Posted on 03/04/2022 6:49:45 PM PST by blam
Selling Ukraine weapons as Trump did and instructing them to cutoff Russian access to the Black Sea as Obama did or instructing Ukraine to go on the offensive in Donbass as Biden had done are entirely different circumstances.
Trump didn't go out of his way to encourage Ukraine to aggressively harm Russia.
There are more people in China with the last name “Wang” than there are people in the United States.
And pray tell, just when and why is Ukraine being encourage to aggressively harm Russia?
Is power-hungry Putin a threat to the US (he is and boasts he is) and NATO countries in the light of past and present aggression against countries that have not attacked Russia? YES.
It Putin lying or delusional in charging the West being a military threat to passive Russia by intentionally attacking first? YES.
Is Putin a threat to Ukraine? YES.
Is US and NATO aid Ukraine against Putin justified? YES.
Did Trump provide substantial AID to Ukraine and the European Deterrence Initiative against Putin? YES.
Are those who support Putin against the West indirectly aiding and abetting the enemy? YES.
"How the hell would know that? You don't know the man. You don't live in Russia. All you know is what Deep State tells you, the same Deep State that lied about Donald Trump and tried to drive him from office."
Oh now I understand Mr. Deep Conspiratorialist. Meaning anything and everything negative that we read about Putin bemoaning the demise of the ol Soviet Union, by which what had been built up over 1,000 years was largely lost," and with a point being that "Tens of millions of our co-citizens and co-patriots found themselves outside Russian territory," while in true Soviet doublespeak, falsely promising that "at the will of its own people, chose democracy for itself. It set out on this course itself and, observing all generally accepted political norms, will decide for itself how it will ensure that the principles of freedom and democracy are implemented," and "establish guarantees that state television and radio are as objective as possible," and hypocritically lecturing "new Nato and EU members in the post-Soviet area to show real respect for human rights," is false.
Even when reported by conservative outlets Most likely everything else we read negative that we read about Putin. All that stuff you read about banning the sharing your faith by any means unless via the RO, and of a free press and peaceful protesters being silenced must be bogus liberal propaganda. As with reports of Putin continuing (according more limited means) the tradition of repeated invasions of countries, and not as the US in liberation, while aiding countries against the US. while even liberals deny he was pining for a new USSR and with Ukraine as a prize as John Bolton had opined ("It’s clear he wants to re-establish Russian hegemony within the space of the former Soviet Union") as others have discerned, and anticipated his invasive action in Ukraine.
Thus you have chosen to defend an oppressor of real Christians, and basic American values (liberals oppose Putin mainly because he is rightly opposes the LGBTQ WOKE agenda, but do major Muslim terrorists), who has aligned himself with China against the US, while despite Clinton's disrespect after the Fall of the SU, Putin could work to be a partner with the West rather than a threat, and against China, with economic trade benefiting the country, while refusing to be WOKE, and even a refuge for conservatives. But that would require him to actually allow freedom of religion and speech as we use to have more of here, and cease from dictatorial repression, and instead maintain position based upon merit. But which, as here, requires a true evangelical revival. Maybe that will require hardship to foster.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.