Posted on 01/08/2023 8:08:12 AM PST by RomanSoldier19
I totally agree with you.
Unfortunately, we are now in a rather weak situation.
One can be clever and factual at the same time.
There was once a time when members on this site were up to date on current events and did not have to be 'educated' on local, regional or international matters. Instead everyone is now a 'freethinker' and their 'news' is from bloglike websites that exist only to push a specific agenda.
So, to answer your ad-hominem...
We are there, either with members of our special forces engaging directly, members of our military providing training, or advisors from our military and law enforcement providing logistics and/or intel.
Our Allies are there and we don't need to be, ala France in Mali and their other 'former' colonial holdings.
The Government does not want our assistance or is unfriendly (in some cases we are there against their wishes)
Also, everything is political even your post about our involvement in Ukraine being political as by using an obvious ad-hominem.
Ukraine NEEDS.....Again and again and again and again.... $$$$ Equipment Paying for their Governing Body from top to bottom etc.etc. etc. ....More of more 24/7!
Strange because you use constant ad-hominem style attacks (even in this reply) against people who challenge your views. I also never attacked you personally but instead made a point that our involvement in Ukraine has nothing to do with helping people but instead of protecting our interests.
The real question should be, what are those interests? Is it really about stopping Russian expansion? If so why were we silent when Russia took Crimea in 2014? Why do we not care about the Caucuses?
If it is about NATO why are we not kicking Turkey out of NATO for their aggression in Syria which could start a regional war?
Also by saying blogs push an agenda I can infer that mainstream sources of information are closer to the truth. These are the same sources that told us there were WMDs in Iraw, that Assad gassed his own people, that cannibalism was happening in NOLA after Katrina, COVID came from bats, COVID vaccines are safe etc. etc.
My basic point overall is that no one can be trusted in this conflict and our involvement will only make things worse as has been the case in almost every war post Korea.
A demonstration of Turret Stabilization, or in tanker-speak, "stabe." It's why modern tanks can hit a target when on the move over rough ground.
The WWII W4A3 Sherman tank had a gyroscope providing vertical (but not horizontal) stabilization. Azimuth (horizontal) stabilization was developed in 1944 but for a number of reasons it didn't make it into production until after the war ended.
German tanks didn't get stabe until the Leopard A1A1 (ca. 1965). Their WWII tanks had to come to a halt to get the best chance of a main gun hit. Ironically, their turrets were traversed by power from an engine power take-off (PTO). So when they were stopped and their engines came to idle, turret traverse was at its slowest. The Sherman's turret traverse was hydraulic but the hydraulic pumps were electric, so it had maximum turret rotation speed (about 20 degrees/sec) even at engine idle. So the scene in the Brad Pitt flick "Fury" where they try to go so fast that the Panzer's gun tube can't keep up is not entirely Hollyweird fiction.
Not strange at all, I didn't call you out for ad-hominem styled attacks, I called you out for ad-hominem styled arguments. Ad-hominem attacks have been used throughout history as a form of an exclamation point in arguments, going back to even the Classical Greek era and likely even before, to throw doubt on the character of the other person.
The arguments you are making are a form of whataboutism, which is a form of 'tu quoque' (you too) ad-hominem, or the schoolyard intellectual equivalent of "I know you are but what am I?"
Instead of arguing your point, you dance around it, as you find yourself unable to defend your core position.
Many wars are fought in places that dont matter much to the global strategic balance or to the global economy.
One example was the long, bloody civil war in Sri Lanka (Ceylon). Ceylon is an island without international borders, produces very little in the way of strategic materials (tea?), the war had no great chance of spilling over anywhere more important (India did intervene half-heartedly for a while), occurred post-Cold War, so was not implicated in the global struggle, etc. The world left it to be settled by the parties involved.
Of course it is political. That is to say strategic in a balance of power and economic sense. Thats the main reason why it matters.
The second is that the humanitarian/PR question is right in Europes face. It is important because Europes people matter, they have, collectively, the means to do something about it. Yes you can call this part rather racist. A bunch of Africans, as in the Congo Wars of 1998-2008, can kill each other by the millions and outside the neighboring countries, which also count for little globally, few are bothered.
The Ukies need much, much more than that, try electricity, fuel, fighting age men, arms, ammo, artillery….they are spent- a welfare queen nation.
The US and Europe weren’t silent when Russia took Ukraine. Russia was placed under various sanctions. These were intensified when the Russians intervened in the Donbas. Ukraine was given significant international financial assistance and supplies, not including armaments.
Had Russia then invaded Ukraine in toto, as in 2022, then even more would probably have been done.
“ So which of Ukraine’s allies is going to be the first to pledge Leopard 2 tanks?”
Nobody.
Couldn't be any worse than what the Texas Legislature did to me: I was gerrymandered from a red district into one that 75% Democrat. My Congressman was Beth Van Duyne, it's now Marc Veasey, true blue BLM Democrat.
Apologies for the formatting, but I live in the northeastern section...you see that small lake? I live a mile from there. I now live in a 75% Democrat district, i.e. I am not represented at all.
My core position is to stay the hell out of European politics. Further ad hominem attacks are one of, if not the weakest types of arguments. If Hitler said the Japanese were fools for bombing Pearl Harbor it would not make the argument invalid because of who it came from.
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.