• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

&#$%* Paywall.

:(
Try here https://archive.ph/QAYcr

Meanwhile, operators are standing by!
 
We need more people like this ;)

You are referring to President Reagan. ;)

An article in The New York Times dated 8 Feb., 2024 had this to say about President Reagan, regarding support for Ukraine,

Ronald Reagan isn’t just rolling over in his grave; he may also lurch from it in a fit of incredulous rage.


( Deleted from "Ukraine - Superthread", and moved here, instead. )

I wonder what President Reagan would have to say about support for Ukraine, were he alive today.
 
I wonder what President Reagan would have to say about support for Ukraine, were he alive today.

Historically speaking I think we have absolutely no idea what Reagan would think about the opportunity to mercilessly screw the Soviets Russians through materially supporting a country the Russians have invaded.

The opportunity Ukraine presents to impoverish, defang, and destabilize Russia would have given Reagan a boner that would have put Nancy into physio.
 
Historically speaking I think we have absolutely no idea what Reagan would think about the opportunity to mercilessly screw the Soviets Russians through materially supporting a country the Russians have invaded.

The opportunity Ukraine presents to impoverish, defang, and destabilize Russia would have given Reagan a boner that would have put Nancy into physio.
Here is my take on Ukraine. They should be given as much high and low tech weaponry as they require and it should be delivered when they need it. To be honest I just don't find it right to say Ukraine should soak Russia of their military might just to help protect NATO later. I believe Ukraine being given weapons to be freed from Russia is a just cause. Ukraine is losing a generation of young people and I am concerned about that. I believe they are in a fight for their freedom and not to protect somebody else.
 
Here is my take on Ukraine. They should be given as much high and low tech weaponry as they require and it should be delivered when they need it. To be honest I just don't find it right to say Ukraine should soak Russia of their military might just to help protect NATO later. I believe Ukraine being given weapons to be freed from Russia is a just cause. Ukraine is losing a generation of young people and I am concerned about that. I believe they are in a fight for their freedom and not to protect somebody else.
Defending Ukraine against Russia is as just a war as living generations will ever see. Russia’s invasion is the most naked possible aggression, and is the absolute archetype of what the rules based international order exists to protect. Ukraine is losing a generation to this.
 
Defending Ukraine against Russia is as just a war as living generations will ever see. Russia’s invasion is the most naked possible aggression, and is the absolute archetype of what the rules based international order exists to protect. Ukraine is losing a generation to this.
I agree with that.
Edit: The "not having to fight Russia later on NATO soil" is a beneficial side effect and not the main reason. The main reason is for Russians to go home, dead or alive.
 
Try here https://archive.ph/QAYcr

Meanwhile, operators are standing by!
I’m not sure if this is dumber than the time he advertised beans on his socials.

 
I'm not sure. My gut tells me that most MAGA folks who happily contribute to his campaign and PAC would be offended by a $399 sneaker which is probably manufactured somewhere in Asia. It sure is garish.

🍻
 
For those concerned about the pace of the American intervention

WWI - 28 July 1914 Archduke Ferdinand Assassinated
6 April 1917 America entered the war after being told that Germany was planning on threatening the Mexican border.
Wilson was narrowly re-elected in 1916 on an anti-war platform.

Apart from an Anglophile element urging early support for the British and an anti-tsarist element sympathizing with Germany's war against Russia, American public opinion had generally reflected a desire to stay out of the war. The sentiment for neutrality was particularly strong among Irish Americans, German Americans, and Scandinavian Americans,[1] as well as among church leaders and women in general.

32 months before America joined and then only after a direct threat to its borders.

WW2 - 1 September 1939 Hitler invades Poland (earlier dates for the Spanish Civil War and the Sino-Japanese War ca 1936)
8 December 1941 America declares war on Japan after Pearl Harbor
11 December 1941 Hitler and Mussolini declare ware on America. America reciprocated.

Roosevelt, acutely aware of strong isolationist and non-interventionist sentiment, promised there would be no involvement in foreign wars if he were re-elected

More than 27 months before America joined and then only after a direct attack on its borders.



Ukraine is coming up on 24 months.

If history is a guide Ukraine will have to struggle on for another 9 to 12 months, wait for the Americans to elect an isolationist President and then pray that somebody attacks them directly.



PS - Britain was rich when the US started selling and leasing war supplies to them.
 
If history is a guide Ukraine will have to struggle on for another 9 to 12 months, wait for the Americans to elect an isolationist President and then pray that somebody attacks them directly.
So when do the US aviator-wannabes stream up here, join the RCAF/RAF, and form Eagle Squadrons again? :sneaky:


RAF_Eagle_Squadron_Emblem.svg
 
So when do the US aviator-wannabes stream up here, join the RCAF/RAF, and form Eagle Squadrons again? :sneaky:


RAF_Eagle_Squadron_Emblem.svg

As soon as Britain relaunches the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan and starts buying planes from Canada again?
 
I'm not sure. My gut tells me that most MAGA folks who happily contribute to his campaign and PAC would be offended by a $399 sneaker which is probably manufactured somewhere in Asia. It sure is garish.

🍻
His other tchotchkes have all been made at the lowest cost overseas, why would this one be any different?
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure. My gut tells me that most MAGA folks who happily contribute to his campaign and PAC would be offended by a $399 sneaker which is probably manufactured somewhere in Asia. It sure is garish.

🍻
Sold out in a matter of hours. 1000 pair, also available in red and white.
 
Last edited:
Sold out in a matter of hours.
Some folks were donating $5k to his GFM, so I’m not totally surprised that 1000 folks shelled out $400 for shoes.

Now, will the other 999 pairs look like the ones he presented…
 
Back
Top