That sure was an odd presidency. One for the history books to look back and really wonder about.
1 Like
Total garbage.
And tipped workers, like I was once a part of.
US has voted against condemning Russian invasion in UN.
This is probably the first time US is siding with North Korea and Russia simultaneously in UN.
I know it’s mainly symbolic, but it feels scary.
Russia was provoked into war by Ukraine and Genocide Joe-a total piece of shit. Kind of like Kennedy blocking Russia from making a military front in Cuba. Willing to go to war, rather than allow this dangerous move to take place.
1 Like
This is not true at all. Saying something like this shows you haven’t really studied the situation.
I don’t know if siding is the right way of putting it. Its possible to vote the same way for different reasons, especially when the options are Yea, Nea, or Abstain.
There was also counter proposal put forth by the US.
The UN has kind of proven itself to be a pretty piss poor, expensive, and ineffective force in world leadership.
And why should anybody even give a shit about what a bunch of people from other countries think we should do?
I think they should stay in their own countries and solve their own damn problems, but they don’t seem to give a shit what I think now, do they?
I agree. And this makes me worried too.
It’s still better than anarchy we’re headed.
Because worrying about each others and negotiating might be the only way to keep 3ww away.
I don’t necessarily disagree with that, but the UN’s ability to act effectively as a peacekeeper or peacemaker is abysmal.
Like, they’re just now voting on whether or not what Russia did was bad?
Maybe if they could have effectively stepped in when Putin was lining up tanks and troops I would respect their efforts, but as it stands, they’re just bureaucratic ruminants chewing billion dollar cud.
Maybe in a few years they’ll even give themselves a prize for voting about something! 
1 Like
The problem with UN is that it’s a sum of it’s members. UN intervention is decided by security council, and Russia is a part of it. Sp it has blocked UN over and over again. US did the same with Iraq years before.
It does still matter what countries state publicly. At least for me. It’s like US president would state that Epstein did nothing wrong, and he supports his doings. It does not affect directly to anything, but surely it would matter?
I have a pretty solid pragmatic streak that prevents me from acknowledging worthless acolades or admonishments.
I have a firm belief that actions speak louder than words, and effect means more than intention too.
Like when an aide package was airdropped on some palestinians head? I look at that and go “Their heart was in the right place, but that guy they smashed is just as dead as if it was a bomb.”.
To me they threw something out of an airplane and it killed someone.
I can’t say that I disagree. We all know a bunch of politicians who speak beautiful things and act differently.
Words aren’t meaningless, thought.
1 Like
They aren’t meaningless, but action means a lot more.
Like, I weld. People don’t pay me to know how to weld, or wax poetic about welding. They pay me to do it.
If they need some technical stuff, sure, i can do that too, but the meat & potatoes comes from the action.
1 Like
They act differently because those who fund their campaigns want them to. It is the funders of the campaign who get there way. A voter-in their mind- is a meaningless constituency. They only need their votes, so they say things that will please the voter- then they throw those promises away. Anytime a politician does something shitty-which is the majority of the time. peel back the layers and there is usually some corporation behind it, trying to protect their profits. But the meat puppets in Congress take the hit and shield the real culprits-ultra-wealthy/corporations-as that is their real job.
How open the political funding and lobbying is in US? I could imagine there’s a bunch of shady actors.
And posting something like this shows you’ve drank the propaganda.
1 Like
That’s why I said I’m worried.
It’s not that US is allying Russia, North Korea etc. But I hope this statement doesn’t predict anything.
1 Like
I fear it’s the other way around. I’ve been following Putin’s doings for 20 years and I’ve also followed the war closely.
I’ve used a bunch of different sources over the years, I’ve followed even the Russian propagandists. I would claim that I have pretty goods knowledge about the war and it’s reasons.
Saying that Russia was provoked and not quilty for the war is story told only by Russia and some random social media influencers. If you really try to figure out how Russia was “provoked”, there is not anything solid. Also, I’ll recommend to look how Russia has acted before the war.
But there are always people who will claim that everybody else is lying and some pro-russian youtuber is right. That’s the way in open democraties. If you study the 30s, It’s clear that not everyone where thinking that west should have a war against Nazis (or that Hitler did nothing wrong).
There are always differences in perspectives, but other are better argumented.
Such as?
And how did Ukraine act before the war?
Who? That perspective is so fringe no one would take that person seriously.
Certainly not true. Try Mearsheimer, Sachs
1 Like
I’ll reply when I have more time.
Provoked may be the wrong word. Given little choice but to invade is how the situation appears to me, if I am to discern it through the lies and propaganda with limited information.
What do you prefer as a Finn?
A Biden Presidency who suggests a minor incursion would be tolerated, votes to condemn it when it happens and then facilitates years of slaughter?
Or Trump, who seems to know a thing or two about international negotiations and wielding American power to stop the slaughter?
A Harris Presidency would have been functionally indistinguishable from Biden. She would have been a mere figurehead, and was even dumber than Biden.
As an American, I never stopped being amazed at our press’ ability to manipulate reality. With Biden they were forced to constantly run stories like this, explaining that the president actually meant something else. With Trump they also try to tell you what he really means.
In both instances they seem only capable of misleading people, almost as if that’s the point.