I’m not being wishy washy. I have every right to call out Zelensky for telling the US that we’re not doing enough when in fact we’ve essentially done EVERYTHING BUT send our troops in and shoot down Russian aircraft with our own pilots.
I love when people say "I have every right to XYZ", like I ever said you didn't have the right to feel a certain way or express your opinion. Yes, you have the right. I also have the right to strongly disagree with you, don't I? Cool.
I just think this is a terrible take. Yes, USA has done a lot to denounce the war with sanctions. Yes, USA has good reason not to send in troops/enforce a No Fly Zone.
But again, this is the president of a country getting overwhelmed with a brutal assault from a top three military power in the world. Sanctions won't end this war. Russia will eventually win, and countless lives, likely ncluding Zelensky's, will be lost.
The fact that you think Zelensky should then NOT ask for military help and take the official stance of "hey USA, thanks for at least doing what you could without risking retaliation, my country and I will get fucked and die now but we appreciate your circumstances" makes no sense to me.
I'm sure if China and Russia teamed up and were succeeding in brutally killing and taking over the USA, you'd want our president asking Europe for military help, not saying "hey ya'll keep yourselves safe, thanks for telling China you won't buy goods from them anymore."
You called NATO expansion a justification. I did not. Just shedding light on a possible explanation for the invasion.
Sorry that the term wishy washy seems to have triggered you, but this is exactly what I'm talking about. You post a big map of NATO expansion and say "makes you wonder if USA would feel threatened if roles were reversed". Then in response to nothing I said, you bring up as something you don't know "that the rapid expansion of NATO since the mid 90’s has contributed to the Russian invasion"
In this thread you have denounced the bloodshed, but not the war. You've criticized Zelensky for calling for more help for his people. You've given Putin the benefit of the doubt that he may not be killing innocents on purpose. You've said "USA does it too". You've celebrated Mr X's post about Russia/Ukraine being more complicated than media lets on. You've said your Russian GF has given you new perspective on the Russia/Ukraine feud.
BUT, you won't just come out and say Putin has a legitimate gripe. I infer from all of the above you are saying NATO was a justification; never said you claimed it was a good one, just that it was Putin's justification. But no, you were "just shedding light".
I mean I honestly don't know what the hell is going on or what you are trying to say. It just seems an awful lot like you want to play both sides of the fence (this war is terrible + Putin has his reasons though) and then get upset when I call you out on it? Okay.
Dave, one other thing….
Would you please stop with the name calling? You may not have noticed but you tend to do stuff like that in about 50% (rough estimate) of your WW2/C-19/politics posts.
Am I allowed to have an opposing view point without being on a “weird hill”?
That isn't name calling. I've never called you an idiot or anything else. I'd love for you to cite some examples of me actually calling you or others names, seeing as I do it 50% of the time should be awfully easy for you.
Saying you have a "wishy washy thing going on" isn't calling you a name. It's describing your actions in this thread. I am legitimately sorry if that hurt your feelings, that wasn't my intention. I stand by this description.
It's totally fine to say I don't know, I don't have an opinion, this is too complicated. But not if you want to pair that with arguments, opinionated posts, etc. I'll give you an example. ESPN just reported some transgender girl just won a race. That issue is way too complicated for me. I'm fully in support of trans rights. I don't think they should be banned from playing the sports that they love. But I also think it is entirely unfair to the rest of the field that they have a biological edge over. I have no solution ideas. I'm lost.
So if there were a thread about it, I wouldn't post an infograph on how trans athletes don't have a significantly higher win rate with a caption like "makes you think, doesn't it" and then when one of you responded say "oh I actually didn't say that, the whole thing is too complicated. I was just shedding light."
Yes, shockingly, you are "allowed" to have a different opinion than my own without it being a weird hill. But I'm also "allowed" to call it that (P.S. thats describing your stance as strange, not calling you names). This first amendment thing works both ways, it's super cool.
