Leaving aside the Iraq war discussion for a moment (that war, by the way, was America’s Pickett’s Charge, the high tide of the US) it’s amazing remembering how anti-Trump the Republican crowd was. A complete world of difference from today.

Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. They hate electric cars, but all of a sudden the guy who popularized them is a hero.

Zelensky is invited here and shows incredible restraint and decorum only to be shouted down and vilified. Meanwhile, Netanyahu comes over here and CHASTISES Congress for not delivering weapons FAST ENOUGH. This after we've propped up Israel's apartheid regime and filled warehouses with weapons for decades.

> There’s no “propaganda network.”

There absolutely is and you are the victim of it.

> If you believe that there is no NATO propaganda network that controls all of the western media, you are a victim of it.

Yep, the best propaganda is one you don't even think of as propaganda. It's just the truth.

Bless your heart.

Like most Asians and most Muslims, I have been opposed to the “rules based international order” my entire adult life. American proxy wars have caused tremendous damage around the world. And I’m incredibly proud we finally have an American President who realizes they don’t serve American interests either.

This is not a new sentiment and it caused by Russian social media propaganda: https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4473508,00.html. I cite Chomsky less these days than I used to, but I recall back when I was a Gore-supporting Democrat and we were mocking “Team America: World Police” he was seen as pretty respectable. Is he Russian propaganda?

American proxy wars propping up illegitimate governments that rule without the consent of the governed have caused problems. The US is supporting a legitimate government against an invading dictatorship. The broad brush you paint with would have had the US not support the allies with weapons in WW2 all the way through 1941.

That was true of Vietnam and South Korea too. And in Iraq we were toppling a brutal dictatorship and in Syria we would’ve been doing that. The U.S. shouldn’t have been getting involved in any of those. Democracy promotion is not a legitimate foreign policy—because for many countries (maybe most countries) authoritarianism is better than a dysfunctional democracy.

Once again, your argument is in favor of not helping the Allies against the Axis powers. This is not about democracy promotion. It's about repelling an invasion from a dictatorship. Invading a nonexpansionist Third Reich is a different proposition from helping other countries fight off an invasion from a Morgen die Welt conqueror. As I said, I agree the US shouldn't install and prop up illegitimate governments like the RVN. The people ruled by the illegitimate government won't appreciate it. That's not what's going on here.

> And I’m incredibly proud we finally have an American President who realizes they don’t serve American interests either

Seriously? The current president is even more on-board than the previous ones with using Israel as a U.S. proxy. Just because he's also in bed with Putin doesn't mean he opposes American imperialism.

You really don't believe the United States, E.U and NATO contributed to the Maidan coup in 2014? We started this. Good on Trump for trying to finish it.

Ukraine's parliament overwhelmingly supported the EU-UA agreement. It had the support of the populace. Yanukovych was going to be replaced at the next election because of it, and his violent suppression of the protests only sped that up. There was no need for western involvement to make that happen, and your belief that there was is an evidence-free conspiracy theory. https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/us-launched-euromaidan-to-weak...

It wasn't then nor now a legitimate parliament. Please refer to the 2014 Victoria Nuland phone leaks to see for yourself how the United States chooses who is a member of the Ukrainian government.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

Nothing in that leak shows that the US chooses members of the Ukrainian government, only that they work with them. All of them were democratically elected, just like Zelensky. Next you're going to tell me that Yatsenyuk grew a beard and joined a Chechen gang in the 90s and cite the DNC leaks as proof. https://www.voanews.com/a/ukraine-yatsenyuk-chechnya-russia-...

Absolutely not cause I grew up in Ukraine and I know how EU and NATO used to not give a damn about Ukraine. You are barking up the wrong tree.

Trump cited Russian propaganda of Zelensky‘s 4% approval rate.

So where did he get that from?

You think random factoids are driving Trump’s viewpoint?

Trump overthrew the Bush dynasty by eviscerating Jeb over the Iraq War: https://youtu.be/H4ThZcq1oJQ?si=Y3nWQeiui8KJhj8b. Now, neocons want to chalk that up as bad execution of an otherwise sound ideology. But you don’t think that Trump’s supporters could genuinely disagree with that assessment—think that the underlying problem is that america is too willing to intervene militarily in places that don’t directly affect the U.S.? You think that view is driven by Russian propaganda?

The way I see it, Ukraine is the test case for the foreign policy populist Democrats have long supported. The Cold War is over. The likelihood that Putin will invade Germany or France next is low. Regional wars are just that, and we should let them play out without getting involved.

Otherwise you’re still subscribing to Reaganite neoconservatism—you’re just quibbling about the details of whether to involve the american military empire in any particular skirmish.

I think personal animosities drive Trump's viewports, otherwise you wouldn't call a president a dictator because he didn't held an election during a war what's exactly that what the Ukrainian constitution says.

You wouldn't appease a dictator who imprisoned and killed his opposition.

And Putin wouldn't attack openly, nowadays you attack per online sabotage, something the US will see rising, or won't see because Trump suspended the cyber operations.

Strangely enough he has no problem sending money to Israel after Hamas attacked them, despite the Israel army is much more powerful than the Hamas.

So Trump has no problem being involved in wars he knows his supported side will win or has already won.

Trump gos for the easy wins, he is a low-hanging fruit harvester.

Same with DOGE. Firing people doesn't reduce bureaucracy, changing laws and regulations does. But that's not what they do.

BTW people said the same about the likelihood of Putin attacking Ukraine, or about the likelihood of Ukraine withstanding the attack more than weeks. Seems like likelihood is a bad measure for reality.

And pissing of your allies and victim blaming the president of an invaded country is bad politics, unless you are the villain.

> You think random factoids are driving Trump’s viewpoint?

Very much so.

https://www.businessinsider.com/gary-cohn-stole-documents-of...

> According to the Washington Examiner, McMaster said on Tuesday that Gary Cohn, Trump's former top economic adviser, did steal documents off the president's desk to prevent Trump from pulling the US out of key trade deals.

> Cohn told colleagues at the time that the theft was necessary and that Trump would forget about the idea, according to the book, released earlier this month. Woodward reported that Cohn also snatched a document that would have pulled the US out of the North American Free Trade Agreement from the president's desk.

He has a long history of parroting the last thing someone said to him.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/04/14/want-chan...

I always wonder how is it that you are allowed to post so much in controversial political threads, yet your posts are usually significantly voted down. Does the rate limiting not apply to you?

Also is anyone seriously suggested France or Germany would be next? Wouldn't it be more like Poland? And your perspective reeks of the weeks prior to the Ukraine invasion, where so many swore Russia would never do it, it was just Biden-antagonism. And this isn't me being pro Biden. These are just facts.

I voted for Biden, and while I was unhappy with the result for many reasons, I thought he did an okay job keeping us from getting more deeply involved in the Ukraine war.

Many people seem to take it as axiomatic that the U.S. has an obligation to use force to maintain pre-existing borders. And we simply don’t agree with you about that. The standard for me is whether it’s going to significantly affect the daily life of someone in Iowa.

So maybe I’d care if anyone was seriously saying France and Germany could fall to Russia. But short of that?

How is that even a response to my post? At all? I didn't express any opinion if the US should use force... so I'm not sure what you could agree or disagree with about that.

He knows it's wrong. He wanted to elicit a counter statement from Zelensky. Which Zelensky gave, saying that he had 57% approval rating.

So now Trump can say: Look, if you have 57% approval rating, why do you shun elections?

And then Zelensky can say because our constitution says so.

I honestly don’t get the impression that Trump is that strategic. He also usually doesn’t care if something is right or wrong, but only whether it supports his interests.

> So now Trump can say: Look, if you have 57% approval rating, why do you shun elections?

So a lie to "prove" another lie? Is he's going to show us exactly how he's "shunning elections"?