Even if I showed them footage of Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister saying the US was trying to stage a coup in 2013
- organised out of the US embassy in Kiev
Even if I showed them footage of Victoria Nuland saying they spent 5 billion on the coup.
Even if I showed them footage of Right Sector saying they shot up Maidan protesters as a policy of the West
Even if I showed them the phone calls of Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pratt deciding on the new leader
Even if I showed them policy documents by the West saying the way to beat Russia was to overthrow Ukraine
Even if I showed them reasonably good testimony that the war crimes Russia is accused of were false flags
Even if I showed them aspects of international law and how the West left Russia no choice
Even if I showed them that Russia first tried for internal right to self determination but it was never honoured
Even if I try to make arguments based on common sense they just don't listen.

They want to escalate, no matter the cost.
For what purpose, I just do not understand.

The worst part of it all is these people are supposed to be Trump supporters, and even he is starting to say many of the right things.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2023/03/16/trump_every_day_this_proxy_battle_in_ukraine_continues_we_risk_global_war.html

Well AC and sidekick, yet again you show an ability to understand nuance. Nowhere on these or other pages have I said I favour Ukraine in this war.

The problem for dills like AC (we'll get to Paul soon) is that they have this binary view of the world - if you oppose Russia, if you don't fall for every moronic utterance from their propaganda machine (as he does) then you must be all in for Ukraine. No other possibilities enter his one-sided understanding of issues.

I have said previously that I rather treat this war like Kissinger treated the Iran-Iraq war where he said "“It's a pity both sides can't lose”.

My main beef with AC is his utter disregard for the facts while pompously claiming to be the fount of all facts. eg his claims about banning the Russian language where he was forced to finally slink away in defeat (I was going to say shame, but I don't think that's in AC's make-up).

As regards the war, I'm opposed to providing Ukraine with any more support. Everything the west can get from this war has been obtained. Russia has been shown to be a paper tiger. Europe has been yanked out of its idiotic reliance on Russian supplies. Scandinavia has woken up to the Russian menace and will join NATO. Europe is rearming and Poland is on track to becoming the largest army in Europe and capable by itself of dealing with the incompetent Russians.

The most disgraceful aspect of AC's assertions (apart from his MH17 bastardry) is his constant claims that Ukraine and the west should surrender because Russia threatens to use its nukes. If the US made such threats, AC would be the first to call them out for their misanthropy. But its fine when Putin does it.

AC isn't interested in peace or justice or a safe world order. His only concern is victory (such as it is) for the totalitarians he so admires

As to Paul, he's continues the policy of the peaceniks over the decades.

It is now well known and documented that the so-called peace movements of the 1960's calling for peace in Vietnam were in fact funded, often fully funded, by Comintern out of Moscow. Their aim was a communist victory and the useful idiots were used to achieve that. They thought they were protesting for peace, when in fact they were protesting for the enslavement of the Vietnamese people.

He claims to be in favour of peace, but in fact is in favour of a peaceful victory for the totalitarians. Want peace? Well call for Russia to withdraw. That'd bring peace. But that's not the peace he favours. A peace following a Russian victory is his heart's desire.

So let Russians and Ukrainians duke it out. Let Russia have their pyrrhic victory and then spend the next 30 years trying to combat a Ukrainian guerrilla uprising. Let them spend the next 30 years dealing with the ramifications of a newly energised Europe prepared to face them down. Let them do this while they slowly become a vassal state of the equally declining Han Empire.

But spare us this false virtue of claiming to be pro-peace when in fact you're just pro-Russia or, more precisely, anti-freedom.

Liar mhaze, you will not find one word on this thread, or on this site, where I support Russia in this terrible war. If peace can be brought about by Russia withdrawing then I say; RUSSIA WITHDRAW!

Peaceniks? really, "It is now well known and documented that the so-called peace movements of the 1960's calling for peace in Vietnam were in fact funded, often fully funded, by Comintern out of Moscow." Well known by whom? The often lying CIA, the old dead corpse of your folk hero Ronnie Reagan, or the Yankee sycophant YOU! Got any evidence!

Standard operating procedure there from Paul. Whenever he's presented with facts he'd prefer not be true, he screams for evidence. This is of course from the bloke who explicitly advised Foxy against providing evidence. And always, always, when given the evidence he hurried changes the subject and proceeds to ignore it..... nothing must interfere with his warped world view.

Evidence?

Its true that most of it came from western sources....UNTIL the collapse of Paul's beloved USSR and the opening of their archives which confirmed the truth.

eg the World Peace Council was fully run by the Soviets. Their archives confirm it. The council in turn funded and/or established organisations like International Institute for Peace, International Organization of Democratic Lawyers, International Union of Students,
World Federation of Trade Unions and a bunch more. Records show that the Soviets gave more than $1 billion to US peace movements during the Vietnam War - more than they gave the VietCong!!