3 ms·

> Not that different than what the US is doing in the Ukraine right now. A little bit different, in that the Ukraine is a country that is being invaded by a mu

> Not that different than what the US is doing in the Ukraine right now. A little bit different, in that the Ukraine is a country that is being invaded by a much larger neighbour. What's your stance on France being invaded by Germany in World War 2?

refurb 4y ago
What's your stance on on Vietnam? The Korean War? Or our involvement with Kuwait and the subsequent Iraq War? How did that go for us? Are we going to "come to the rescue" of every country that has its territory threatened? No, we obviously pick out battles, not well, but we pick them. My point is that an invasion happening 10,000 miles away from the US isn't automatically our business. It's gotten us mired in horrible wars and actually made a lot of situations worse not better. And the hilarious part is that most commenters here are commenting on an article talking about how terrible the CIA is and somehow throwing all that out the window when it comes to Ukraine.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  Korea - America picked a fight and had to get Britain and Australia in to save them. Vietnam - America picked a fight and to get Britain and Australia in to save them, again. Kuwait - America picked a fight and had to get Britain and then pretty much the whole rest of NATO in to save them, yet again. Afghanistan, Iraq both times, same old same old. We keep saving your bacon, and you find an even bigger mess to make within a few years.
  - ehvatum 4y ago
    > Kuwait - America picked a fight and had to get Britain and then pretty much the whole rest of NATO in to save them, yet again. Those British Abrams tanks, French paveway laser guided bombs, German Apache attack helicopters, and NATO ground troops. Without them, Desert Storm would have been more of a mild Desert Breeze.
- rendall 4y ago
  > And the hilarious part is that most commenters here are commenting on an article talking about how terrible the CIA is and somehow throwing all that out the window when it comes to Ukraine. This you? >>> Not that different than what the US is doing in Ukraine right now. Ukraine has nothing to do with the CIA, but you brought it up, so here we are. We're not throwing anything out.
  - refurb 4y ago
    You don't think the CIA is involved in the Ukraine? It's been involved in every single military incursion before. And regardless, does it matter? The broader issue is getting involved. Whether it's the CIA or the DOD, it's meddling.
    - rendall 4y ago
      If it's meddling to send arms to resist a genocide then we should "meddle" even more. What is with you? Honestly, what is going on in your life that you defend this genocidal army?
      - Gordonjcp 4y ago
        I think we tried all that about 80 years ago and it actually turned out to be a good idea.

refurb 4y ago

What's your stance on on Vietnam? The Korean War? Or our involvement with Kuwait and the subsequent Iraq War? How did that go for us? Are we going to "come to the rescue" of every country that has its territory threatened? No, we obviously pick out battles, not well, but we pick them. My point is that an invasion happening 10,000 miles away from the US isn't automatically our business. It's gotten us mired in horrible wars and actually made a lot of situations worse not better. And the hilarious part is that most commenters here are commenting on an article talking about how terrible the CIA is and somehow throwing all that out the window when it comes to Ukraine.

Gordonjcp 4y ago
Korea - America picked a fight and had to get Britain and Australia in to save them. Vietnam - America picked a fight and to get Britain and Australia in to save them, again. Kuwait - America picked a fight and had to get Britain and then pretty much the whole rest of NATO in to save them, yet again. Afghanistan, Iraq both times, same old same old. We keep saving your bacon, and you find an even bigger mess to make within a few years.
- ehvatum 4y ago
  > Kuwait - America picked a fight and had to get Britain and then pretty much the whole rest of NATO in to save them, yet again. Those British Abrams tanks, French paveway laser guided bombs, German Apache attack helicopters, and NATO ground troops. Without them, Desert Storm would have been more of a mild Desert Breeze.
rendall 4y ago
> And the hilarious part is that most commenters here are commenting on an article talking about how terrible the CIA is and somehow throwing all that out the window when it comes to Ukraine. This you? >>> Not that different than what the US is doing in Ukraine right now. Ukraine has nothing to do with the CIA, but you brought it up, so here we are. We're not throwing anything out.
- refurb 4y ago
  You don't think the CIA is involved in the Ukraine? It's been involved in every single military incursion before. And regardless, does it matter? The broader issue is getting involved. Whether it's the CIA or the DOD, it's meddling.
  - rendall 4y ago
    If it's meddling to send arms to resist a genocide then we should "meddle" even more. What is with you? Honestly, what is going on in your life that you defend this genocidal army?
    - Gordonjcp 4y ago
      I think we tried all that about 80 years ago and it actually turned out to be a good idea.