(DIR) Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
(HTM) https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
(DIR) Return to: True Left vs False Left
*****************************************************
#Post#: 11124--------------------------------------------------
War
By: 90sRetroFan Date: February 8, 2022, 12:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
(HTM) https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-progressives-cautious-anti-war-105457061.html
[quote]For most of my life, the anti-war movement — such as it
is — has been a primarily left-of-center phenomenon.
When you think of the Vietnam War, images of hippies, Jane Fonda
and Eugene McCarthy probably come to mind. The "nuclear freeze"
campaign of the 1980s was similarly a lefty occurrence. When
President George W. Bush prepared to launch the invasion of Iraq
in 2003, it was mostly liberals and leftists who took to the
streets in protests — and when Americans got fed up with that
misbegotten war, they elected Democrats to put an end to it.
...
the hawks-versus-doves clash in this country has largely been a
right-against-left conflict.[/quote]
Yes, because Vietnam and Iraq are non-Western countries. True
Leftists supported Clinton's wonderful Operation Deliberate
Force against Serbia, a Western country. We would have supported
war against Apartheid South Africa, a Western country, had it
refused to surrender. We support war against Israel, a Western
country. It is only False Leftist geopolitical idiots who are
opposed to the US getting into wars without even considering
whether the target is a Western country or a non-Western
country.
[quote]Now Russia appears to be on the cusp of invading Ukraine
— Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, warned Sunday
that war could come within days — and some of the loudest voices
for U.S. restraint are coming from conservatives. It's kind of
weird![/quote]
No, it's not weird at all. Russia is a Western country, so of
course rightists don't want war against Russia. Rightists are
only opposed to the US warring against Western countries, while
having no problem with the US warring against non-Western
countries. They are our opposites.
[quote]That's led some observers to wonder if there might be a
natural alliance between those elements on the left and right
urging U.S. restraint in Eastern Europe.[/quote]
Only False Leftists will join rightists calling for restraint
against Turandom. True Leftists will not rest until Turandom has
ceased to exist.
[quote]Maybe. But there are a few reasons antiwar progressives
should be cautious, at the very least, about making common cause
with the Trumpist right:[/quote]
We are not progressives, and we are not anti-war. We are only
opposed to fellow former victims of Western colonialism (among
which we include America) fighting one another instead of
uniting against the Western colonial powers. Nevertheless, at
least even False Leftists seem to be catching on that rightists
are against war with Russia for all the wrong reasons.
[quote]Carlson's opposition to aiding Ukraine is rooted —
rhetorically, at least — in his longstanding inability to tell
the difference between immigration and an actual military
invasion. It's a chance to knock "open borders" Democrats. Why
would we protect Ukraine's borders and not our own?
For Carlson, this is an explicitly racial question, cast in
typically bad-faith terms.[/quote]
To keep thing simple, in Carlson's mind, Russians are "white"
and Ukrainians are "white", therefore Russia invading Ukraine is
OK because it's OK to be "white".
[quote]Carlson once rooted on the Iraq War by calling Iraqis
"semi-literate primitive monkeys."[/quote]
For Carlson, it's also OK for "whites" to invade "non-whites"
because it's OK to be "white".
[quote]Dreher believes American opposition to a Ukraine invasion
stems from anger over Vladimir Putin's opposition to gay rights.
"This cold war with Russia is an extension of the culture war
within American society, waged by elites against the American
people," Dreher wrote in his blog at The American Conservative.
That reading might be the product of Dreher's particular
passions, but maybe not. Much of the right, after all, sees
Putin as one of the world's leading defenders of Christendom.
[/quote]
Jesus never taught homophobia, therefore homophobia is not
Christian. The Orthodox Church that Putin defends is not
Christian. It is Mosaic. More about Dreher (and Carlson) here:
(HTM) https://trueleft.createaforum.com/enemies/hungary-v4/msg7892/#msg7892
Continuing:
[quote]Hawley isn't really being dovish when he argues against
Ukraine's entry into NATO. He just doesn't want America to
divert its attention away from a possible confrontation with
China. That's where the real action is. "The United States can
no longer carry the heavy burden it once did in other regions of
the world — including Europe," he recently wrote to Secretary of
State Antony Blinken. "To the contrary, we must do less in those
secondary theaters in order to prioritize denying China's
hegemonic ambitions in the Indo-Pacific."
None of this is the humanist pacifism of, say, Martin Luther
King Jr. or Daniel Berrigan. It's something darker, uglier, and
angrier.[/quote]
Indeed. Of course, we agree with Hawley that the US can no
longer carry the burden it once did in other regions of the
world. Where we disagree is where the US should prioritize. We
believe the US should completely pull out of the Indo-Pacific in
order to concentrate on countering the rise of Turandom. Put
another way, America should succeed the role that National
Socialist Germany created back in WWII, while encouraging China
to succeed the role that Japan created back in WWII.
[quote]That doesn't mean that the anti-war left shouldn't work
with whatever allies they can find. The goal of those who
advocate American restraint should be to avoid a war with
Russia, not to signal their own virtue. But they should tread
carefully. The world that Tucker, Hawley, and the rest hope to
create is very different from the one progressives want.[/quote]
The indiscriminately anti-war False Left is not our ally. We do
not advocate American restraint. We advocate American heroism.
The world that True Leftists want to create is different from
either the one that rightists want to create or the one that
False Leftists want to create. The world we envision is a world
without Western civilization. Any war in service of this vision
is a war which we support. Any war which might interfere with
this vision is a war which we oppose.
#Post#: 11907--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: 90sRetroFan Date: March 10, 2022, 11:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Our enemies remind us why we should want the war in Ukraine to
keep going for years:
(HTM) https://vdare.com/posts/will-a-giant-wave-of-migrants-from-africa-head-toward-europe-again-due-to-mr-putin-s-war
[quote]Ukrainian farmers obviously have more pressing priorities
right now than sowing their fields. And in any case, the Russian
blockade and conquest of most of Ukraine’s Black Sea coast will
prevent exports of wheat to the countries that rely on them
most.
Between them, Russia and Ukraine account for a third of the
world’s supply of wheat, but in fragile countries across the
Middle East and Africa, where wheat bread is the staple food,
the dependency on Ukrainian grain is even higher.
...
The potential consequences of hunger and social unrest, and
perhaps accelerated state collapse and mass migration
northwards, will be a major concern for European politicians in
the coming year unless the war comes to a swift conclusion.
...
So, one potential result of Mr. Putin’s War is violent unrest in
the Global South, setting off another round of mass migration to
the Global North.[/quote]
#Post#: 11908--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: guest55 Date: March 10, 2022, 11:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It is all coming together perfectly! Operation Gaddafi may be
getting the much needed reserves it's been lacking sooner than
we imagined!
#Post#: 12098--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: rp Date: March 16, 2022, 10:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Going back to this comment:
(HTM) http://aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/thank-you-for-remembering-us-duginists/comment-page-1/#comment-183404
Can we count on Operation Barbarossa to pay dividends in a
potential conflict with Russia, thus handing us an easy victory
over Turandom?
#Post#: 12099--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: 90sRetroFan Date: March 17, 2022, 12:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think the effects have dissipated by now. What we should be
thinking about is how to get Barbarossa II going. Now would be a
very good timing for it. Even those who do not care about
colonial-era history should be able to understand the moral case
for Russia losing territory as punishment for the recent
invasion, as I was explaining here:
(HTM) https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/re-duginism-1134/msg11997/#msg11997
[quote]Absent retaliatory invasion into Russian territory, even
if Russia comes out on the other side of this war having totally
failed to capture Ukraine, it will have lost nothing except
troops and weapons. Who will foot the bill for all the
infrastructure damaged by Russia, and for all other expenditures
incurred as a result of the war? Some people out there literally
believe that Russia's loss of troops and weapons can be counted
as the payment. No! If I smash up my neighbour's house with a
baseball bat, breaking the baseball bat in the process, I am not
thereby (on account of the broken baseball bat) absolved of
paying the damages to my neighbour's house! I should have to
give my house to my neighbour! Similarly, the only sure way to
in effect get Russia to pay is by acquiring Russian territory
and resources.[/quote]
But Russia is obviously not going to agree to this, so the only
way to make it lose territory is to take it militarily. Now is
the time to do it! Russia is sending in reinforcements into
Ukraine, which weakens its defences elsewhere:
[quote]Putin's manpower problem: Russia 'is drafting in troops
from Siberia and the Pacific as well as Syrians and mercenaries'
in desperate attempt to get stalled Ukrainian invasion going
after punishing losses[/quote]
The obvious move is to wait until all the reinforcements are
inside Ukraine, and then open up multiple new fronts of war on
Russian territory itself! No way can Russia hold Koenigsberg
right now if NATO simply decided to take it back.
(HTM) https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/03/16/12/55425173-10618647-image-a-76_1647435523030.jpg
China and Japan are fools to not take back Outer Manchuria and
Karafuto ASAP! With the troops in Armenia going to Ukraine,
Turkey can now also invade and take back Crimea:
(HTM) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea
[quote]Crimea (or the Tauric Peninsula, as it was called from
antiquity until the early modern period) has historically been
at the boundary between the classical world and the
Pontic–Caspian steppe. Its southern fringe was colonised by the
Greeks and then ruled by the Persians followed by the Roman
Empire, the Byzantine Empire, and finally successor states
including the Empire of Trebizond and Principality of Theodoro.
During the entirety of this period the urban areas were
Greek-speaking and eventually eastern Christian (Eastern
Orthodox). During the collapse of the Byzantine state some
cities fell to its creditor, the Republic of Genoa, until
eventually all were absorbed by the rapidly rising Ottoman
Empire.[/quote]
#Post#: 12100--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: guest55 Date: March 17, 2022, 12:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The host of "Speak The Truth" made a good point in one of his
videos as well: The troops arriving from the middle-east region
to reinforce Putin's failing invasion are not used to the
weather in Ukraine. It is much colder in Ukraine than in Syria.
This will have an effect on their performance as well. Reminded
me of what Hitler said about Muslims fighting in Europe
actually.
I still do not understand why reclaiming Crimea even for Ukraine
is not being discussed at all by so many....
#Post#: 12102--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: rp Date: March 17, 2022, 12:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
". Even those who do not care about colonial-era history should
be able to understand the moral case for Russia losing territory
as punishment for the recent invasion, as I was explaining
here:"
But wait a minute, don't we support the invasion because it
kills Ukrainians? Or do we only support it insofar as it
achieves the aforementioned objective, but oppose it because it
benefits Russia? If the latter case, why should we oppose it
solely because it benefits Russia? Because it strengthens
Turandom more broadly?
#Post#: 12103--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: guest55 Date: March 17, 2022, 12:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Personally, I never supported the invasion to begin with, but
I'm glad it happened. Look at all the positives that have come
from it already too though, the EU uniting, Germany rearming
itself, etc. I've always taken Patton and Hitler's words to
heart on the subject, namely that sooner than later America
would have to fight Russia. So, in that regard, Turanians taking
each other out now makes things easier for America in the long
run.
#Post#: 12104--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: 90sRetroFan Date: March 17, 2022, 1:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
"don't we support the invasion because it kills Ukrainians?"
To support the invasion would imply that we want the invasion to
succeed. We do not. Therefore we do not support the invasion. We
are merely glad that the invasion attempt occurred. We still
want the attempt to ultimately fail, and lead to Russia ending
up in a worse position than it was before the attempt.
"Or do we only support it insofar as it achieves the
aforementioned objective, but oppose it because it benefits
Russia?"
Again, "support" is the wrong word. The worst scenario for us
would have been if the invasion went as Putin (and genuine Putin
supporters) wanted it to go: Ukraine surrenders without a single
Ukrainian dying. Fortunately, this ship has already sailed.
"If the latter case, why should we oppose it solely because it
benefits Russia? Because it strengthens Turandom more broadly?"
Yes. Recall:
(HTM) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics
[quote]Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a
state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import
or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic
exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an
enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the
Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about
continental politics".[/quote]
We are anti-Duginists.
#Post#: 12117--------------------------------------------------
Re: War
By: rp Date: March 17, 2022, 8:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
BTW, what is your stance on children being casualties of war, in
particular, if there is no way to evacuate them (as in Ukraine)?
*****************************************************
(DIR) Next Page