As an anti-war person I find it disturbing that the US seems to be gearing up for some sort of conflict over Ukraine…..and all this bolstering where is the anti-war people?
This is what it sounds like when Democrats gear up for war. Silence from the stalwarts. No mass demonstrations. No protest songs. No campus sit-ins. Those will only come later, after the administrations change hands and the body bags start coming home–if we’re all not turned into piles of irradiated ash first.
The scary part, at least for me, this that an unlikely voice is being heard from an anti-war perspective….Tucker Carlson (I know….how unlikely is that?)…..but there is a caveat in there…..The most prominent “anti-war” voice right now is that of Tucker Carlson and that’s only because wants the war directed at migrants on the southern border.
But…..Russia is ready to invade now, if not now, then soon, if not soon, then later, if not later, then eventually, if not eventually, then…(What comes next, Jen? Oh yeah, here it is) Our disclosure of their imminent invasion, spoiled Putin’s plans and saved the day.
Could the prediction of a Russian ‘false flag’ be just American ‘false flag’?
I would like to see some anti-war come forward and protest before it is just a reaction to a war and the deaths that will be seen.
So far just the spewing of words.
Just keep in mind….’war is good business….invest your children’…
Turn The Page!
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”
In Saner Thought 
I respect your anti-war stance, old buddy.. you’ve been there. No argument or debate from me. Yet if we apply some perspective here, there’s really no general movement at all here in the States of sending our military directly to the Ukraine to fight Russians. There’s simply no political will to do that after Afghanistan. We’ve been sending symbolic token forces to surrounding NATO allies to impress upon Putin that we do have a will to draw a line in the sand beyond any of his desires to go beyond the Ukraine. These symbolic troops also help to cement our commitment to NATO. The reality is.. if Putin indeed decided to blitzkrieg into any of our NATO allies in the region there’s no way a couple thousand American troops are going to repel the invading horde and save the day.
Now, is there some big business behind the scenes trying to start a war.. the good old military industrial complex hoping for a long term proxy war? Well, if there’s a shooting war between us and the Russians it likely won’t last long (a few days?), forget proxy anything, and the nuclear exchange will rather stifle long term business profits.
I do not think anyone is dumb enough to use nukes……all this is tit for tat…..Russia sends troops to Belarus and we send more to Ukraine, Poland, so on and so on…..Let me ask….at what point is enough enough? Why is the US sending troops….what about NATO? The M-IC makes money whether there is shooting or not…..I still do not think this is making the world a safer place. chuq
Doug….this is a pretty good look at the situation…..https://original.antiwar.com/Rajan_Menon/2022/02/08/war-with-russia-how-did-we-get-here/
Be well…..chuq
Interesting article with a lot of detail that the average reader would be hard pressed to verify. All that may well be on some level accurate. But here’s the thing, chuq…
1. NATO has never been an offensive alliance that I can recall ANYWHERE on the globe hence there’s no history of threatening any country. Russia has to know this and has had ample opportunity over the last couple decades to have a working relationship with NATO. In fact, over the last couple decades their own economy has become entwined with the global economy, more recently with the Nord Stream pipeline and expanding oil sales.
2. Talking about ancient history regarding those old Commies as having any direct relevancy to the here and now is off the mark to me. A lot of Russians indeed entertain a nationalism toward the old Soviet empire.. including old school Putin. It’s why they have been trying to gobble up.. or re-gobble up.. the old Bloc nations that went independent after the fall. I don’t see this attempt to grab the old neighbors as anything but resurrecting some level of old influence. NATO is a bit in the way of that. But the argument of NATO expansion I don’t see as a real Russian issue except for being a presence to contain any Russian expansion.. which they have a record of doing.
3. I can sense you might be comparing some of this troop buildup to early Vietnam, Iraq and Iran and the proverbial mission creep of involvement. Maybe, maybe not. I certainly have no crystal ball. But events just don’t read that way to me because the adversary is not a hidden enemy with a religious fanaticism but a major military battlefield player. We are good against those players.
4. NATO has been sending troops. The Brits and the French have sent some token forces to the NATO allies in the region and I believe Germany has sent some aid. I just don’t see anything ready to go all hostile by Russia as they will have a lot of lives lost if they try. As with anything I could be wrong. But her could end up with an empty country…. given all the refugees will be able to scramble to neighboring NATO countries.
The threats are there just not the ‘offense’ to the point of attacking first….we usually allow someone else to be the aggressor so we can swoop in and be the hero.
I agree that all this is posturing….. be well chuq
We basically hide out intentions by pretending that everyone wants democracy….
If any ‘shooting war’ begins, I think it will be more by accident than intention. Seems to me to be a lot of ‘chest-beating’ on all sides, with Putin trying to appear to be very tough. As for using nuclear weapons, Russia is far too close to the potential conflict to risk using any in the region, and I still think it is unlikely that NATO would use them against Russian targets ove an issue like Ukraine.
Best wishes, Pete.
I agree….nukes are just a ‘happy’ thought…no one will use them. chuq