(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