actions that were anything but. But hey, if you want to dodge the point, go ahead!
With Trump we had NO new wars and were cutting down on military conflicts. Using Jan 6 to discredit this is dumb, I'm not dodging any point. Dems use to be anti war now they are in bed with corporate america fueling the wars. Trump has a very peaceful record compared to the last 6 presidents.
Interesting spin, but let's not rewrite history. Inciting an insurrection (He was impeached for it, so it's facts) and using force to clear peaceful protesters aren't exactly peaceful achievements. Also, let's not pretend that cozying up to dictators and alienating allies was some masterclass in diplomacy. Peace isn't just about avoiding new wars; it's about upholding democratic principles too.
Calling it an Insurrection is spitting in the face of real victims of insurrections and coups.
And the impeachment is why RFK jr And Tulsi is flipping, the democrat party is now the banana republic party of lawfare against anyone threatening the one true party.
But yeah vote for your warhawking dems, while Trump was president over the most peacefull period of my life lmao.
and lmao upholding democratic principles is that very last the the Democrats are doing right now, the last president properly voted in by the people and not rigged was Obama, thats 18 years ago that the democrat party turned into a party of elites chosen your leader and lockstepping right behind.
Oh, so now Biden's the 'war hawk'—interesting take. What makes him so? As for January 6, it’s a domestic policy issue, but it’s still tied to the idea of maintaining peace and democracy, don’t you think? And still ignoring Lafayette Square. Trump's foreign policy? Isolationism might sound great in theory to you, but it’s a rough fit for global economics and didn’t exactly boost American jobs. But hey, keep drinking the Trump peace foolishness lol.
Biden has been funding both major wars heavily. Biden has transferred billions of dollars’ worth of weapons to Ukraine and has considered sending additional American military advisors to the country. The Biden administration has approved over 100 weapons transfers to Israel worth more than $41 billion and $15 billion in military aid. (via: cato insitute)
"Isolationism might sound great in theory to you, but it’s a rough fit for global economics and didn’t exactly boost American jobs"
Yes because we should get involved in wars for job creation! Genius!! That's the key to fixing the economy!
Non interventionist is different than isolationist. You literally are making the same argument that Warhawks in the GOP made 10 years ago. It's hilarious someone who is gonna vote democrat is arguing that it's good for the economy to fund the Military industrial complex.
If Russia wins in the Ukraine he will be up against current NATO borders, which would probably lead to American sons and daughters going overseas to bolster those nations. Letting Ukraine handle Russia with support is a much better option for everyone in the west. Has zero to do with job creation and everything to do with weakening a peer adversary.
Michael Tracey recently put out a video reacting to the RFK endorsement that among other things, made a number of points relating to how delusional it is to describe Trump as the peace candidate. What is he getting wrong? Didn't Trump recently support a massive defense bill to fund the wars in Ukraine and Gaza?
Trump is not pro peace. He has no issues with all sorts of dictators waging wars all over the place, de-stabilizing the world all over. Letting Putin have his way in Ukraine would embolden him to look westwards, which means NATO countries, for example.
With Trump in power, there will be only more wars in the world, not less. So no, not the president for peace.
Putin first had his hopes in Trump forcing Ukraine into submission, with things like the Hunter Biden story etc. Next to that, with Zelensky coming into power in 2019, Putin had hoped to roll over this actor quickly through other means.
Next to that, it takes time to build up an army, especially when you like to pretend you are not going to invade. This build up already started during Trump's tenure. Add to it that Trump did his best to show NATO as weak and divided, an image that certainly got stuck with Putin and the whole situation is what it was, with as a result an invasion early 2022.
Luckily for Ukraine, not only was NATO and/or the EU not divided at all in this case, they came to the rescue nearly instantly, helping Ukraine with very important weapons in the very early stage to repel the initial attack.
You’re making deflections and excuses. The fact remains that Putin did invade during Bidens administration and not with Trumps. And Donald Trump was calling out allies for not paying their fair share and relying on American military might I.E Germany. You can make all the excuses for Biden that you want. But it doesn’t change the fact that 2 major conflicts started under his watch.
Putin invading Ukraine proper during Biden's presidency does not undo the fact that Trump emboldened Putin. Those two facts can co-exist without a problem.
Trump was shouting about the 2% rule that was agreed upon well before Trump got in power and came with deadlines that are well past Trump's presidency. Countries were already, albeit slowly moving towards the 2% of their GDP spending on defense. Covid caused some delay here and there, but Russia's full blown invasion made most countries act accordingly to compensate.
Also, every member of NATO pays its fair share to NATO. The defense budget is a different matter than 'paying the fair share'.
Which 2 conflicts started under Biden? Ukraine already was a conflict during Trump's presidency, and it kept escalating further and further. The end result was the full blown invasion, but it was far from the beginning of the conflict.
The second major conflict, you will have to help me out, unless you mean Israel. That conflict as well has a history going way back. Among things, during Trump's presidency, the amount of illegal jewish immigrants on the westbank surged significantly. This came together with a lot of violence against the people rightfully living there. This violence going unpunished for so many years erupted in this massive wave of violence. If you want to blame Biden, be my guest.
There was quite literally a terrorist attack that occurred in October of last year kicking off the war in israel. You keep trying to pin blame on trump for everything you can. You’re grasping at straws. It is objective to say the world was peaceful under trump. The world is not as peaceful as it was under Trump. You cannot deny that. Trump also wanted a stronger NATO. Most of Natos military force is American. Trump didn’t make NATO weak. Outside of America Nato is weak. You’re delusional and will not see reason. I wish you the best but this debate is useless if you are so biased that you want to blame a man that had been out of office for 2 years. Good day
You pretend that attack happened in a total vacuum, as if everything was going great for the Palestinian people.
Trump wanted to get out of NATO, and was using agreements made before he became president as some form of weapon to threaten to leave. He also publicly questioned if he would act on article 5. Hell, he openly invited Putin to claim the Baltic countries for his own. Just because there were no new major armed conflicts, does not mean there were no major conflicts happening, which eventually resulted in armed conflicts.
Also, while the USA spends a lot on defense, only part of it is aimed as available for NATO, unlike the European countries, where all their defense material is available to NATO.
If you think that actions only happen during the rule of a person and that everything that happens once he/she leaves the office is not possibly a result of that rule, then you are quite dense I fear.
I don’t know if you know how to read or not. I question it because you replied to my response that made it clear I was done arguing with somebody grasp at straws. I may be dense but at least I can read
It's ok to get red pilled and realize your being played.
Let Jens Stoltenberg (head of NATO) clear this up
"The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition to not invade Ukraine. Of course, we didn't sign that"
Whaaaaa.. He doesn't want to just take over all of Europe?
Agreed, Trump is no pro peace. He is lucky he didn't start 3 more wars. He did try though.
Maybe if we startd listening to the "adversary" instead of not, things could get done with talkinh.
When a nation with the most nuclear weapons on earth says this is our brightest of red lines (Ukraine or Georgia) maybe instead of provoking the reaction we could say "ok we hear you, let's talk."
Nope, US send wespons, helps overthrow a govt.. Fuels a civil war, and then acts surprised when a full scale invasion happens. Go figure.
Listening to your adversary is important, but taking them at face value without considering their actions or broader ambitions can be dangerous. Putin's words don't always match his actions, and dismissing his intentions based on his rhetoric alone overlooks the complex nature of international relations. The situation in Ukraine didn't happen in a vacuum—Russia's actions have repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to use force to achieve its goals, not just in Ukraine but in Georgia and Crimea as well. Diplomacy is crucial, but so is recognizing when a leader is using dialogue as a cover for more aggressive ambitions. We can't ignore the fact that the invasion of Ukraine is part of a pattern, not an isolated reaction to provocation.
Can you find me one passage where he said he'd invade Ukraine? He explicitly said he wouldn't. All you can find is what his state media suggests and his memoirs. In the latter, he claims that Ukraine, Poland and the Baltics don't exist and have always been Russian. It's not that he would flat out invade a Nato country, the fear is that he would use his disinformation network to fracture Nato and then invade Poland and the Baltics once they are weak and not in Nato. Since a certain orange man has said that he would leave Nato, it's fair to assume that's Putins plan.
America invades Iraq illegally, invades Afghanistan, destroys Libya and murders Gaddafi, ferments civil war in Syria and gives weapons to ISIS, overthrows Ukraine government to install a NATO puppet and funds colour revolutions all over the world but President Putin is the ‘warmonger’ for wanting to protect Russia from a Neo Nazi NATO puppet state.
It's go one by one shall we?
Yes, we invaded iraq, yes it was bad and I and many Americans were firmly against it and we ended it. We also didn't annex any of Iraq after.
Afghanistans current government was harboring a organization that killed thousands of Americans in terror attacks. Again, we didn't annex any territory, we just left.
Libya was a civil war, libyans killed Gaddafi and then killed a ambassador to the US when we opened a embassy, so you wanna guess what we did? We didn't annex any land and we just left.
This one is hard to argue because it's just made up. We had nothing to do with the revolution in Syria and although we did arm factions that later declared for extremist organizations, not a single one of them ever were a part of ISIS. But you know what we definitely didn't do? We didn't annex any territory and we just left.
This is my favorite one, can you provide any evidence at all that we had anything to do with the Euromaiden protests? Can you show how we installed a Nato puppet? Please bring up the phone call.
What color revolutions?
Yes, Zelensky the renowned Jewish Nazi. Putin protected Russia from what exactly? A civil war he started and funded in another country? Why would Russia be threatened by that war?
Just like in Chechnya, Moldova, Georgia and Chrimia, Putin invaded the Donbas and annexed the territory. Now he's attempting to do that to the rest of Ukraine. He is absolutely a warmonger.
It's go one by one shall we? Yes, we invaded iraq, yes it was bad and I and many Americans were firmly against it and we ended it. We also didn't annex any of Iraq after.
You installed a puppet government and destroyed Iraq to such an extent that they’ve still not recovered till this day as well as giving rise to conditions that allowed ISIS to become the power it did.
Afghanistans current government was harboring a organization that killed thousands of Americans in terror attacks. Again, we didn't annex any territory, we just left.
You installed a puppet government that crumbled the moment America left as well as committed countless war crimes. The terrorists in question were mostly Saudis but America wouldn’t do anything to harm their dictator allies of Saudi Arabia rather hypocritical of the so called free world.
Libya was a civil war, libyans killed Gaddafi and then killed a ambassador to the US when we opened a embassy, so you wanna guess what we did? We didn't annex any land and we just left.
America backed terrorists in Libya and bombed the country to support them your actions wrecked the country so badly that it now has slave markets.
This one is hard to argue because it's just made up. We had nothing to do with the revolution in Syria and although we did arm factions that later declared for extremist organizations, not a single one of them ever were a part of ISIS. But you know what we definitely didn't do? We didn't annex any territory and we just left.
https://armswatch.com/islamic-state-weapons-in-yemen-traced-back-to-us-government-serbia-files-part-1/
This is my favorite one, can you provide any evidence at all that we had anything to do with the Euromaiden protests? Can you show how we installed a Nato puppet? Please bring up the phone call.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/07/ukra-f07.html
https://geopolitics.co/2022/03/01/ukraine-the-mess-that-victoria-nuland-made/
What color revolutions?
The Arab spring, the attempted Green Revolution in Iran, the attempts to overthrow Venezuelan government, Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia, the Rose Revolution in Georgia and many more.
Yes, Zelensky the renowned Jewish Nazi. Putin protected Russia from what exactly? A civil war he started and funded in another country? Why would Russia be threatened by that war?
Zelensky being Jewish doesn’t change the clear nazi actions the Ukrainian government takes like erecting monuments to Nazi collaborators whist tearing down WW2 monuments, the Civil war was started by NATO supporting such a regime leading to the eastern regions no choice but to break away, such a fanatical regime attacking Russian speakers and acting so provocatively on Russia’s borders what do expect him to do? If there was a communist government in Mexico killing English speakers, bombing breakaway regions and being backed by Russia or China what do you think America would do? They would invade in full force and they certainly wouldn’t use the kid gloves President Putin is using.
Just like in Chechnya, Moldova, Georgia and Chrimia, Putin invaded the Donbas and annexed the territory. Now he's attempting to do that to the rest of Ukraine. He is absolutely a warmonger.
All countries that were targeted by America and Twitter supported colour revolutions if Russia hadn’t acted quickly then Russia would be surrounded by American backed puppets.
Do you equate a peace agreement with supporting war? You are literally on the side that has stopped any attempt at peace negotiations and calling the other side the one that supports war.
There was a peace agreement before 2014. Ukraine gave up their nukes in return for recognized sovereignty of their nation. Putin showed what a peace treaty with Russia is worth (absolutely nothing).
The Ukraine war has its base in the Chechen wars, where Putin could get away with many things, followed by Georgia. This already played during the Bush Jr era and is not something caused by Obama's policies.
If anything, Trump undermining the position of the USA in the world gave Putin all the more feelings of security to start a full invasion. Trump depicting Biden as weak all the time during the entire election campaign, de-stabilizing the nation with the January 6 riots and continuous sowing division.
Swift response and all NATO members uniting to send aid to Ukraine is what stalled Putin and made Russia deal with a very expensive occupation of part of Ukraine. Trump would roll out the red carpet to Kyiv for Putin.
Anyone with functioning eyes, ears and TV/Internet knew Biden was weak. If my 10 year old knows that Biden is weak and clueless, I'm pretty sure Putin knew too. Trump pointing out the obvious didn't undermine anything.
I guess it's nice that NATO got together to help Ukraine, but I'd rather the current Ukraine war not happen in the first place. I'd prefer the hundreds of billions of dollars of my tax money, stay in my nation. I'd rather the hundreds of thousands of dead young Ukrainian and Russian young men were still alive. It's always funny to me that no one seems to care about all of the death. There is zero evidence that Trump would've "rolled out the red carpet" for Putin. If that was the case, he would have invaded during the Trump years to save himself money and his own troops. The exact opposite happened.
Add into the mix the Israel, Gaza, Iran situation, Trump has been proven to be right. I'm not some geo-political expert, but during the Trump years, on the news, I didn't hear a peep about Ukraine, Isreal or Gaza. I stopped hearing about Isis very early in the Trump presidency.
The fact is, MSNBC talking points about what Trump "would have done" are not based in any reality and go against what actually has happened when you compare the Trump years to the Biden years.
Trump campaigned on getting out of Afghanistan. The first 6 months he was in office he ordered the largest troop surge into Afghanistan then any previous President before him. Even greater than the surge Obama ordered. Funny how 2 of the most popular Presidents in recent memory campaigned on leaving Afghanistan then sent more troops but the 1 who actually got us out of that hellhole is “weak”
If anything, Biden has shown more resolve and a more straight back than Trump did. By actions, not by using some crappy rhetoric without backing them up. This war was inevitable with Putin in power and his wish to restore the old glorious Russian empire. Trump's 4 years in power just made it much easier, with him selling out many operatives.
It is funny you claim nobody cares about the dead, but you only mention it after the money it costs. Trump already gave Putin all he could ask for as it is.
That the news broadcaster of your choice did not talk about it, does not mean in the rest of the world it wasn't talked about. The USA just was too busy with the next outrageous thing Trump did.
Biden getting the blame for wars is about as spot on as Biden being blamed for all the inflation, that being not spot on at all. When you live in a vacuum, it might look to be correct, but the USA does not live in a vacuum.
The Ukraine war began in 2014, when U.S. agencies overthrew the democratically elected government of Ukraine and installed a handpicked pro-Western government. They launched a deadly civil war against ethnic Russians in Ukraine. In 2019, America walked away from a peace treaty, the Minsk Agreement, that had been negotiated between Russia and Ukraine by European nations. And then in April of 2022, we wanted the war. In April 2022, President Biden sent Boris Johnson to Ukraine to force President Zelenskyy to tear up a peace agreement that he and the Russians had already signed. The Russians were withdrawing troops from Kiev, Donbas, and Luhansk. And that peace agreement would have brought peace to the region and would have allowed Donbas and Luhansk to remain part of Ukraine.
The conservative swing towards supporting Russia as soon as Trump took that stance has been honestly breathtaking. If you had told someone at the start of 2010 that by 2020 Republicans would be toeing the Putin line I would have laughed in your face.
It has nothing to do with being pro-peace negotiations. It's about denying Ukraine weapons to level the playing field that ENABLES peace negotiations that upsets people. Not supporting Ukraine is not pro-peace. It's pro-war.
Hypothetically. Imagine you have a neighbour that has 10 times more guns than you. He invades your home. People start calling for peace negotiations but your neighbour continues his invasion. Now imagine that you have additional guns given by your friends that enables you to hold off your neighbour. Now both sides are, in theory, ready for negotiations.
How do you expect Ukraine to hold negotiations should they be steamrolled over?
Janoekovitsj was elected about as democratically as Putin, after his biggest rival was put behind bars with some fake accusations. Timosjenko wanted to do something against corruption, and the pro Russia oligarchs did not like that one bit.
That is why there was the Maidan protests, because people were looking at the EU, while Janoekovitsj went back on his election promise and turned fully to Russia, turning it into a Vasal state like Belarus.
Ukrainian citizens aren't fleeing to Russia from the tyranny of Ukraine, they are fleeing to the EU, away from the Russian tyranny. Those that ended up in Russia mostly were kidnapped or deported to Russia.
The downvotes on this comment are traitors to their own way of life and system of government. Please go to Russia and tell them your opinions on anything they will love to hear about them I’m sure
I’m not an expert but this completely ignores the protests and killing of protestors the previous Pro-Russian regime committed. Were American agencies involved? I really don’t know. All I do know is hundreds of Ukrainians were killed by their own government and that definitely had a larger impact on the transition of government then anything else
I guess the hundreds of protestors killed in the streets of Kiev by the previous Pro-Russian regime had no bearing on the rapidly transitioning Western bent of Ukraine and her people. People like you are exactly why America is dying. Tribal Tribal Tribal
Oh, absolutely, because who could forget the secret American plot to orchestrate every geopolitical event since 2014? Clearly, the U.S. has magical powers that forced Russia to annex Crimea, instigated the conflict in Donbas, and somehow convinced Ukraine to resist invasion just for fun. And, of course, Boris Johnson, with his supernatural influence, personally shredded that elusive peace treaty that Putin, a well-known pacifist, was dying to sign. Sounds totally legit.
Tulsi is the biggest hypocrite ever! She pretended to be a Democrat and thought she could fool Democrats into making her president. What a joke! She’s jealous of Kamala Harris. She’s a wannabe and is seeking attention. She’s showing her true colors by supporting Trump! Birds of a feather flock together! They’re both traitors and the lowest of the low! Tulsi, you will never walk in Kamala’s shoes! They’re way too big for you!
Hypocrite? Tulsi is sticking to her anti-war views by opposing a pro-imperialist candidate. Kamala is the one who conducted mass incarceration against African Americans and is now trying to paint herself as miss Black Lives Matter despite the fact that even they reject her. Kamala is the one who arrested people on mass for smoking pot and then joked about smoking it collage. Kamala is the one who play into the same negative stereotypes about black people that the courts used against her father Donald Harris in their custody trial to the point where he denounced her presidential campaign. She is the hypocrite here not Tulsi.
Another typical Reddit response “If you disagree with the hive mind you must be a bot” a single look at my profile will show that’s not the case especially if my comment history sorted by top.
Because the same points are relevant and apply each time and are also the points that Harris’ followers keep ignoring because they’re inconvenient so they need to be brought up again and again. I’ve been writing these up on word before posting but it’s hard not to return to the same points.
Also “comrade”
So you admit to being anti-communist, anti-socialist, anti-left wing and pro-imperialist? Because if you use comrade as an insult like that you’re pretty much showing that you see communists and anti-imperialists as the enemy.
If you guys actually listened to what she said and why she endorsed Trump, its not hard to understand. Both her and RFK, the most “let’s protect our kids and help our country” candidates who are against the corrupt corporate funded war machine that is our country have endorsed Trump… doesn’t that make you stop and think for like half a second as to why?
You're right! Because nothing says "protecting our kids and helping our country" like backing the guy who tried to overturn an election and thought separating children from their parents at the border was a brilliant idea. Really makes you wonder why more "let's help our country" candidates aren’t jumping on that bandwagon. Makes perfect sense if you don’t think about it for more than half a second!
Is this satire? You do know Trump told his people literally not to do the Jan 6th thing, which was initiated by a fed and had cops open doors for them, and “separating kids from their parents” oh you mean stopping child trafficking and illegal immigration? I mean like seriously when you have a candidate saying he isn’t going to send out sons and daughters to die in foreign wars, he’s going to get drugs and crime off the streets, and he’s going to fix the chronic illness problems, how is that not the pro child candidate?
How do you know what he was doing? He was likely making a lot of phone calls and figuring out exactly what was going on, especially because he told his supporters NOT to do that beforehand, he has no responsibility over independent people making independent choices, but even still, once they chaos settled he once again spoke out and said to go home. He also tried to get the NATIONAL GUARD to set up to help prevent this exact same thing buy that request was turned down… so sounds like Trump did more to stop it than the capital police who open doors for everyone.
Easy, there are firsthand accounts from MULTIPLE people. His daughter, chief of staff, a national security adviser, and White House Counsel, just to name a few. They testified under oath, and there are records of text messages corroborating their testimony.
How does the President of the United States have no responsibility over individuals who came to see him, then attacked Capitol and DC police, looked to kill the VP and SOH while destroying the US Capitol after he told them to "fight like hell or else you won't have a country anymore"? Do you think those people just decided to do what they did for no reason? Of course, he has responsibility.
Trump never tried to get the DC National Guard there. If he did, they would have been there. https://dc.ng.mil/About-Us/#:\~:text=As%20such%2C%20the%20Commanding%20General,the%20Secretary%20of%20the%20Army.
As for Capitol police opening doors, they were understaffed and overwhelmed. Also, not all police are good police. Derek Chauvin ring a bell?
All in all, from my discussions with you, you're susceptible to right-wing media, misinformation, and disinformation. Many of the things you've said are easily debunkable if you actually watched and/or read normal news and not propaganda. I'm here to help, not to fight you. I have provided you with information that will correct the false things you're saying. I hope you actually take the time to read them and watch videos, but I hate to assume. However, I doubt it, and you will continue on like millions of people who don't like to learn and just want to be told what they want to hear.
So funny seeing people unable to deal with the reality of Trump being the actual unifier of our age and the democrats being the party of war and undemocratic processes, Shit the last president chosen by the democrat voters was obama, that 18 years of the elite telling you who to like by pushing out the popular candidates like bernies, tulsi and RJK jr, and you lockstepping right behind who ever the point at as the new great leader.
Telling a bunch of domestic terrorists he loves them is unifying?
Saying there's good people on both sides of a hate crime is unifying?
Attempting to violate our civil rights is unifying?
Attempting a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the country is unifying?
Practically doing nothing during his last year in office during Covid was unifying?
1.)Lmao telling his supporters he loves them and they they need to “GO HOME” is not the Jan 6th support you thinks it is
2.)what part of “I condone the white supremacists” did you not hear?
3.)calling out election fraud is not violating civil rights… unlike the censorship and lockdowns forced from his opponents…
4.) banning people (regardless of faith) from high terrorist countries is literally no more of a “Muslim ban” than halting immigration from Italy after rampant Italian terrorism would be a “Catholic ban” literally the aclu (lmao) said “ban immigration from 7 countries” last time I checked, a country and a religion are different
5.) so your mad he didn’t take down enough covid lockdowns, but your also mad he squashed civil liberties, which is what covid lockdowns were??!!? So which is it? Also didn’t he kinda do the whole vaccine thing? Which even though turned out to be a disaster and covid no worse than a flu, still something he did.
I genuinely believe your comments were satire because it would be insane for someone to believe these things with the access we have to information
So after they attacked police, the capitol, threaten to kill the VP and SOH, he sat for almost 3 hours and did nothing. Then when he went to record that video he did like 50 takes and told them he loved them. That's unifying?
I heard what he said, but I have been hearing Trump talk for almost ten years. You all hear nothing he says and hear one thing then stick to that and pretend like the rest of what he said is ok. Is that video unifying?
Did you read the two indictments. Yes or no? BTW a new one came out so you can check that one out.
Yeah, no. Was what he tried to do unifying?
What does your comment have to do with what is being talked about?
1.) he told them to protest peacefully before it even started, and yes saying you love people is literally unifying, what’s not unifying is taking away the rights and liberties of those who happened to be there on Jan 6th. Why wouldn’t he pardon someone who participated in a nonviolent crime influenced by social pressure, who is receiving no due process?
2.) literally everything he says is unifying… he’s the populist candidate, he has people rally behind HIM not the gop. Everyone benefits from a better economy and a safer country
3.) I literally don’t care about an indictment or impeachment coming out, as they can just throw any charges they want on him, it’s about what he is actually convicted of, and so far he was convicted for using the wrong bank account which more of showcase of how corrupt the courts are to their political opponents than trump doing wrong.
4.) limiting immigration is unifying because it’s focusing on and protecting Americans. I really don’t care about being unifying with those who aren’t American, it’s why I don’t think we should be involved in foreign wars, oh trump also wants us out of those wars too.
5.) you literally posted an article complaining about trump not doing enough for covid, but in reality, he actually did a lot for it. Which looking back we know he didn’t need to because it wasn’t what it was hyped up to be.
He told them protest peacefully while telling them to fight like 50 times and telling people like you that they wont have a country anymore. If he was about peace why did he sit in his chair for almost 3 hours doing nothing? What's not unifying is you told people that attacked police, the US capitol, and threatened to kill the VP and SOH all while delaying an official proceding that you loved them. You can't say you.
January 6, 2021 was a nonviolent crime? You're not well.
Again. Did you read the two indictments. Yes or no?
You rambled and didn't address what the article was about lol.
“Supporting a Neo Nazi regime that has been murdering Russian speakers, erecting monuments to Nazi collaborators, shelling the breakaway regions for years killing thousands and all in all being NATO’s pawn against Russia is being a War Hawk”
Yes, yes it is.
Viewpoints are not historical facts. You live in a country where you have almost all information freely available. Yet you choose to use some sentences that are not only wrong, but also anti-American, anti-freedom and anti-democracy. Again, shame on you.
Because promoting regime change against nations and overthrowing democratically elected because they oppose the interests of American imperialism is very pro-freedom and democracy? Arming ISIS in Syria another pro-freedom, pro-democratic action that along with destroying the most prosperous nation in Africa and murdering it’s leader can’t get anymore pro-freedom than that. All nations should embrace the freedom and democracy spread by America’s bloodstained war machine of genocide and chaos.
You are mixing so many things that the original point is completely flooded. Ukraine voted for independence from Russia in 1990 with 90% being pro. In 2004, Ukrainian prime minister Viktor Yanukovych was ousted from office after the supreme court of Ukraine ordered a recount of the elections after fraud. This pissed of Russia because a pro-Europe and pro-Western candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, did in fact win. This pissed of Russia because Ukraine was leaning and growing more and more to Europe and the West. Forward to 2013 and Russia send in security forces into Ukraine, wounding and killing Ukrainians in the capitol after the Ukrainian government, under Russian pressure, got rid of an EU agreement and moved again to Russia. Simultaneously, Russia invaded Crimea and armed and funded separatists in Eastern-Ukraine, starting a civil war. Russia, not the US nor the collective West, started the war in Ukraine. It was Russia all along.
Russia did the EXACT SAME THING in Georgia and Chechnya.
But sure. Repeat Russian talking points where you just say: 'nazis, imperialism, oppression natives', without any actual arguments that are able to be checked.
The actions of the US State department, Victoria Newland and the CIA in fermenting colour revolution in Ukraine can’t be denied.
https://truthout.org/articles/the-ukraine-mess-that-nuland-made/
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/07/ukra-f07.html
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/13/the-mess-that-nuland-made/
I have read the transcript. It's about Victoria Nuland expressing harsh disdain about the EU and doubts about Ukrainian opposition. The phone call was made while protests were already ongoing in Ukraine. There is no proof, in the call, that the US, or the CIA even, orchestrated a coup in Ukraine.
And diplomats speak with national politicians in every country. The US does this in Ukraine. As did Russia. As does the EU. As does the rest of the world.
The narrative you are posting here is trying to undermine the legitimacy of the Ukrainian state and government which on its turn legitimizes the war Russia brought to Ukraine.
Victoria Nuland was involved in pushing the Iraq war, the NATO lead destruction of Libya and arming Islamic terrorists in Syria then just happened to be in Ukraine when the coup took place. Not only that in the call she is clearly trying to push to outcome America wants to happened this is clear American imperialist backing for the coup which falls in line with the modus operandi of Victoria Nuland and the Clinton State Department.
Not only that but the CIA has had a long history in the Ukraine which they even admit themselves
https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/the-cia-admits-its-long-time-presence-in-ukraine/
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/12/29/evidence-of-us-backed-coup-in-kiev/
Ukraine brought war upon its self by breaking the terms of the Minsk agreement and shelling the breakaway regions in breach of the ceasefire. Ukraine brought war upon itself when it persecuted Russian speakers and erected shrines to Nazi collaborators whist tearing down WW2 monuments showing their Nazi intents. Ukraine brought war upon itself by trying to join NATO to further encircle Russia and NATO brought war to Ukraine by breaking its promise of not expanding any further west.
She was my number 2 choice after Bernie for a while. I am disgusted with what she has become over the last 4 years.
I can't believe I fell for this grifter a few years back, and now it just seems obvious that she was only in the race to undermine other potential candidates.
I’m right in the same boat with ya man. I pushed for her, donated to her campaign… believed she stood on those values. I thought she would be a great alternative to Bernie… Now she’s endorsing a man who epitomizes the exact opposite. Well… if we wanna slightly feel better about how badly we were duped, at least we can say we admit it.
Yeah, I used to think she was going to be the perfect bridge to make common sense progressive policy palatable to right wingers. I ignored the attacks from liberals about her being an opportunist. I would chalk off her questionable beliefs as her being a nuanced person.
I thought she cared about ending our involvement in the destruction of entire countries. Our taxpayer money is going to Israel to aid in a genocide and she doesn't seem to care. If she did she wouldn't be endorsing either of these party's candidates
I, Tulsi Gabbard, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Man she endorses attempted to overturn the 2020 election and on January 6, 2021 sat in his office for hours watching domestic terrorists attack the US capitol and police officers and did nothing.
Reee.... Come on
... It's just the lesser of two evils one supports totalitarianism and the other would not have mandated the vaccine for federal employees
He’s the lesser of two evils compared to the queen of mass incarceration and war monger Kamala who is already heating up war rhetoric against the DPRK.
“Spewing misinformation”
Why are redditors such mindless drones?
What’s ‘misinformation’ anything that’s goes against the mainstream media?
We’re talking about a woman who contacted mass incarnation against African Americans, withheld DNA evidence that could have saved a man’s life, used prison labour for profit, withheld information about false positives in drug tests that were keep people imprisoned on false charges, imprisoned people on mass for smoking pot and then laughed about smoking it herself.
Now she wants to invade the DPRK and take the west into to WW3 against Russia and China which is significantly worse than getting a crowd of upstarts to do a walk around of the capital whilst doing some minor vandalism and making politicians quake in their boots.
No, I have expressed my self quite concisely but you don’t wish to address any of the points I made in my initial response and instead answer in the typical snarky reddit fashion. The truth is that even if expressed myself with the eloquence of Cicero you would still dismiss me as ‘rambling’ or ‘deflecting’ rather than actually address the meat of my response.
I confess I have not but then again I have no interest in that I am far more concerned about which candidate would be more likely to bring the west into a new world war which is clearly Kamala especially considering her rhetoric against the DPRK and Russia. I don’t care how disruptive Mr. Trump tired to be to America’s bourgeois democracy I’m far more concerned with anti-imperialism and that is hoping that the person who wins is the least likely to invade the DPRK and promote regime change against anti-imperialist countries.
Nobody with half a brain... or those who can actually spell "incarceration" thinks that Kamala plans to invade the DPRK. Whoever paid you a penny a word for this drivel is getting straight ROBBED.
Oh no I made a few misspellings I guess my entire argument is worthless now. Can you reddit midwits not make any arguments without sounding as smug and soy infused as possible? You must be the most infuriating people to be around in real life or do you only act like pompous midwits when there’s no one who can respond by punching you on the nose?
I’m dyslexic and so I’m bound to make some misspellings at some point or changing the wrong word by mistake.
Now Kamala Harris has made several remarks against comrade Kim Jong-un and attacked Mr. Trump for meeting him clearly showing that she is against peace on the Korean peninsula. Moreover she’s backed by the former Clinton State department the same department that backed colour revolutions across the world, murdered Gaddafi then jeered at this death, armed ISIS in Syria and took aggressive stances against many anti-imperialist nations, so it’s clear that she’ll be a war hawkish president. Now seeing as the DPRK has been a thorn in side of American imperialism for some time and is sitting on vast rare mineral deposits that America would be very keen to get hold of would it be any surprise if she ranks up aggression towards them? After all I suppose there would be many before 2011 that would have said that America wouldn’t invade Libya either.
Look up trumps fake elector scheme? I assume you think Jan 6th was a random day where 'some people did some things' as opposed to a culmination of months of traitorous activity.
Kalama was fucking the poor when she was overseeing mass incarnation, withholding DNA evidence that would save a man’s life, using prison labour for profit and is now getting read to send millions of poor people to die in WW3 or in a war against the DPRK.
Why are you redditors such obnoxious twats? Do you think this level of self righteous smugness makes you endearing or witty? Are you hoping that one of the reddit drones is going to see your comments so you can both circlejerk other how enlightened you are? Do you think that pointing out typos completely invalidates what the other is saying?
Are you kidding me? Just at the DNC, many Republicans spoke. The Lincoln Project, which has a huge following, is a project created by Republicans all against Trump. The majority of the former staff of Trump have all come out against.
Nah, don’t feel bad. A true idiot would make excuses and try to justify that they’re still right, despite a complete 180 on their original values. Admitting someone isn’t who you thought isn’t idiotic. PS, this is me trying to make myself feel better about believing in her too
The downfall of our civilization will be because of vacuous sacks of shit like this lady. No moral conviction, no integrity, no shame. Bought and sold by whoever has Power, thinking maybe they can lick some boots long enough to taste some of it. Tulsi. I never liked or trusted you. I believe that nobody anywhere does. You have no talent and no common decency. You are exactly the person that a degenerate slime like Slump would attract… buhbye now.
This is so sad to me. It was inevitable, and she pretty much had already done so, but to see it become official is so tragic honestly. I remember when I believed she was a breath of fresh air in politics and she was my second choice in 2020 after Yang. I thought she had strong progressive values at her core that she presented in a down-to-earth, rational, kind, compassionate, peace-loving, thoughtful, Aloha manner.
And her bold, maverick ideas could appeal to independents, libertarians, and people across the aisle while still not losing their core identity. I mean, this was the woman who resigned from the DNC to endorse Bernie in 2016, right? She had given reason for people to trust her. In her youth and style, I saw the bright future of American politics, a clear contrast between the elderly candidates, Trump and Biden, we were being asked to support in the General Election. Once the dust of 2020 settled, Tulsicrats had the right combination of foreign policy and domestic policy to usher in a new era.
But since then it’s become so clear that her social conservatism is stronger than whatever progressive values she claimed to have before. Her hard-right pivot has been so disappointing to see. Trump is dramatically removed from “Aloha” values, it’s astonishing. And even just comparing Tulsi’s journey to Andrew Yang’s is stunning. Both had somewhat unconventional ideas when they ran, both were seen as Bernie-adjacent progressives but felt adrift from the Democratic Party, both had a great deal of bipartisan appeal, and both left to become independents following their campaigns.
But while Tulsi has functionally become a Republican in everything but the name, Yang has been a true left-leaning independent and hasn’t sacrificed any of his values in the process. And of course, Yang is supporting Kamala in 2024 and Tulsi is… well. It turns out Tulsi was a “maverick” in the sense that she secretly wanted to hate trans people and combat “woke” values, not in the sense that she had actually thoughtful, maverick viewpoints.
So taking the correct view social issues is more important than anti-imperialism? Because Kamala has already started heating up the war mongering against the DPRK, China and Russia, also she can hardly be seen socially progressive considering her history of mass incarceration, use of prison labour for profit and arresting parents for truancy.
Wokeness really does server imperialism and the ruling class you’re willing to support a war mongering imprisoner of the poor as long as she pays lip service to the correct woke talking points. It’s totally fine if she invades the DPRK, takes you into WW3 or conducts regime change operations across the world as long as you can write woke slogans on the bombs used to murder innocents imperialism is A-OK.
Anti-imperialism is right wing now? Being against America’s war is right wing now? Not wanting WW3 is right wing? Not wanting to see an actual existing communist country invaded is right wing? Not wanting to see more colour revolutions is right wing? Isn’t left wing politics meant to be against imperialism and against regime change? Isn’t it meant to be against war didn’t Lenin go against the second international because they were supporting WW1? I guess he was right wing for not standing with those social reformers? At least by your logic he would be.
You’ve proven once again that wokness only exists to serve imperialism, the ruling class and destroy the left. You don’t give a damn about class struggle or anti-imperialism you just want imperialism and capitalism with nice progressive face on it using identity politics and social justice to justify your imperialist war machine.
Yes, you're spewing bs right wing talking points. White right wingers hijacked the word woke and made it into their own thing to hide their hatred, so yes, holy wright wing talking points Batman!
Now moron the DPRK opposes wokeness, China opposes wokeness, actual communists oppose wokeness, and most anti-imperialist countries oppose wokeness because wokeness is fake synthetic leftism that serves imperialism and the ruling class.
Being anti-imperialist is actual leftism not your fake corporate created fake activism.
It doesn’t really mean much, it’s happened throughout history and is common in multi-party democracies. I feel like if anything it says more about her abandonment of her 2020 platform, which is what most people here likely know her from.
Is “switching party affiliation due to disgust with the state of their original party” a game you really want to play? I don’t think that’s going to go the way you want it to go
…..are you doing a bit? This is your defense of the party completely controlled by one man who will declare people RINOs if they levy any tepid criticism at him?
Whenever people mention how bad the Dems are it's never acknowledged the brain turns off and all that comes out is Trump hate. You can hate Trump and acknowledge the Democrat party flaws. It is possible unless you're a bot then it's not possible and you're just programmed that way.
Tulsi was never a Dem she ran as one because it was the only way to get elected. Just look at her upbringing and the weird right wing cult she grew up in
Tulsi is a very good litmus test for rational political thought:
Either you began following her pre-2020, liked her views/politics, and somewhere along the way of her transformation, sanely, saw she did not in fact have any integrity or convictions and so dropped your support. (You ‘passed’)
Or, you began following her pre-2020 and, insanely, continue ‘believing’ in her despite her obviously having no integrity or convictions and becoming the very thing she used to denounce (you ‘failed’).
Or, you began following her post-2020 and, insanely, ignore everything she said/did pre-2020 simply because she now says things you like to hear (btw, you are the exact target of her grift) and disregard that she has already proven she has zero integrity/convictions and her views are ‘for sale’ to whoever might help her career (you ‘failed’).
Finally… you began following her at any time and did/do mistrust her — especially for claiming ‘integrity’ when we now have abundant evidence that she has none (you ‘passed’ - though for those who believed this in 2019 or earlier… how did you know?)
Kamala is a better test if you look at history of mass incarnation, arresting parents for truancy, cracking down on Marijuana use then joking about smoking it collage, refusing to release prisoners who were convicted under false drug test results, refusing to release DNA evidence that would save a man’s life, wanting to continue to use prisoners as labour past their release date and even being denounced by her own father. Now wanting to ramp up war mongering against the DPRK, China and Russia If someone can think her as progressive and left wing then they’re clearly stupid.
What should be done to parents who repeatedly neglect school attendance? This is one criticism of her I struggle to agree with. Truancy is by far one of the biggest predictors of criminality, it makes sense why some would have little tolerance for it.
I agree that Kamala has been too tough on crime for my taste and is definitely a centrist - not an ‘extreme leftist’ or whatever some are labeling her.
Tulsi is another Nikki Haley...no one knows they exist until election time then they pop out, claim they're relevant and get back into the political game, pick up some cash, don't get any votes
(Nikki) try to get a cushy job in the campaign and beyond( money grab ) then disappear...until the next election...☹
Welcome to the MAGA-movement beutigul Tulsi, Strong Tulsi. MAGA- The peoples movement against oligarchs and disgusting woke-persons, sponsored by oligarchs and neoliberals. Just like Reddit. She has taken the red pill. The bots on Redit has not. They are bots.
stirfriedquinoa@reddit
lmao. The U-turn is complete.
Geektime1987@reddit
She ran as a democratic because that was the only way she would get elected in her state and district. She has always been right wing just look at her upbringing and the weird homophobic cult she was in
Potential_Ad_420_@reddit
That doesn’t even make sense lmao. You’re just pissed
SeasonsGone@reddit
What was all this about then https://politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/tulsi-gabbard/
OkContribution1411@reddit
Reading these were her views in 2020 just screams that she was an opportunist
VrindavanNidhivan@reddit (OP)
The reason Tulsi stated that she endorsed President Trump is because he is the pro-peace candidate while Vice President Harris is the pro-war candidate.
Harvinator06@reddit
Trump will allow and encourage Israel to turn Gaza into glass.
Fuck_this_timeline@reddit
No, he won’t. Trump wants to be remembered as the peacemaker of our time, if for no other reason than this ego. This applies equally to Ukraine.
Ask yourself: who is Netanyahu more afraid of, Trump or Kamala? Imagine a negotiation. Its not hard to see who is stronger.
Delicious_Winter_820@reddit
Except not a peacemaker on his own soil…
AmongUS0123@reddit
Kamala, net thinks trump will give him whatever he wants.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Then why were there no new wars in the world under Donald Trump?
AmongUS0123@reddit
Isis?
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Isis started under Obama because he underestimated them calling them “jv”
AmongUS0123@reddit
we can say that about ukraine and israel. im going by the rules established
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Both Ukraine and Israel started under the Biden administration.
AmongUS0123@reddit
no they didnt.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
The Ukraine war and Israel war started under Joe Biden. The Isis war started with Obama. You’re trying to gas light. Isis began the war in 2014. A full 3 years before Donald Trump took office.
AmongUS0123@reddit
https://academic.oup.com/book/36779/chapter-abstract/321914651?redirectedFrom=fulltext
This goes over a little of trumps failed war. Its his to own like covid thousands and thousands of deaths.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Ukraine war began in 2022 and Israel began last year. You don’t have anything to stand on with this issue.
Hulkhogansgaynephew@reddit
There were no new "wars" under any president since Bush (dubya). Unless you're counting wars that started in other countries and I don't see how that relates to anything. If you're trying to say Trump didn't take aggressive action, don't forget he approved the assassination of Soleimani.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Isis grew out of hand under Obama’s watch
Flederm4us@reddit
If you really think the US didn't cause the revolts in Syria and Libya to turn into full scale civil war, I have a bridge in Alaska for you...
JoshSidekick@reddit
Here's a list of wars the US was part of during Trumps time as president.
Invasion of Afghanistan
War in Northwest Pakistan
Somalia and Northeastern Kenya
Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda
US Led intervention in Iraq
US led intervention in Syria
Yemeni Civil War
US intervention in Libya
Not to mention he moved the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Recognized the permanent Israeli annexation of the occupied Golan Heights. Got rid of the Iran deal which led to the election of a hardline government in Tehran which boosted funding to terrorist organizations. He also ordered the assassination of Qasem Soleimani which by some miracle didn't escalate to a war through no help of his own. He had the idea to nuke North Korea and blame someone else. He shredded the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty that ensured transparency between the U.S., much of Europe, and Russia, and failed to extend the critical New START Treaty with Russia. He had the largest number of drone strikes during his tenure. He even wanted to nuke a fucking hurricane.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Of those wars how many of those did Donald J Trump start?
Detritus_AMCW@reddit
True, Kamala is far stronger. She would handle folks like she did Brett Kavanaugh and Attorney General Sessions. Trump, unfortunately, showed us his "I'm a whipped dog" approach with Putin at the Helsinki summit. He did switch it up to "I'm a boot licker" with Kim Jong IL, so he has range, but the only people he alienated with regularity are our allies.
Fuck_this_timeline@reddit
The way in which Kamala treated Kavanaugh was repulsive. Wish you hadn’t reminded me of this, that whole spectacle showed just how vile Democrats are and that there is no low they won’t sink to for the sake of power, but that’s what happens when one chooses to become a progressive — you think you’re morally entitled to such.
Trump made an earnest attempt to reset relations with Russia, but the Washington bureaucratic machine refused and he was lambasted for it. A shame, considering what could’ve been avoided since then.
He reminded Kim Jong of who has the bigger red button… that’s hardly boot licking. More like a kindly reminder of where North Korea belongs on the world stage.
Rice-Chex@reddit
Oh yeah. That was a nice tweet. Very powerful.
Flederm4us@reddit
Allow, maybe. Encourage, no.
We've already seen what he wanted to do to solve the issue. There's no reason he would do anything else. Because what he did actually worked. He was slamming away the crutches that prop up Hamas. The foreign money flowing into Hamas hands was slowly throttled away by bilateral deals with hamas' main supporters like UAE or Saudi Arabia.
Once the money runs out, Hamas will be forced to talk peace, or will become irrelevant.
Trump is not pro war, he's a dealmaker. And if Biden had continued that policy this war would not be happening.
AlrightyThen1986@reddit
lol Trump is not a “deal maker”
teecuedee@reddit
In the real world, that's already happening under Biden-Harris.
serpicowasright@reddit
But at least it’s happening with JOY! /s
The-Curiosity-Rover@reddit
And once everyone’s dead, there will be peace. Duh.
Mr-Tosaka@reddit
Unfortunately it might be the only answer 😔
CommanderPreston@reddit
it IS the only answer. We need to wake up and realise only 1 will survive this conflict.
meatboitantan@reddit
Oh no! Anyway…
AmongUS0123@reddit
So dont pretend to be pro peace. You made the point
JoeyjoejoeShabadues@reddit
At this point that is pro peace stance, the other is rewarding radical islamist terrorist after 80 years of trying to genocide jews.
jefe4959@reddit
So Genocide is the pro peace stance as a final solution to a baseless hypothetical genocide. You're sick in the head and completely brainwashed. You missed the part about Israeli terrorism that started the whole thing, and 80 years of occupation, Aparthied, ethnic cleansing and oppression.
meatboitantan@reddit
I’m pro not hearing about other countries’ bullshit anymore. I couldn’t give two fucks about Israel or Gaza.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
And I’m completely fine with Israel killing every last one of those terrorist.
AlrightyThen1986@reddit
Trump will use US troops to help Russia destroy Ukraine
TheSkyLax@reddit
More like Trump is Anti-Ukraine and Harris Pro-Ukraine
Latenighredditor@reddit
She's pro-peace only as long as it doesn't involve Muslims but bring up a Muslim she's go wicked witch of the west on them lol
Geektime1987@reddit
Trump dropped the largest non nuclear bomb in the history of warfare. He ordered more far more drone strikes than the Obama administration
VrindavanNidhivan@reddit (OP)
President Trump dropped that bomb on ISIS which President Obama had allowed to take over a third of Syria and two fifths of Iraq, and who turned women minorities into sex slaves, and who decapitated American hostages.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
So sometimes war good? Depends on who we can blame it on ?
VrindavanNidhivan@reddit (OP)
President Trump didn't start that war. Did you really want for him to make peace with ISIS?
mikeyzee52679@reddit
But all you’re doing is back tracking , Trump was pro war , and is pro war today ,
_xxxtemptation_@reddit
Trump was the first US president since the Carter administration to not start any new wars, or use US military interventionism to start or escalate foreign conflicts. Call it whatever you want, but that’s about as pro-peace as you’re going to get in this day and age.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
That’s just not true, 2,243 drone strikes in his first two years most definitely escalated the wars. Upped air strikes in Afghanistan that led to 330% increase in civilian deaths. Also emboldens Israel and Russia , which led to where they are now. He didn’t send American troops to any new places , that’s pretty sweel. He wasn’t an anti war president and didn’t help make a more peaceful world.
_xxxtemptation_@reddit
Well Reuters, USA Today and Newsweek say it is; so forgive me if I take their word over Foreign Policy Magazines opinion that changing the rules of engagement to save our service members lives in wars that predate the Trump administration, count as an escalation.
I’m not here to support Trump or anyone else, just here to point out the person you’re accusing of moving goalposts isn’t the only one.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
I’ll just comment real quick, they were moving goal post and your three articles didn’t help their case. Thread started off saying he was a pro peace candidate, it’s just not true. Than they moved the goal post to “no new wars” and now you backed them up.
_xxxtemptation_@reddit
OP said that’s why Tulsi endorsed Trump instead of Harris. However both of OP and my claims are factually accurate. And relative to all the prior administrations since the Carter administration, he is the least pro war candidate. You said what I said wasn’t true, but it is according to three independent sources of varying biases. So pointing to Trump changing the rules of engagement in wars started by previous administration to reduce American casualties by 500% as evidence of him being pro war is a lazy red herring.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
Op said trump is “pro peace” that’s started it, that’s not true , you’r 3 articles didn’t help that statement any. No red herrings no funny terms, he’s not “pro peace”
_xxxtemptation_@reddit
This is what OP said:
Everything they said after that, was a defense of Tulsis position that Trump is pro-peace relative to Harris. Everything I said, furthered this argument by pointing out that he’s pro-peace relative to the presidents of the last four decades, and backed up that claim with sources you could not refute. Everything you said, was a red herring to distract people from the fact, that in this election between Trump and Harris, Trump is by far the most pro peace candidate.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
Your last sentence just isn’t true. The world is Al lot less safer with him in power, your articles don’t help , move on.
_xxxtemptation_@reddit
That is your opinion. If you want to pipe up and cite statistics, at least have the humility to argue in good faith. Over half a million of our supposed allies are dead because of the policy decisions of the Biden-Harris administration, and believing it will be any different under a Harris administration is a leap of faith I’m not willing to indulge in a fact based discussion. I don’t think either of them deserve to be the president, but Trumps record on war is an indisputable fact. At least congress had the common sense to try and put limits on Trumps power when he was in office; but do you really think the same will be true if Kamala wins and gets a blue congress?
mikeyzee52679@reddit
Some stats are in this thread , all the drone strikes in the first 2 years , the civilian death toll in Afghanistan tripled. Emboldened of Israel and Russia led to a less safe world , heavy support of the bombing of Yemen. He just wasn’t for world peace
_xxxtemptation_@reddit
Well Reuters, USA Today and Newsweek say he is the most pro peace president since the Carter administration; so forgive me if I take their word over Foreign Policy Magazines opinion that changing the rules of engagement to utilize more air strikes than ground forces, and decrease our own service members deaths by 500% in wars that predate the Trump administration, counts as an escalation, or make him more pro war than Harris.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
What wars did President Donald Trump start?
mikeyzee52679@reddit
He just bombed the shit out of Afghanistan and supported the bombing of Yemen. He’s not pro peace
VrindavanNidhivan@reddit (OP)
Which part of "President Trump didn't start that war" are you not able to understand? Are you seriously saying that President Trump should have made a peace deal with ISIS?
El_Padrino_Fred@reddit
Well he did negotiate the deal with the Taliban to leave Afghanistan. You know, that group that killed our Service members and treat women like shit. So if it benefited him I am sure he would have negotiated with ISIS as well. He’s pro himself and you refuse to see it.
BoodaSias@reddit
You mean the deal that required the taliban to make peace with the Afghan national government, and had provisions for a complete pullout of the deal if the Taliban didn't make and keep peace?
Rice-Chex@reddit
The deal to hand Afghanistan to the Taliban that excluded the Afghani government from the deal and released 5,000 Taliban fighters to be ready to take over when the US withdrew it's troops? One of those prisoners is the new Taliban leader of Afghanistan.
DOHA Agreement PDF
El_Padrino_Fred@reddit
Yeah. The same bad deal that forced the Afghan government to release 5000 taliban prisoners. Did they make peace with the Afghanistan government? No they took over the country again. Spin it how you want but it was a flawed deal that ultimately lead to more deaths of US troops, not that trump really cares about those troops, in his eyes they are all suckers and losers, and it lead to the oppression of afghans citizens.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
You move a goal line, that’s fine. Just as adults we know this starts with you saying he’s pro peace ,
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
He’s literally not pro war.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
You might not know what that means. It’s all good
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Can you tell me what wars Donald Trump started?
mikeyzee52679@reddit
Go back and read the thread. Trump is a pro war candidate, sorry .
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
You’re deflecting. I asked a question. What wars did Donald Trump start?
mikeyzee52679@reddit
You don’t even know what deflecting means , you jumped into a conversation where a guy said trump was pro peace , I pointed out how he sent more drone strikes in his first 2 years than Obama did in eight , ramped up the war in taken and so on. And that guys only response was “ he didn’t start new wars” which wasn’t what the thread was about , that was them changing the conversation to fit their narrative, and you jumped in for some reason.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Am I not allowed to jump in? Do you own this subreddit? Did i violate dime sort of rules? People call President Trump a warmonger yet he stated no wars. Your condescending tone is noted but irrelevant.
mikeyzee52679@reddit
Jump in wherever you want, don’t talk to me about something I’m not talking about, don’t tell me I’m deflecting cause you want to jump in and add your 2 cents which had nothing to do with the conversation.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
If you do not wish to engage in discourse perhaps you should not be on a political subreddit. Just some advice.
meatboitantan@reddit
Trump meets with the taliban or Al-quaeda: “he’s a terrorist sympathizer!!”
Trump doesn’t meet with ISIS: “mean orange guy dropped big bombs!! :(“
Make up y’all’s damn minds.
Geektime1987@reddit
Trump also order the assassination of a Iranian general. All the Maga people who keep screaming we're heading towards war with Iran because of the left yet Trump order an assassination of the head of a countries military we're not at war with. If you think Trump isn't pro war you're delusional Trump is pro whatever Trump wants to do that will benefit him. He suggested used the US military against US citizens
Fuck_this_timeline@reddit
That’s because he made the mistake of listening to John Bolton. Today Trump admitted that he didn’t exactly hire the best people in his first administration…
PackAttacks@reddit
So he makes bad decisions AND hires the worst people? What’s your angle here? lol?
Rice-Chex@reddit
Trump also signed the executive order to make sure the American people would never know how many people his drone strikes killed.
Executive Order on Revocation of Reporting Requirement
Academic-Art7662@reddit
Are you taking about dropping a single MOAB?
beavis617@reddit
Tulsi believes turning Ukraine over to Russia is the only way to attain peace in the region.🙄
teecuedee@reddit
The ultimate strawman
FluffyPurpleBear@reddit
Yeah the obvious inaccuracy of that statement has made my inkling of hope to support her in the future evaporate. That plus the endorsement of someone who has already proved how big of a threat to democracy he is…
streetwearbonanza@reddit
Trump dropped more bombs in 4 years than obama did in 8 lol wtf
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
What wars did Donald Trump start?
streetwearbonanza@reddit
None? Biden/Harris didn't start any new wars either and they ended one.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
No no you’re claiming President is a warmonger. He inherited a crisis from Obama in the form of ISIS. Trump simply finished that crisis
jstohler@reddit
Trump supported Putin's war, so fuck off.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Sources?
Ibo-Naw@reddit
January 6, 2021 Lafayette Square June 1, 2020
That's pro peace?
nbc500@reddit
You're seriously comparing Jan 6 to wars in Ukraine and the middle east? Absolute lunacy.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Nice try, but I wasn’t comparing scales of conflict. Just pointing out the irony of lecturing about 'peace' when supporting actions that were anything but. But hey, if you want to dodge the point, go ahead!
nbc500@reddit
With Trump we had NO new wars and were cutting down on military conflicts. Using Jan 6 to discredit this is dumb, I'm not dodging any point. Dems use to be anti war now they are in bed with corporate america fueling the wars. Trump has a very peaceful record compared to the last 6 presidents.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Interesting spin, but let's not rewrite history. Inciting an insurrection (He was impeached for it, so it's facts) and using force to clear peaceful protesters aren't exactly peaceful achievements. Also, let's not pretend that cozying up to dictators and alienating allies was some masterclass in diplomacy. Peace isn't just about avoiding new wars; it's about upholding democratic principles too.
JoeyjoejoeShabadues@reddit
Calling it an Insurrection is spitting in the face of real victims of insurrections and coups.
And the impeachment is why RFK jr And Tulsi is flipping, the democrat party is now the banana republic party of lawfare against anyone threatening the one true party.
But yeah vote for your warhawking dems, while Trump was president over the most peacefull period of my life lmao.
and lmao upholding democratic principles is that very last the the Democrats are doing right now, the last president properly voted in by the people and not rigged was Obama, thats 18 years ago that the democrat party turned into a party of elites chosen your leader and lockstepping right behind.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
What's the definition of insurrection?
How is the Democrat Party a Banana Republic when Republicans also voted to impeach and convict him?
January 6, 2021 was peaceful? Yes or no.
nbc500@reddit
No spin, trump isn't a war hawk like Biden, Obama, and Bush. End of story.
Jan 6 is a different subject completely but it has NOTHING to do with his foreign policy.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Oh, so now Biden's the 'war hawk'—interesting take. What makes him so? As for January 6, it’s a domestic policy issue, but it’s still tied to the idea of maintaining peace and democracy, don’t you think? And still ignoring Lafayette Square. Trump's foreign policy? Isolationism might sound great in theory to you, but it’s a rough fit for global economics and didn’t exactly boost American jobs. But hey, keep drinking the Trump peace foolishness lol.
nbc500@reddit
Biden has been funding both major wars heavily. Biden has transferred billions of dollars’ worth of weapons to Ukraine and has considered sending additional American military advisors to the country. The Biden administration has approved over 100 weapons transfers to Israel worth more than $41 billion and $15 billion in military aid. (via: cato insitute)
"Isolationism might sound great in theory to you, but it’s a rough fit for global economics and didn’t exactly boost American jobs"
Yes because we should get involved in wars for job creation! Genius!! That's the key to fixing the economy!
Non interventionist is different than isolationist. You literally are making the same argument that Warhawks in the GOP made 10 years ago. It's hilarious someone who is gonna vote democrat is arguing that it's good for the economy to fund the Military industrial complex.
ScratchTasty2964@reddit
If Russia wins in the Ukraine he will be up against current NATO borders, which would probably lead to American sons and daughters going overseas to bolster those nations. Letting Ukraine handle Russia with support is a much better option for everyone in the west. Has zero to do with job creation and everything to do with weakening a peer adversary.
Geektime1987@reddit
Trump is in bed with corporate America all of his big donors are billionaires.
papa_jahn@reddit
If you think Kamala isn’t taking donations from billionaires, boy do I have a bridge to sell you
Geektime1987@reddit
I didn't say that but this idea that Trump is for the working man and isn't all about big donors is ridiculous
papa_jahn@reddit
He’s more for the working man than she is. Household costs were decent until Biden took over.
zombierapture@reddit
Not even close. Jan 6 vs corrupt Ukraine war. I would say the many lives lost in Ukraine is worse than the hysteria of Jan 6.
SeasonsGone@reddit
In what world is geopolitics that simple? Trump approved trillion dollar arms deals to foreign powers just as anyone else did
Illin_Spree@reddit
Can you try to explain the reasoning behind that?
Michael Tracey recently put out a video reacting to the RFK endorsement that among other things, made a number of points relating to how delusional it is to describe Trump as the peace candidate. What is he getting wrong? Didn't Trump recently support a massive defense bill to fund the wars in Ukraine and Gaza?
Remy0507@reddit
Ok, bot.
AlrightyThen1986@reddit
Tulsi is a Russian asset
DC_MOTO@reddit
Get a fucking job Tulsi. Oh wait this is the best she can do.
Shomondir@reddit
Trump is not pro peace. He has no issues with all sorts of dictators waging wars all over the place, de-stabilizing the world all over. Letting Putin have his way in Ukraine would embolden him to look westwards, which means NATO countries, for example.
With Trump in power, there will be only more wars in the world, not less. So no, not the president for peace.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
Can you tell me how many wars Trump started? Make sure you cite your sources
Shomondir@reddit
Wars? Exactly the same amount as Barack Obama and Joe Biden, which is a lot less than George Bush jr.
What Truml did however, contrary to Obama and Biden, is embolden tyrants to do whatever they like, destabilising the world.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
That’s objectively false. Why did Putin wait for trump to be out of office to invade?
Shomondir@reddit
Putin first had his hopes in Trump forcing Ukraine into submission, with things like the Hunter Biden story etc. Next to that, with Zelensky coming into power in 2019, Putin had hoped to roll over this actor quickly through other means. Next to that, it takes time to build up an army, especially when you like to pretend you are not going to invade. This build up already started during Trump's tenure. Add to it that Trump did his best to show NATO as weak and divided, an image that certainly got stuck with Putin and the whole situation is what it was, with as a result an invasion early 2022. Luckily for Ukraine, not only was NATO and/or the EU not divided at all in this case, they came to the rescue nearly instantly, helping Ukraine with very important weapons in the very early stage to repel the initial attack.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
You’re making deflections and excuses. The fact remains that Putin did invade during Bidens administration and not with Trumps. And Donald Trump was calling out allies for not paying their fair share and relying on American military might I.E Germany. You can make all the excuses for Biden that you want. But it doesn’t change the fact that 2 major conflicts started under his watch.
Shomondir@reddit
Putin invading Ukraine proper during Biden's presidency does not undo the fact that Trump emboldened Putin. Those two facts can co-exist without a problem.
Trump was shouting about the 2% rule that was agreed upon well before Trump got in power and came with deadlines that are well past Trump's presidency. Countries were already, albeit slowly moving towards the 2% of their GDP spending on defense. Covid caused some delay here and there, but Russia's full blown invasion made most countries act accordingly to compensate. Also, every member of NATO pays its fair share to NATO. The defense budget is a different matter than 'paying the fair share'.
Which 2 conflicts started under Biden? Ukraine already was a conflict during Trump's presidency, and it kept escalating further and further. The end result was the full blown invasion, but it was far from the beginning of the conflict.
The second major conflict, you will have to help me out, unless you mean Israel. That conflict as well has a history going way back. Among things, during Trump's presidency, the amount of illegal jewish immigrants on the westbank surged significantly. This came together with a lot of violence against the people rightfully living there. This violence going unpunished for so many years erupted in this massive wave of violence. If you want to blame Biden, be my guest.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
There was quite literally a terrorist attack that occurred in October of last year kicking off the war in israel. You keep trying to pin blame on trump for everything you can. You’re grasping at straws. It is objective to say the world was peaceful under trump. The world is not as peaceful as it was under Trump. You cannot deny that. Trump also wanted a stronger NATO. Most of Natos military force is American. Trump didn’t make NATO weak. Outside of America Nato is weak. You’re delusional and will not see reason. I wish you the best but this debate is useless if you are so biased that you want to blame a man that had been out of office for 2 years. Good day
Shomondir@reddit
You pretend that attack happened in a total vacuum, as if everything was going great for the Palestinian people.
Trump wanted to get out of NATO, and was using agreements made before he became president as some form of weapon to threaten to leave. He also publicly questioned if he would act on article 5. Hell, he openly invited Putin to claim the Baltic countries for his own. Just because there were no new major armed conflicts, does not mean there were no major conflicts happening, which eventually resulted in armed conflicts. Also, while the USA spends a lot on defense, only part of it is aimed as available for NATO, unlike the European countries, where all their defense material is available to NATO.
If you think that actions only happen during the rule of a person and that everything that happens once he/she leaves the office is not possibly a result of that rule, then you are quite dense I fear.
Money-Rooster4095@reddit
I don’t know if you know how to read or not. I question it because you replied to my response that made it clear I was done arguing with somebody grasp at straws. I may be dense but at least I can read
nkn_19@reddit
His previous 4 years would say otherwise in regards to starting wars, though he did come pretty close
And no, Putin is not moving westward past Ukraine. Find me one passage of anything he has ever said that shows he plans to invade all of Europe.
Can't take Ukraine in two years, but all of Europe, sure no problem.
Gonzo115015@reddit
Ah yes the trustworthy Putin. Lmfaoo
nkn_19@reddit
Still, waiting for the text showing him saying he plans to conquer Europe. .
How about this... the US was well aware of Russia's red line when it came to NATO, Ukraine and Georgia.
Current CIA director advising of the fact. I don't agree with any invasion, but unprovoked is a joke. NATO pushed for this and sold Ukraine out.
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08MOSCOW265_a.html
Gonzo115015@reddit
Lolll
nkn_19@reddit
Still waiting for it.
Gonzo115015@reddit
Lmfaooo. Guys he’s still waiting. Go get some sunshine brotha
nkn_19@reddit
It's ok to get red pilled and realize your being played.
Let Jens Stoltenberg (head of NATO) clear this up
"The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition to not invade Ukraine. Of course, we didn't sign that"
Whaaaaa.. He doesn't want to just take over all of Europe?
Gonzo115015@reddit
Red pilled? Lmfaoooo
Gonzo115015@reddit
Guys he’s still waiting
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Lol at taking Putin at his word.
Not starting a war doesn't mean someone is pro peace. 😂🙄
nkn_19@reddit
Agreed, Trump is no pro peace. He is lucky he didn't start 3 more wars. He did try though.
Maybe if we startd listening to the "adversary" instead of not, things could get done with talkinh.
When a nation with the most nuclear weapons on earth says this is our brightest of red lines (Ukraine or Georgia) maybe instead of provoking the reaction we could say "ok we hear you, let's talk."
Nope, US send wespons, helps overthrow a govt.. Fuels a civil war, and then acts surprised when a full scale invasion happens. Go figure.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Listening to your adversary is important, but taking them at face value without considering their actions or broader ambitions can be dangerous. Putin's words don't always match his actions, and dismissing his intentions based on his rhetoric alone overlooks the complex nature of international relations. The situation in Ukraine didn't happen in a vacuum—Russia's actions have repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to use force to achieve its goals, not just in Ukraine but in Georgia and Crimea as well. Diplomacy is crucial, but so is recognizing when a leader is using dialogue as a cover for more aggressive ambitions. We can't ignore the fact that the invasion of Ukraine is part of a pattern, not an isolated reaction to provocation.
Sharkdart@reddit
Can you find me one passage where he said he'd invade Ukraine? He explicitly said he wouldn't. All you can find is what his state media suggests and his memoirs. In the latter, he claims that Ukraine, Poland and the Baltics don't exist and have always been Russian. It's not that he would flat out invade a Nato country, the fear is that he would use his disinformation network to fracture Nato and then invade Poland and the Baltics once they are weak and not in Nato. Since a certain orange man has said that he would leave Nato, it's fair to assume that's Putins plan.
nkn_19@reddit
Here you go. As stated by the current director of the CIA. The choice "he" didn't want to have to make.
And for the record, he never should have invaded.
https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08MOSCOW265_a.html
Yes, leave NATO. Should have been dismantled when the USSR fell. That was it's purpose. Think the MIC wanted their cash cow to go away?
Here's George Kennan thoughts on it. He was no friend to Russia. "Father" of the containment strategy. His thoughts are pretty clear.
https://archive.ph/UxLwG https://archive.ph/qqVRt
KingLysandus@reddit
America invades Iraq illegally, invades Afghanistan, destroys Libya and murders Gaddafi, ferments civil war in Syria and gives weapons to ISIS, overthrows Ukraine government to install a NATO puppet and funds colour revolutions all over the world but President Putin is the ‘warmonger’ for wanting to protect Russia from a Neo Nazi NATO puppet state.
Sharkdart@reddit
It's go one by one shall we? Yes, we invaded iraq, yes it was bad and I and many Americans were firmly against it and we ended it. We also didn't annex any of Iraq after.
Afghanistans current government was harboring a organization that killed thousands of Americans in terror attacks. Again, we didn't annex any territory, we just left.
Libya was a civil war, libyans killed Gaddafi and then killed a ambassador to the US when we opened a embassy, so you wanna guess what we did? We didn't annex any land and we just left.
This one is hard to argue because it's just made up. We had nothing to do with the revolution in Syria and although we did arm factions that later declared for extremist organizations, not a single one of them ever were a part of ISIS. But you know what we definitely didn't do? We didn't annex any territory and we just left.
This is my favorite one, can you provide any evidence at all that we had anything to do with the Euromaiden protests? Can you show how we installed a Nato puppet? Please bring up the phone call.
What color revolutions?
Yes, Zelensky the renowned Jewish Nazi. Putin protected Russia from what exactly? A civil war he started and funded in another country? Why would Russia be threatened by that war?
Just like in Chechnya, Moldova, Georgia and Chrimia, Putin invaded the Donbas and annexed the territory. Now he's attempting to do that to the rest of Ukraine. He is absolutely a warmonger.
KingLysandus@reddit
jstohler@reddit
HE LITERALLY SUPPORTS PUTINS WAR YOU JACKASS.
zombierapture@reddit
Do you equate a peace agreement with supporting war? You are literally on the side that has stopped any attempt at peace negotiations and calling the other side the one that supports war.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Here’s the only peace agreement:
zombierapture@reddit
That is not a peace agreement. That would be that stance of weapons manufacturers and war generals in order to ensure no agreement is ever made.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Imagine you're the President of a country and a dictator invaded you for no other reason but they think your country belongs to you.
What would be your peace agreement?
zombierapture@reddit
Is that why you think Russia invaded?
Ibo-Naw@reddit
I asked you a question.
zombierapture@reddit
The question is not based in reality
Ibo-Naw@reddit
The irony of your comment is that all of your comments aren't based in reality. lol.
Shomondir@reddit
There was a peace agreement before 2014. Ukraine gave up their nukes in return for recognized sovereignty of their nation. Putin showed what a peace treaty with Russia is worth (absolutely nothing).
Jaymac100@reddit
Everything you said is contradicted by the actual events that occurred under the Obama/Biden years and the Trump years.
Shomondir@reddit
The Ukraine war has its base in the Chechen wars, where Putin could get away with many things, followed by Georgia. This already played during the Bush Jr era and is not something caused by Obama's policies.
If anything, Trump undermining the position of the USA in the world gave Putin all the more feelings of security to start a full invasion. Trump depicting Biden as weak all the time during the entire election campaign, de-stabilizing the nation with the January 6 riots and continuous sowing division.
Swift response and all NATO members uniting to send aid to Ukraine is what stalled Putin and made Russia deal with a very expensive occupation of part of Ukraine. Trump would roll out the red carpet to Kyiv for Putin.
Jaymac100@reddit
Anyone with functioning eyes, ears and TV/Internet knew Biden was weak. If my 10 year old knows that Biden is weak and clueless, I'm pretty sure Putin knew too. Trump pointing out the obvious didn't undermine anything.
I guess it's nice that NATO got together to help Ukraine, but I'd rather the current Ukraine war not happen in the first place. I'd prefer the hundreds of billions of dollars of my tax money, stay in my nation. I'd rather the hundreds of thousands of dead young Ukrainian and Russian young men were still alive. It's always funny to me that no one seems to care about all of the death. There is zero evidence that Trump would've "rolled out the red carpet" for Putin. If that was the case, he would have invaded during the Trump years to save himself money and his own troops. The exact opposite happened.
Add into the mix the Israel, Gaza, Iran situation, Trump has been proven to be right. I'm not some geo-political expert, but during the Trump years, on the news, I didn't hear a peep about Ukraine, Isreal or Gaza. I stopped hearing about Isis very early in the Trump presidency.
The fact is, MSNBC talking points about what Trump "would have done" are not based in any reality and go against what actually has happened when you compare the Trump years to the Biden years.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
You didn't hear about the time Trump extorted Zelensky?
Finall3ossGaming@reddit
Trump campaigned on getting out of Afghanistan. The first 6 months he was in office he ordered the largest troop surge into Afghanistan then any previous President before him. Even greater than the surge Obama ordered. Funny how 2 of the most popular Presidents in recent memory campaigned on leaving Afghanistan then sent more troops but the 1 who actually got us out of that hellhole is “weak”
Shomondir@reddit
If anything, Biden has shown more resolve and a more straight back than Trump did. By actions, not by using some crappy rhetoric without backing them up. This war was inevitable with Putin in power and his wish to restore the old glorious Russian empire. Trump's 4 years in power just made it much easier, with him selling out many operatives.
It is funny you claim nobody cares about the dead, but you only mention it after the money it costs. Trump already gave Putin all he could ask for as it is.
That the news broadcaster of your choice did not talk about it, does not mean in the rest of the world it wasn't talked about. The USA just was too busy with the next outrageous thing Trump did.
Biden getting the blame for wars is about as spot on as Biden being blamed for all the inflation, that being not spot on at all. When you live in a vacuum, it might look to be correct, but the USA does not live in a vacuum.
VrindavanNidhivan@reddit (OP)
August 23, 2024
NorwegianGodOfLove@reddit
The conservative swing towards supporting Russia as soon as Trump took that stance has been honestly breathtaking. If you had told someone at the start of 2010 that by 2020 Republicans would be toeing the Putin line I would have laughed in your face.
zombierapture@reddit
I think the spin that peace negotiations are supporting Russia is way worse.
jagfb@reddit
It has nothing to do with being pro-peace negotiations. It's about denying Ukraine weapons to level the playing field that ENABLES peace negotiations that upsets people. Not supporting Ukraine is not pro-peace. It's pro-war.
zombierapture@reddit
War IS peace. Lol
jagfb@reddit
Hypothetically. Imagine you have a neighbour that has 10 times more guns than you. He invades your home. People start calling for peace negotiations but your neighbour continues his invasion. Now imagine that you have additional guns given by your friends that enables you to hold off your neighbour. Now both sides are, in theory, ready for negotiations.
How do you expect Ukraine to hold negotiations should they be steamrolled over?
Think.
Shomondir@reddit
Janoekovitsj was elected about as democratically as Putin, after his biggest rival was put behind bars with some fake accusations. Timosjenko wanted to do something against corruption, and the pro Russia oligarchs did not like that one bit.
That is why there was the Maidan protests, because people were looking at the EU, while Janoekovitsj went back on his election promise and turned fully to Russia, turning it into a Vasal state like Belarus.
Ukrainian citizens aren't fleeing to Russia from the tyranny of Ukraine, they are fleeing to the EU, away from the Russian tyranny. Those that ended up in Russia mostly were kidnapped or deported to Russia.
Finall3ossGaming@reddit
The downvotes on this comment are traitors to their own way of life and system of government. Please go to Russia and tell them your opinions on anything they will love to hear about them I’m sure
Geektime1987@reddit
And he's wrong
OpenEnded4802@reddit
(Genuine question) Please explain?
Finall3ossGaming@reddit
I’m not an expert but this completely ignores the protests and killing of protestors the previous Pro-Russian regime committed. Were American agencies involved? I really don’t know. All I do know is hundreds of Ukrainians were killed by their own government and that definitely had a larger impact on the transition of government then anything else
Finall3ossGaming@reddit
I guess the hundreds of protestors killed in the streets of Kiev by the previous Pro-Russian regime had no bearing on the rapidly transitioning Western bent of Ukraine and her people. People like you are exactly why America is dying. Tribal Tribal Tribal
Illin_Spree@reddit
Why would you assume Trump would have acted differently? What rhetoric or actions from Trump would support that conclusion?
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Oh, absolutely, because who could forget the secret American plot to orchestrate every geopolitical event since 2014? Clearly, the U.S. has magical powers that forced Russia to annex Crimea, instigated the conflict in Donbas, and somehow convinced Ukraine to resist invasion just for fun. And, of course, Boris Johnson, with his supernatural influence, personally shredded that elusive peace treaty that Putin, a well-known pacifist, was dying to sign. Sounds totally legit.
Sharkdart@reddit
Wait till you ask them to source any of these grand fantasies.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
"do your own research"
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
This submission has been removed for being from an unproductive and unreliable source of News in accordance with rule 6 of our Community Guidelines.
If you disagree with this removal message the moderators at this link. Individual moderators will not respond to this comment.
Thanks!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Hmm_6221@reddit
Tulsi is the biggest hypocrite ever! She pretended to be a Democrat and thought she could fool Democrats into making her president. What a joke! She’s jealous of Kamala Harris. She’s a wannabe and is seeking attention. She’s showing her true colors by supporting Trump! Birds of a feather flock together! They’re both traitors and the lowest of the low! Tulsi, you will never walk in Kamala’s shoes! They’re way too big for you!
KingLysandus@reddit
Hypocrite? Tulsi is sticking to her anti-war views by opposing a pro-imperialist candidate. Kamala is the one who conducted mass incarceration against African Americans and is now trying to paint herself as miss Black Lives Matter despite the fact that even they reject her. Kamala is the one who arrested people on mass for smoking pot and then joked about smoking it collage. Kamala is the one who play into the same negative stereotypes about black people that the courts used against her father Donald Harris in their custody trial to the point where he denounced her presidential campaign. She is the hypocrite here not Tulsi.
Hmm_6221@reddit
Tulsi garbage is a hypocrite, period! I don’t believe anything you say about Kamala. You’re a liar like Trump, tulsi, and the rest of trump’s minions!
Bright-Original9747@reddit
Lol that’s right. Just pick and choose what you believe, not based on facts, but based on if it makes you feel better.
makk73@reddit
en masse
Ibo-Naw@reddit
You're definitely a bot.
KingLysandus@reddit
Another typical Reddit response “If you disagree with the hive mind you must be a bot” a single look at my profile will show that’s not the case especially if my comment history sorted by top.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
You just keep posting the same exact thing with a slight rewrite. What should we expect, comrade?
KingLysandus@reddit
Because the same points are relevant and apply each time and are also the points that Harris’ followers keep ignoring because they’re inconvenient so they need to be brought up again and again. I’ve been writing these up on word before posting but it’s hard not to return to the same points. Also “comrade” So you admit to being anti-communist, anti-socialist, anti-left wing and pro-imperialist? Because if you use comrade as an insult like that you’re pretty much showing that you see communists and anti-imperialists as the enemy.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
I wasn't insulting you, comrade.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
I wasn't insulting you, comrade.
NuclearCodebreaker@reddit
After tRoMp’s disgraceful performance at Arlington National Cemetery this week, I don’t know how any veteran can support tRoMp.
MuchGangster1337@reddit
If you guys actually listened to what she said and why she endorsed Trump, its not hard to understand. Both her and RFK, the most “let’s protect our kids and help our country” candidates who are against the corrupt corporate funded war machine that is our country have endorsed Trump… doesn’t that make you stop and think for like half a second as to why?
Ibo-Naw@reddit
You're right! Because nothing says "protecting our kids and helping our country" like backing the guy who tried to overturn an election and thought separating children from their parents at the border was a brilliant idea. Really makes you wonder why more "let's help our country" candidates aren’t jumping on that bandwagon. Makes perfect sense if you don’t think about it for more than half a second!
MuchGangster1337@reddit
Is this satire? You do know Trump told his people literally not to do the Jan 6th thing, which was initiated by a fed and had cops open doors for them, and “separating kids from their parents” oh you mean stopping child trafficking and illegal immigration? I mean like seriously when you have a candidate saying he isn’t going to send out sons and daughters to die in foreign wars, he’s going to get drugs and crime off the streets, and he’s going to fix the chronic illness problems, how is that not the pro child candidate?
Ibo-Naw@reddit
So, if he told them not to do it, why did he sit in his chair watching it on tv and did nothing for almost three hours?
MuchGangster1337@reddit
How do you know what he was doing? He was likely making a lot of phone calls and figuring out exactly what was going on, especially because he told his supporters NOT to do that beforehand, he has no responsibility over independent people making independent choices, but even still, once they chaos settled he once again spoke out and said to go home. He also tried to get the NATIONAL GUARD to set up to help prevent this exact same thing buy that request was turned down… so sounds like Trump did more to stop it than the capital police who open doors for everyone.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Easy, there are firsthand accounts from MULTIPLE people. His daughter, chief of staff, a national security adviser, and White House Counsel, just to name a few. They testified under oath, and there are records of text messages corroborating their testimony.
How does the President of the United States have no responsibility over individuals who came to see him, then attacked Capitol and DC police, looked to kill the VP and SOH while destroying the US Capitol after he told them to "fight like hell or else you won't have a country anymore"? Do you think those people just decided to do what they did for no reason? Of course, he has responsibility.
Trump never tried to get the DC National Guard there. If he did, they would have been there. https://dc.ng.mil/About-Us/#:\~:text=As%20such%2C%20the%20Commanding%20General,the%20Secretary%20of%20the%20Army.
As for Capitol police opening doors, they were understaffed and overwhelmed. Also, not all police are good police. Derek Chauvin ring a bell?
All in all, from my discussions with you, you're susceptible to right-wing media, misinformation, and disinformation. Many of the things you've said are easily debunkable if you actually watched and/or read normal news and not propaganda. I'm here to help, not to fight you. I have provided you with information that will correct the false things you're saying. I hope you actually take the time to read them and watch videos, but I hate to assume. However, I doubt it, and you will continue on like millions of people who don't like to learn and just want to be told what they want to hear.
PMmeNothingTY@reddit
Easier to grift on the right.
MuchGangster1337@reddit
Trump is unpopular?
JoeyjoejoeShabadues@reddit
So funny seeing people unable to deal with the reality of Trump being the actual unifier of our age and the democrats being the party of war and undemocratic processes, Shit the last president chosen by the democrat voters was obama, that 18 years of the elite telling you who to like by pushing out the popular candidates like bernies, tulsi and RJK jr, and you lockstepping right behind who ever the point at as the new great leader.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Telling a bunch of domestic terrorists he loves them is unifying?
Saying there's good people on both sides of a hate crime is unifying?
Attempting to violate our civil rights is unifying?
Attempting a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the country is unifying?
Practically doing nothing during his last year in office during Covid was unifying?
MuchGangster1337@reddit
Please provide any actual accounts of these things because all have been proven to be half assed propaganda :3
Ibo-Naw@reddit
1 https://youtu.be/zJ2P7XHHYjw?si=VhVEU7RUJd99hsZ1
2 https://youtu.be/JmaZR8E12bs?si=7YaCT-V0cWWtbH9s
MuchGangster1337@reddit
1.)Lmao telling his supporters he loves them and they they need to “GO HOME” is not the Jan 6th support you thinks it is 2.)what part of “I condone the white supremacists” did you not hear? 3.)calling out election fraud is not violating civil rights… unlike the censorship and lockdowns forced from his opponents… 4.) banning people (regardless of faith) from high terrorist countries is literally no more of a “Muslim ban” than halting immigration from Italy after rampant Italian terrorism would be a “Catholic ban” literally the aclu (lmao) said “ban immigration from 7 countries” last time I checked, a country and a religion are different 5.) so your mad he didn’t take down enough covid lockdowns, but your also mad he squashed civil liberties, which is what covid lockdowns were??!!? So which is it? Also didn’t he kinda do the whole vaccine thing? Which even though turned out to be a disaster and covid no worse than a flu, still something he did.
I genuinely believe your comments were satire because it would be insane for someone to believe these things with the access we have to information
Ibo-Naw@reddit
So after they attacked police, the capitol, threaten to kill the VP and SOH, he sat for almost 3 hours and did nothing. Then when he went to record that video he did like 50 takes and told them he loved them. That's unifying?
I heard what he said, but I have been hearing Trump talk for almost ten years. You all hear nothing he says and hear one thing then stick to that and pretend like the rest of what he said is ok. Is that video unifying?
Did you read the two indictments. Yes or no? BTW a new one came out so you can check that one out.
Yeah, no. Was what he tried to do unifying?
What does your comment have to do with what is being talked about?
MuchGangster1337@reddit
1.) he told them to protest peacefully before it even started, and yes saying you love people is literally unifying, what’s not unifying is taking away the rights and liberties of those who happened to be there on Jan 6th. Why wouldn’t he pardon someone who participated in a nonviolent crime influenced by social pressure, who is receiving no due process? 2.) literally everything he says is unifying… he’s the populist candidate, he has people rally behind HIM not the gop. Everyone benefits from a better economy and a safer country 3.) I literally don’t care about an indictment or impeachment coming out, as they can just throw any charges they want on him, it’s about what he is actually convicted of, and so far he was convicted for using the wrong bank account which more of showcase of how corrupt the courts are to their political opponents than trump doing wrong. 4.) limiting immigration is unifying because it’s focusing on and protecting Americans. I really don’t care about being unifying with those who aren’t American, it’s why I don’t think we should be involved in foreign wars, oh trump also wants us out of those wars too. 5.) you literally posted an article complaining about trump not doing enough for covid, but in reality, he actually did a lot for it. Which looking back we know he didn’t need to because it wasn’t what it was hyped up to be.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
January 6, 2021 was a nonviolent crime? You're not well.
PMmeNothingTY@reddit
Bro with the RECEIPTS
Ibo-Naw@reddit
So helping Ukraine defend themselves from being invaded by a dictator is being a war hawk?
KingLysandus@reddit
“Supporting a Neo Nazi regime that has been murdering Russian speakers, erecting monuments to Nazi collaborators, shelling the breakaway regions for years killing thousands and all in all being NATO’s pawn against Russia is being a War Hawk” Yes, yes it is.
jagfb@reddit
You are dictating Russian propaganda. If you are an American, shame on you.
KingLysandus@reddit
No, putting forward actual anti-imperialist viewpoints and calling out the synthetic pro-imperialist ‘left’.
jagfb@reddit
Viewpoints are not historical facts. You live in a country where you have almost all information freely available. Yet you choose to use some sentences that are not only wrong, but also anti-American, anti-freedom and anti-democracy. Again, shame on you.
KingLysandus@reddit
Because promoting regime change against nations and overthrowing democratically elected because they oppose the interests of American imperialism is very pro-freedom and democracy? Arming ISIS in Syria another pro-freedom, pro-democratic action that along with destroying the most prosperous nation in Africa and murdering it’s leader can’t get anymore pro-freedom than that. All nations should embrace the freedom and democracy spread by America’s bloodstained war machine of genocide and chaos.
jagfb@reddit
You are mixing so many things that the original point is completely flooded. Ukraine voted for independence from Russia in 1990 with 90% being pro. In 2004, Ukrainian prime minister Viktor Yanukovych was ousted from office after the supreme court of Ukraine ordered a recount of the elections after fraud. This pissed of Russia because a pro-Europe and pro-Western candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, did in fact win. This pissed of Russia because Ukraine was leaning and growing more and more to Europe and the West. Forward to 2013 and Russia send in security forces into Ukraine, wounding and killing Ukrainians in the capitol after the Ukrainian government, under Russian pressure, got rid of an EU agreement and moved again to Russia. Simultaneously, Russia invaded Crimea and armed and funded separatists in Eastern-Ukraine, starting a civil war. Russia, not the US nor the collective West, started the war in Ukraine. It was Russia all along.
Russia did the EXACT SAME THING in Georgia and Chechnya.
But sure. Repeat Russian talking points where you just say: 'nazis, imperialism, oppression natives', without any actual arguments that are able to be checked.
KingLysandus@reddit
The actions of the US State department, Victoria Newland and the CIA in fermenting colour revolution in Ukraine can’t be denied. https://truthout.org/articles/the-ukraine-mess-that-nuland-made/ https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/07/ukra-f07.html https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/13/the-mess-that-nuland-made/
makk73@reddit
fomenting not “fermenting”
jagfb@reddit
I have read the transcript. It's about Victoria Nuland expressing harsh disdain about the EU and doubts about Ukrainian opposition. The phone call was made while protests were already ongoing in Ukraine. There is no proof, in the call, that the US, or the CIA even, orchestrated a coup in Ukraine.
And diplomats speak with national politicians in every country. The US does this in Ukraine. As did Russia. As does the EU. As does the rest of the world.
The narrative you are posting here is trying to undermine the legitimacy of the Ukrainian state and government which on its turn legitimizes the war Russia brought to Ukraine.
KingLysandus@reddit
Victoria Nuland was involved in pushing the Iraq war, the NATO lead destruction of Libya and arming Islamic terrorists in Syria then just happened to be in Ukraine when the coup took place. Not only that in the call she is clearly trying to push to outcome America wants to happened this is clear American imperialist backing for the coup which falls in line with the modus operandi of Victoria Nuland and the Clinton State Department. Not only that but the CIA has had a long history in the Ukraine which they even admit themselves https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/the-cia-admits-its-long-time-presence-in-ukraine/ https://consortiumnews.com/2022/12/29/evidence-of-us-backed-coup-in-kiev/ Ukraine brought war upon its self by breaking the terms of the Minsk agreement and shelling the breakaway regions in breach of the ceasefire. Ukraine brought war upon itself when it persecuted Russian speakers and erected shrines to Nazi collaborators whist tearing down WW2 monuments showing their Nazi intents. Ukraine brought war upon itself by trying to join NATO to further encircle Russia and NATO brought war to Ukraine by breaking its promise of not expanding any further west.
ageofadzz@reddit
To Russian assets yes
makk73@reddit
Gross
PimplePopper6969@reddit
Fuck Tulsi.
serpicowasright@reddit
I guess everyone eventually chooses their lesser evil. I don’t support it but I understand.
CitizensForChange@reddit
W
SuperNoFrendo@reddit
She was my number 2 choice after Bernie for a while. I am disgusted with what she has become over the last 4 years.
I can't believe I fell for this grifter a few years back, and now it just seems obvious that she was only in the race to undermine other potential candidates.
Feel free to ban me, Tulsi's remaining fans.
Rice-Chex@reddit
I have photos of myself with her at three different campaign events in 2020. It was a big mistake.
coreyschafer@reddit
I’m right in the same boat with ya man. I pushed for her, donated to her campaign… believed she stood on those values. I thought she would be a great alternative to Bernie… Now she’s endorsing a man who epitomizes the exact opposite. Well… if we wanna slightly feel better about how badly we were duped, at least we can say we admit it.
TrevinoDuende@reddit
Yeah, I used to think she was going to be the perfect bridge to make common sense progressive policy palatable to right wingers. I ignored the attacks from liberals about her being an opportunist. I would chalk off her questionable beliefs as her being a nuanced person.
I thought she cared about ending our involvement in the destruction of entire countries. Our taxpayer money is going to Israel to aid in a genocide and she doesn't seem to care. If she did she wouldn't be endorsing either of these party's candidates
dillasdonuts@reddit
She's fallen victim to tribalism.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
I, Tulsi Gabbard, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Man she endorses attempted to overturn the 2020 election and on January 6, 2021 sat in his office for hours watching domestic terrorists attack the US capitol and police officers and did nothing.
catchingtherosemary@reddit
Reee.... Come on ... It's just the lesser of two evils one supports totalitarianism and the other would not have mandated the vaccine for federal employees
KingLysandus@reddit
He’s the lesser of two evils compared to the queen of mass incarceration and war monger Kamala who is already heating up war rhetoric against the DPRK.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
You do know you're spewing misinformation right? lol.
How is a man who attempted to overturn the votes of the American people the lesser of two evils? Do you know how crazy that sounds?
KingLysandus@reddit
“Spewing misinformation” Why are redditors such mindless drones? What’s ‘misinformation’ anything that’s goes against the mainstream media? We’re talking about a woman who contacted mass incarnation against African Americans, withheld DNA evidence that could have saved a man’s life, used prison labour for profit, withheld information about false positives in drug tests that were keep people imprisoned on false charges, imprisoned people on mass for smoking pot and then laughed about smoking it herself. Now she wants to invade the DPRK and take the west into to WW3 against Russia and China which is significantly worse than getting a crowd of upstarts to do a walk around of the capital whilst doing some minor vandalism and making politicians quake in their boots.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
I asked you a question.
KingLysandus@reddit
And I answered them.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
No, you deflected.
KingLysandus@reddit
No, I gave concise answers but like the typical reddit drone you call it deflection because you don’t like the answers I gave.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Definitely not a drone, you're just rambling lol.
KingLysandus@reddit
No, I have expressed my self quite concisely but you don’t wish to address any of the points I made in my initial response and instead answer in the typical snarky reddit fashion. The truth is that even if expressed myself with the eloquence of Cicero you would still dismiss me as ‘rambling’ or ‘deflecting’ rather than actually address the meat of my response.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Have you read the state and federal indictments against Donald Trump related to the 2020 election? Yes or No.
KingLysandus@reddit
I confess I have not but then again I have no interest in that I am far more concerned about which candidate would be more likely to bring the west into a new world war which is clearly Kamala especially considering her rhetoric against the DPRK and Russia. I don’t care how disruptive Mr. Trump tired to be to America’s bourgeois democracy I’m far more concerned with anti-imperialism and that is hoping that the person who wins is the least likely to invade the DPRK and promote regime change against anti-imperialist countries.
giantsean@reddit
Nobody with half a brain... or those who can actually spell "incarceration" thinks that Kamala plans to invade the DPRK. Whoever paid you a penny a word for this drivel is getting straight ROBBED.
KingLysandus@reddit
Oh no I made a few misspellings I guess my entire argument is worthless now. Can you reddit midwits not make any arguments without sounding as smug and soy infused as possible? You must be the most infuriating people to be around in real life or do you only act like pompous midwits when there’s no one who can respond by punching you on the nose? I’m dyslexic and so I’m bound to make some misspellings at some point or changing the wrong word by mistake. Now Kamala Harris has made several remarks against comrade Kim Jong-un and attacked Mr. Trump for meeting him clearly showing that she is against peace on the Korean peninsula. Moreover she’s backed by the former Clinton State department the same department that backed colour revolutions across the world, murdered Gaddafi then jeered at this death, armed ISIS in Syria and took aggressive stances against many anti-imperialist nations, so it’s clear that she’ll be a war hawkish president. Now seeing as the DPRK has been a thorn in side of American imperialism for some time and is sitting on vast rare mineral deposits that America would be very keen to get hold of would it be any surprise if she ranks up aggression towards them? After all I suppose there would be many before 2011 that would have said that America wouldn’t invade Libya either.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
I see you liked when I called you comrade.
giantsean@reddit
That's not dyslexia bro, trust me. Whoever supports your word count is massively overpaying.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Ok, so you have not read them, so that means I was right about what you were saying.
catchingtherosemary@reddit
Correct
indoctrinatedcop@reddit
Look up trumps fake elector scheme? I assume you think Jan 6th was a random day where 'some people did some things' as opposed to a culmination of months of traitorous activity.
Harvinator06@reddit
She showed her real face many years ago.
jstohler@reddit
Of course she did. Fuck medical autonomy for women! Fuck the poor! Fuck em hard, right Gabbi?
KingLysandus@reddit
Kalama was fucking the poor when she was overseeing mass incarnation, withholding DNA evidence that would save a man’s life, using prison labour for profit and is now getting read to send millions of poor people to die in WW3 or in a war against the DPRK.
giantsean@reddit
Fortunately nobody has any idea who Kalama is or who she is incarnating
KingLysandus@reddit
Why are you redditors such obnoxious twats? Do you think this level of self righteous smugness makes you endearing or witty? Are you hoping that one of the reddit drones is going to see your comments so you can both circlejerk other how enlightened you are? Do you think that pointing out typos completely invalidates what the other is saying?
AkinasPotato@reddit
Careful stating facts here, the hive mind isn't able to process them
weirdestnomadever@reddit
Melt
Loud-Row-1077@reddit
weirdos love weirdos
mcndjxlefnd@reddit
How is Trump not the unity candidate? He's brought two former Dems in RFK and Tulsi, over to his team.
I haven't seen a Republican cross the aisle since Olympia Snow. The Dems are weak. I do not believe they won 2020 or will win 2024.
PMmeNothingTY@reddit
Republicans spoke at the DNC. You're either being purposely ignorant or you're way out of your league.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/2024/08/27/2024-election-campaign-updates-harris-trump/
Geektime1987@reddit
Are you kidding me? Just at the DNC, many Republicans spoke. The Lincoln Project, which has a huge following, is a project created by Republicans all against Trump. The majority of the former staff of Trump have all come out against.
Amiga777@reddit
She had the chance to do that in 2020.
Zazierx@reddit
Lmao, of course.
dhessi@reddit
Not surprising at this point, but I still feel like an idiot for ever having believed in her
coreyschafer@reddit
Nah, don’t feel bad. A true idiot would make excuses and try to justify that they’re still right, despite a complete 180 on their original values. Admitting someone isn’t who you thought isn’t idiotic. PS, this is me trying to make myself feel better about believing in her too
Hopeful_Cellist9747@reddit
The downfall of our civilization will be because of vacuous sacks of shit like this lady. No moral conviction, no integrity, no shame. Bought and sold by whoever has Power, thinking maybe they can lick some boots long enough to taste some of it. Tulsi. I never liked or trusted you. I believe that nobody anywhere does. You have no talent and no common decency. You are exactly the person that a degenerate slime like Slump would attract… buhbye now.
KingLysandus@reddit
but enough about Kamala Harris
papa_jahn@reddit
Based
PandaCasserole@reddit
Welp. I'm out boys. Showed promise but... Wth
bobthetomatovibes@reddit
This is so sad to me. It was inevitable, and she pretty much had already done so, but to see it become official is so tragic honestly. I remember when I believed she was a breath of fresh air in politics and she was my second choice in 2020 after Yang. I thought she had strong progressive values at her core that she presented in a down-to-earth, rational, kind, compassionate, peace-loving, thoughtful, Aloha manner.
And her bold, maverick ideas could appeal to independents, libertarians, and people across the aisle while still not losing their core identity. I mean, this was the woman who resigned from the DNC to endorse Bernie in 2016, right? She had given reason for people to trust her. In her youth and style, I saw the bright future of American politics, a clear contrast between the elderly candidates, Trump and Biden, we were being asked to support in the General Election. Once the dust of 2020 settled, Tulsicrats had the right combination of foreign policy and domestic policy to usher in a new era.
But since then it’s become so clear that her social conservatism is stronger than whatever progressive values she claimed to have before. Her hard-right pivot has been so disappointing to see. Trump is dramatically removed from “Aloha” values, it’s astonishing. And even just comparing Tulsi’s journey to Andrew Yang’s is stunning. Both had somewhat unconventional ideas when they ran, both were seen as Bernie-adjacent progressives but felt adrift from the Democratic Party, both had a great deal of bipartisan appeal, and both left to become independents following their campaigns.
But while Tulsi has functionally become a Republican in everything but the name, Yang has been a true left-leaning independent and hasn’t sacrificed any of his values in the process. And of course, Yang is supporting Kamala in 2024 and Tulsi is… well. It turns out Tulsi was a “maverick” in the sense that she secretly wanted to hate trans people and combat “woke” values, not in the sense that she had actually thoughtful, maverick viewpoints.
KingLysandus@reddit
So taking the correct view social issues is more important than anti-imperialism? Because Kamala has already started heating up the war mongering against the DPRK, China and Russia, also she can hardly be seen socially progressive considering her history of mass incarceration, use of prison labour for profit and arresting parents for truancy. Wokeness really does server imperialism and the ruling class you’re willing to support a war mongering imprisoner of the poor as long as she pays lip service to the correct woke talking points. It’s totally fine if she invades the DPRK, takes you into WW3 or conducts regime change operations across the world as long as you can write woke slogans on the bombs used to murder innocents imperialism is A-OK.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Holy right wing talking points Batman!
KingLysandus@reddit
Anti-imperialism is right wing now? Being against America’s war is right wing now? Not wanting WW3 is right wing? Not wanting to see an actual existing communist country invaded is right wing? Not wanting to see more colour revolutions is right wing? Isn’t left wing politics meant to be against imperialism and against regime change? Isn’t it meant to be against war didn’t Lenin go against the second international because they were supporting WW1? I guess he was right wing for not standing with those social reformers? At least by your logic he would be.
You’ve proven once again that wokness only exists to serve imperialism, the ruling class and destroy the left. You don’t give a damn about class struggle or anti-imperialism you just want imperialism and capitalism with nice progressive face on it using identity politics and social justice to justify your imperialist war machine.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Yes, you're spewing bs right wing talking points. White right wingers hijacked the word woke and made it into their own thing to hide their hatred, so yes, holy wright wing talking points Batman!
KingLysandus@reddit
Now moron the DPRK opposes wokeness, China opposes wokeness, actual communists oppose wokeness, and most anti-imperialist countries oppose wokeness because wokeness is fake synthetic leftism that serves imperialism and the ruling class. Being anti-imperialist is actual leftism not your fake corporate created fake activism.
WholeBlueBerry4@reddit
I love Tulsi thus am so sorry this has happened
Harris Vance Trump Biden Hamas Natenauhu are ALL TERRIBLE
jstohler@reddit
But Trump's good? gotcha, chief.
WholeBlueBerry4@reddit
I have NEVER said Trump is good
I have NEVER voted for Trump
My comment clearly CONDEMNED Trump
Reading Is Fundamental
WholeBlueBerry4@reddit
Trump is Terrible
Vance Trump Biden Harris Hamas Natenauhu, rulers of: Afghanistan Libya Sudan Eritrea Mexico Argentina Iran Iraq Pakistan Gaza West-Bank Judeah Samaria Jerusalem are AGAINST our freedom peace independence youthfulness usefulness happiness prosperity
WholeBlueBerry4@reddit
Excuse me?!?
I CLEARLY stated that Trump and Vance and Natenauhu are: TERRIBLE
Please Learn To READ
Random-Cpl@reddit
What a piece of shit, ha.
oddiccey@reddit
This video needs to trend daily
zombierapture@reddit
This speaks volumes for how far the Democrats have fallen that many Dems are now finding themselves on the Republican side.
SeasonsGone@reddit
It doesn’t really mean much, it’s happened throughout history and is common in multi-party democracies. I feel like if anything it says more about her abandonment of her 2020 platform, which is what most people here likely know her from.
paultheschmoop@reddit
Is “switching party affiliation due to disgust with the state of their original party” a game you really want to play? I don’t think that’s going to go the way you want it to go
zombierapture@reddit
I don't think going with the party with no dissent and always voting for them regardless will go the way you want it to.
paultheschmoop@reddit
…..are you doing a bit? This is your defense of the party completely controlled by one man who will declare people RINOs if they levy any tepid criticism at him?
zombierapture@reddit
Whenever people mention how bad the Dems are it's never acknowledged the brain turns off and all that comes out is Trump hate. You can hate Trump and acknowledge the Democrat party flaws. It is possible unless you're a bot then it's not possible and you're just programmed that way.
paultheschmoop@reddit
I mean….no shit? I have no allegiance to the Democratic Party lol
But on a post about someone endorsing Trump, yes, believe it or not, I will indeed shit on Trump.
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Can you name many of those Democrats? I can bet I can name more Republicans on the Dems side.
deprecatedchode@reddit
Hell they were front and center at the DNC.
Geektime1987@reddit
Tulsi was never a Dem she ran as one because it was the only way to get elected. Just look at her upbringing and the weird right wing cult she grew up in
DNA98PercentChimp@reddit
Tulsi is a very good litmus test for rational political thought:
Either you began following her pre-2020, liked her views/politics, and somewhere along the way of her transformation, sanely, saw she did not in fact have any integrity or convictions and so dropped your support. (You ‘passed’)
Or, you began following her pre-2020 and, insanely, continue ‘believing’ in her despite her obviously having no integrity or convictions and becoming the very thing she used to denounce (you ‘failed’).
Or, you began following her post-2020 and, insanely, ignore everything she said/did pre-2020 simply because she now says things you like to hear (btw, you are the exact target of her grift) and disregard that she has already proven she has zero integrity/convictions and her views are ‘for sale’ to whoever might help her career (you ‘failed’).
Finally… you began following her at any time and did/do mistrust her — especially for claiming ‘integrity’ when we now have abundant evidence that she has none (you ‘passed’ - though for those who believed this in 2019 or earlier… how did you know?)
KingLysandus@reddit
Kamala is a better test if you look at history of mass incarnation, arresting parents for truancy, cracking down on Marijuana use then joking about smoking it collage, refusing to release prisoners who were convicted under false drug test results, refusing to release DNA evidence that would save a man’s life, wanting to continue to use prisoners as labour past their release date and even being denounced by her own father. Now wanting to ramp up war mongering against the DPRK, China and Russia If someone can think her as progressive and left wing then they’re clearly stupid.
SeasonsGone@reddit
What should be done to parents who repeatedly neglect school attendance? This is one criticism of her I struggle to agree with. Truancy is by far one of the biggest predictors of criminality, it makes sense why some would have little tolerance for it.
DNA98PercentChimp@reddit
I agree that Kamala has been too tough on crime for my taste and is definitely a centrist - not an ‘extreme leftist’ or whatever some are labeling her.
thedubiousstylus@reddit
Her cozying up to Modi in India was a huge red flag.
ParatusPlayerOne@reddit
She disgusts me. Zero character. A shill, a charlatan, a danger to this country.
Adept_Board_8785@reddit
I don’t think that’s a good idea.
Bromfed@reddit
and this is where I leave. Bye Tulsi.
beavis617@reddit
Tulsi is another Nikki Haley...no one knows they exist until election time then they pop out, claim they're relevant and get back into the political game, pick up some cash, don't get any votes (Nikki) try to get a cushy job in the campaign and beyond( money grab ) then disappear...until the next election...☹
Ibo-Naw@reddit
Officially a traitor.
Dependent-Tear-1915@reddit
lol. Left wing Russian collusion conspiracy theorist
Ibo-Naw@reddit
I mean if you read the Mueller Report Volume 2 or even a summary of it you wouldn't be using that Trump talking point.
Finall3ossGaming@reddit
Bud you and me both know nobody on the Trump side is reading that document
dman2143@reddit
what a fraud
weirdestnomadever@reddit
Maybe don’t put her on a terror watch list, Dems. Lol
RemoteConstruction90@reddit
Tulsi Gabbard is a sold out, self-promoting political prostitute.
Chocowark@reddit
Only broke congressperson
Common_Struggle_1257@reddit
Welcome to the MAGA-movement beutigul Tulsi, Strong Tulsi. MAGA- The peoples movement against oligarchs and disgusting woke-persons, sponsored by oligarchs and neoliberals. Just like Reddit. She has taken the red pill. The bots on Redit has not. They are bots.
Good Choice Gabbard.
ObviouslyNotAMoose@reddit
I've missed some years it seems. Wtf happened to Tulsi? We gone.
BarryLicious2588@reddit
Heck yeah!!! Trump 2024!!!
overland_park@reddit
What else can you do?