The working class love their country and are willing to fight dictators who are leading their country in the wrong direction. The US is willing to help those citizens who do not want to be ruled by a dictator. Jacobin writes articles through a socialist lens and is very unfair to use in a newsletter. If you argue that the US is aiding Neo-Nazis, well the UN is sending more military and aid to Ukraine. Would that mean they are also aiding Neo-Nazis? Ukraine has 170,000 active-duty troops, 100,000 reservists, and territorial defense forces that include at least 100,000 veterans. Look up the size of Azov Battalion - they're the size of a regiment. Meaning one to two thousand people, Azov Battalion is not running Ukraine. There are more Neo Nazis in the US with 3,000 to 6,000 Klan members.
“Many people ask, what should the United States do about this? The only viable solution would be for the working classes to overthrow the US ruling class that uses war to enrich itself, thereby preventing further loss of innocent life to the benefit of a handful of oligarchs” - Are you suggesting a revolution of our government? That is a very radical statement. Also, may I ask why? Russia started this war. Not NATO nor the US, Russia invaded a sovereign country off a ridiculous claim about the Nazis. The US citizen does not need to overthrow the government, Russian citizens need to! Putin and his actual oligarchs want this war. Russian citizens are already suffering the consequences of the stupidity of their leader. Russian soldiers don’t even want to invade Ukraine. They were told it was a military operation and that Ukrainians wanted to be liberated.
Overthrowing the Ukrainian President. Why do you blame the US and NATO? Viktor Yanukovych was a corrupt politician who stole money from his people and was a puppet for Putin. No mention in this article about how corrupt he was. Your article is about the working class, then you should support the 2014 revolution in Ukraine instead of talking about Nazis and Victoria Nuland. The people wanted the revolution because they wanted freedom, something Putin hates. Read: “ A brief history of corruption in Ukraine: the Yanukovych era” by Euroasia.org or "What did Ukraine's revolution in 2014 achieve?" by the Economist
In conclusion, blame the west if you want. However, remember who took the first shot. Who killed the first civilian and who denied diplomacy. Russia is an evil dictatorship that is targeting civilians, hospitals, and schools. Ukraine is fighting for freedom while Russia is fighting for control. Russia wanted this war, Ukraine wanted peace. NATO is supporting Ukraine. The US is supporting Ukraine. The world is supporting Ukraine. Glory to Ukraine!
First and foremost, I want to thank you for taking an interest in the article and for leaving a comment. It is always appreciated.
As for my citing a socialist website, who is it unfair to? I provide links to the articles which readers can click on and see that it's from Jacobin which doesn't hide the fact that it's a socialist magazine. I cover right-wing corporate outlets like the New York Times and the Washington Post too. To exclude information from a news outlet based on it's political stance that you or myself don't like would make my newsletter completely one-sided. That, in my opinion, would be "very unfair." Unbiased news doesn't exist. If you beleive that they do, please name those outlets that practice this kind of journalism.
"Look up the size of Azov Battalion - they're the size of a regiment. Meaning one to two thousand people, Azov Battalion is not running Ukraine."
I will be going more in depth on the Azov battalion in my upcoming articles that will center specifically on Ukraine, but I am confused as to what your stance is. Are you arguing that we didn't arm Nazis? Or that it's okay that we did because we only armed "one to two thousand" of them? I hope you meant the former instead of the latter. Furthermore, you should check your numbers. For what it's worth, Wikipedia has the Azov Battalion as having "more than 2,500" members. And, again, they are receiving funding from the United States with your tax dollars. I can assure you these aren't rinky-dink firearms. And do they have to be "running Ukraine" in order for you to find it reprehensible to fund white supremacists? Whether they are running the country is not the point. The point is that the United States funds them, and the Ukrainian government recognizes them and uses them to kill Russians in the Donbas and have done so for the last eight years. But more on that soon.
"Are you suggesting a revolution of our government? That is a very radical statement. "
The Declaration of Independence says clearly "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
"Russia started this war. Not NATO nor the US, Russia invaded a sovereign country...The US citizen does not need to overthrow the government, Russian citizens need to! Putin and his actual oligarchs want this war. Russian citizens are already suffering the consequences of the stupidity of their leader"
I want to adress both these statements. Do you believe the U.S. has never invaded a country or violated their soveriegnty? I would advise you to research our invasions of Panama, Grenada, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Iraq. In case you haven't heard, we are still in Iraq as I am answering you right now, which is a violation of international law and of Iraq's sovereignty. To make things worse, we predicated both invasions of Iraq on fictitious grounds. The first Iraq invasion was sold to the public on the lie that Iraqi soldiers were ripping babies out of incubators and leaving them on the floor to die( you can see it here: https://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/15/opinion/deception-on-capitol-hill.html#:~:text=An%20article%20last%20week%20on%20The%20Times%27s%20Op-Ed,babies%20from%20incubators%20and%20left%20them%20to%20die. ). The current invasion was predicated on the lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. I don't know any serious person who denies this. Even a wanker like Trump said to Jeb Bush's face, in reference to his brother's administration, "They were lying, and they knew they were lying!" We are still in Iraq as we speak and there are thousands of American soldiers dead and currently one million Iraqi civilians slaughtered. If you want to talk about even more recent violations of sovereignty, the United States bombed Syria and Somalia the week of the Russian invasion. Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world while the U.S. is the richest and spends more on it's military then the next ten richest countries combined, so what was the threat to our country? Communism? I think you get the idea.
By your own logic, the United States fits the definition of a dictatorship and therefore suggesting it be overthrown is not unreasonable.
Speaking of dictatorships, the United States sends millions of dollars(your tax dollars) to Saudi Arabia, who doesn't hold elections, criminalizes and kills people for homosexuality, beheads people in the street, and just recently gave women the right to drive by themselves. So to say that the U.S. is "willing to help those citizens who do not want to be ruled by a dictator," is laughable on it's face.
"Overthrowing the Ukrainian President. Why do you blame the US and NATO? Viktor Yanukovych was a corrupt politician who stole money from his people and was a puppet for Putin. No mention in this article about how corrupt he was. "
I didn't mention Yankovych's corruption because it's wasn't important in the context of the U.S.' involvement in the coup that overthrew him. My whole point is that citizens should have control of their governments without foreign countries funding coups and overthrowing their leaders. Not that I believe this makes a difference, since I am an anti-interventionist, but which country improved economically and socially after we launched a coup there and backed their new leader? Did Pinochet improve Chile? Did Chamorro and Somoza improve Nicaragua? Our "Allies" in Afghanistan kept child slaves that they sexually abused. When U.S. soldiers blew the whistle, the military top brass told them to shut up. Read about it here: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html
Not that it make a difference , but how was Yanukovych Putin's puppet? And again, if a president being corrupt is good enough for it's people to ovethrow his government then why do you say it's radical when I suggest the same? Do you believe our Presidents and politicians aren't corrupt?
"However, remember who took the first shot. Who killed the first civilian and who denied diplomacy. "
This conflict didn't happen overnight. The U.S. has been escalating tension with Russia for decades. Remember the Cold War? Furthermore, the U.S. did indeed deny diplomacy.
Concerning NATO, please give me the justification for it's existence and some of it's shining achievements and how it is in the interest of the American people to keep it going after it already completed what it was intended to do: topple the soviet union. If I can verify the examples you give as to why it's great, then I will be the first one to rush to NATO's headquarters and place an apple on their desk. This conflict has to do mainly with the US' expanision of NATO up to Russia's border which Russia has said was a red line for years. If NATO were to expand to Ukraine that would mean American military bases and missiles on Russia's border. Remember the Cuban missile crisis? The United States almost started a world-ending nuclear war because Russia put missiles in Cuba which is not on the US' border. Escalating this conflict would lead Russia to do the same. To be clear(Read about the nuclear winter), no one will survive a nuclear war. Are you willing to set the world on fire because of evil Putin? Don't you think the millions of Russians who live in Russia should decide what to do with Putin instead of the US State DePARTMENT?
"The people wanted the revolution"
Which people? Some people? Most people? All people? and how do you know this?
Thanks again for reading. I hope you keep reading even if you disagree. More to come. Sorry for the long reply.
The working class love their country and are willing to fight dictators who are leading their country in the wrong direction. The US is willing to help those citizens who do not want to be ruled by a dictator. Jacobin writes articles through a socialist lens and is very unfair to use in a newsletter. If you argue that the US is aiding Neo-Nazis, well the UN is sending more military and aid to Ukraine. Would that mean they are also aiding Neo-Nazis? Ukraine has 170,000 active-duty troops, 100,000 reservists, and territorial defense forces that include at least 100,000 veterans. Look up the size of Azov Battalion - they're the size of a regiment. Meaning one to two thousand people, Azov Battalion is not running Ukraine. There are more Neo Nazis in the US with 3,000 to 6,000 Klan members.
“Many people ask, what should the United States do about this? The only viable solution would be for the working classes to overthrow the US ruling class that uses war to enrich itself, thereby preventing further loss of innocent life to the benefit of a handful of oligarchs” - Are you suggesting a revolution of our government? That is a very radical statement. Also, may I ask why? Russia started this war. Not NATO nor the US, Russia invaded a sovereign country off a ridiculous claim about the Nazis. The US citizen does not need to overthrow the government, Russian citizens need to! Putin and his actual oligarchs want this war. Russian citizens are already suffering the consequences of the stupidity of their leader. Russian soldiers don’t even want to invade Ukraine. They were told it was a military operation and that Ukrainians wanted to be liberated.
Overthrowing the Ukrainian President. Why do you blame the US and NATO? Viktor Yanukovych was a corrupt politician who stole money from his people and was a puppet for Putin. No mention in this article about how corrupt he was. Your article is about the working class, then you should support the 2014 revolution in Ukraine instead of talking about Nazis and Victoria Nuland. The people wanted the revolution because they wanted freedom, something Putin hates. Read: “ A brief history of corruption in Ukraine: the Yanukovych era” by Euroasia.org or "What did Ukraine's revolution in 2014 achieve?" by the Economist
In conclusion, blame the west if you want. However, remember who took the first shot. Who killed the first civilian and who denied diplomacy. Russia is an evil dictatorship that is targeting civilians, hospitals, and schools. Ukraine is fighting for freedom while Russia is fighting for control. Russia wanted this war, Ukraine wanted peace. NATO is supporting Ukraine. The US is supporting Ukraine. The world is supporting Ukraine. Glory to Ukraine!
First and foremost, I want to thank you for taking an interest in the article and for leaving a comment. It is always appreciated.
As for my citing a socialist website, who is it unfair to? I provide links to the articles which readers can click on and see that it's from Jacobin which doesn't hide the fact that it's a socialist magazine. I cover right-wing corporate outlets like the New York Times and the Washington Post too. To exclude information from a news outlet based on it's political stance that you or myself don't like would make my newsletter completely one-sided. That, in my opinion, would be "very unfair." Unbiased news doesn't exist. If you beleive that they do, please name those outlets that practice this kind of journalism.
"Look up the size of Azov Battalion - they're the size of a regiment. Meaning one to two thousand people, Azov Battalion is not running Ukraine."
I will be going more in depth on the Azov battalion in my upcoming articles that will center specifically on Ukraine, but I am confused as to what your stance is. Are you arguing that we didn't arm Nazis? Or that it's okay that we did because we only armed "one to two thousand" of them? I hope you meant the former instead of the latter. Furthermore, you should check your numbers. For what it's worth, Wikipedia has the Azov Battalion as having "more than 2,500" members. And, again, they are receiving funding from the United States with your tax dollars. I can assure you these aren't rinky-dink firearms. And do they have to be "running Ukraine" in order for you to find it reprehensible to fund white supremacists? Whether they are running the country is not the point. The point is that the United States funds them, and the Ukrainian government recognizes them and uses them to kill Russians in the Donbas and have done so for the last eight years. But more on that soon.
"Are you suggesting a revolution of our government? That is a very radical statement. "
The Declaration of Independence says clearly "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
"Russia started this war. Not NATO nor the US, Russia invaded a sovereign country...The US citizen does not need to overthrow the government, Russian citizens need to! Putin and his actual oligarchs want this war. Russian citizens are already suffering the consequences of the stupidity of their leader"
I want to adress both these statements. Do you believe the U.S. has never invaded a country or violated their soveriegnty? I would advise you to research our invasions of Panama, Grenada, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Iraq. In case you haven't heard, we are still in Iraq as I am answering you right now, which is a violation of international law and of Iraq's sovereignty. To make things worse, we predicated both invasions of Iraq on fictitious grounds. The first Iraq invasion was sold to the public on the lie that Iraqi soldiers were ripping babies out of incubators and leaving them on the floor to die( you can see it here: https://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/15/opinion/deception-on-capitol-hill.html#:~:text=An%20article%20last%20week%20on%20The%20Times%27s%20Op-Ed,babies%20from%20incubators%20and%20left%20them%20to%20die. ). The current invasion was predicated on the lie that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. I don't know any serious person who denies this. Even a wanker like Trump said to Jeb Bush's face, in reference to his brother's administration, "They were lying, and they knew they were lying!" We are still in Iraq as we speak and there are thousands of American soldiers dead and currently one million Iraqi civilians slaughtered. If you want to talk about even more recent violations of sovereignty, the United States bombed Syria and Somalia the week of the Russian invasion. Somalia is one of the poorest countries in the world while the U.S. is the richest and spends more on it's military then the next ten richest countries combined, so what was the threat to our country? Communism? I think you get the idea.
By your own logic, the United States fits the definition of a dictatorship and therefore suggesting it be overthrown is not unreasonable.
Speaking of dictatorships, the United States sends millions of dollars(your tax dollars) to Saudi Arabia, who doesn't hold elections, criminalizes and kills people for homosexuality, beheads people in the street, and just recently gave women the right to drive by themselves. So to say that the U.S. is "willing to help those citizens who do not want to be ruled by a dictator," is laughable on it's face.
"Overthrowing the Ukrainian President. Why do you blame the US and NATO? Viktor Yanukovych was a corrupt politician who stole money from his people and was a puppet for Putin. No mention in this article about how corrupt he was. "
I didn't mention Yankovych's corruption because it's wasn't important in the context of the U.S.' involvement in the coup that overthrew him. My whole point is that citizens should have control of their governments without foreign countries funding coups and overthrowing their leaders. Not that I believe this makes a difference, since I am an anti-interventionist, but which country improved economically and socially after we launched a coup there and backed their new leader? Did Pinochet improve Chile? Did Chamorro and Somoza improve Nicaragua? Our "Allies" in Afghanistan kept child slaves that they sexually abused. When U.S. soldiers blew the whistle, the military top brass told them to shut up. Read about it here: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html
Not that it make a difference , but how was Yanukovych Putin's puppet? And again, if a president being corrupt is good enough for it's people to ovethrow his government then why do you say it's radical when I suggest the same? Do you believe our Presidents and politicians aren't corrupt?
"However, remember who took the first shot. Who killed the first civilian and who denied diplomacy. "
This conflict didn't happen overnight. The U.S. has been escalating tension with Russia for decades. Remember the Cold War? Furthermore, the U.S. did indeed deny diplomacy.
Concerning NATO, please give me the justification for it's existence and some of it's shining achievements and how it is in the interest of the American people to keep it going after it already completed what it was intended to do: topple the soviet union. If I can verify the examples you give as to why it's great, then I will be the first one to rush to NATO's headquarters and place an apple on their desk. This conflict has to do mainly with the US' expanision of NATO up to Russia's border which Russia has said was a red line for years. If NATO were to expand to Ukraine that would mean American military bases and missiles on Russia's border. Remember the Cuban missile crisis? The United States almost started a world-ending nuclear war because Russia put missiles in Cuba which is not on the US' border. Escalating this conflict would lead Russia to do the same. To be clear(Read about the nuclear winter), no one will survive a nuclear war. Are you willing to set the world on fire because of evil Putin? Don't you think the millions of Russians who live in Russia should decide what to do with Putin instead of the US State DePARTMENT?
"The people wanted the revolution"
Which people? Some people? Most people? All people? and how do you know this?
Thanks again for reading. I hope you keep reading even if you disagree. More to come. Sorry for the long reply.