- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SO, what exactly is the difference between Neville Chamberlain's leftist pacifist...
Posted on 2/22/23 at 12:58 pm to MichiganTiger
Posted on 2/22/23 at 12:58 pm to MichiganTiger
Why aren't you fighting for KEEEV right now? THey are short of troops and take foreign volunteers.
Don't attempt to convince me of the cause being right. I'm calling you out for a dire lack of action on your part for such a righteous cause. Delta is ready when you are.
Don't attempt to convince me of the cause being right. I'm calling you out for a dire lack of action on your part for such a righteous cause. Delta is ready when you are.
0
Posted on 2/22/23 at 12:58 pm to Rip Torn
quote:Classic example of "penny wise and pound foolish." He bought himself the "pounds" of a half-decade war that cost millions of lives, to save a few "pennies" by appeasing Hitler at a time when it would have been quick and economical to rein him in.
Neville Chamberlain wasn’t left wing or a pacifist. He was a realist and the reality was Great Britain and Western Europe were broke after WW1. They simply couldn’t afford another World war unlike our current leaders who just print money endlessly
Good move, Neville.
This post was edited on 2/22/23 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:03 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
when it would have been quick and economical to rein him in.
I'm sure that would have ended well for Chamberlain. He was in a lose/lose situation.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:16 pm to Rip Torn
quote:
Neville Chamberlain wasn’t left wing or a pacifist. He was a realist and the reality was Great Britain and Western Europe were broke after WW1. They simply couldn’t afford another World war unlike our current leaders who just print money endlessly
I wish I had half as good PR as Neville Chamberlain's post-modern reframers. The effort to rewrite his failures into either not failures or successes rivals only Kale in its propagandizing effect.
This post was edited on 2/22/23 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:18 pm to therick711
People that rationalize Putins invasion
Are appeasers like Chamberlain
Limp wrists that Putin feasts on
Are appeasers like Chamberlain
Limp wrists that Putin feasts on
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:19 pm to Tmcgin
When are you going to the front lines?
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:21 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Sometimes those are the facts for a true leader. Chamberlain failed on that measure.quote:I'm sure that would have ended well for Chamberlain. He was in a lose/lose situation.
when it would have been quick and economical to rein him in.
For all his many failings, at least Biden was not a Chamberlain on this point. Dem or GOP, I would like to think that any POTUS would have made the decision to support Ukraine, but I am not certain.
Ukraine could have nipped this in the bud a decade ago. They needed weapons, and Obama sent them old blankets.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:22 pm to Tmcgin
quote:
People that rationalize Putins invasion
Are appeasers like Chamberlain
Limp wrists that Putin feasts on
Good lord that's the dumbest shite I've ever seen. People who don't care about this war on the internet are the same as the spineless idiot who as the leader of a world power trumpeted cutting a side deal with a fascist dictator as a move for peace? Pick up a book some time.
This post was edited on 2/22/23 at 1:23 pm
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:23 pm to Tmcgin
quote:
Limp wrists that Putin feasts on
Your pussy arse couldn't fight your way out of a wet paper bag.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:28 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Sometimes those are the facts for a true leader. Chamberlain failed on that measure.
Based on reactionary history. His early involvement could have ended in disaster.
It's so easy to argue his failure 70 years later but Britain survived and even thrived.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 1:39 pm to MichiganTiger
You’re not only equating Neville Chamberlain with conservatives, you’re equating Putin with Hitler? Have I got that right?
I’ll sit back and see how this works out for you, but I’ll just say this: Putin has been Prime Minister or President of Russia since 1999 some time. In that 24 years, how many countries has Russia annihilated and subjugated? How many citizens of a certain sect have been led off to concentration camps and slaughtered like animals? How much aggression has Russia shown its neighbors in comparison to the military advantage they have over their neighbors, which could mean the complete destruction of those neighbors if Putin so chose?
I’ll sit back and see how this works out for you, but I’ll just say this: Putin has been Prime Minister or President of Russia since 1999 some time. In that 24 years, how many countries has Russia annihilated and subjugated? How many citizens of a certain sect have been led off to concentration camps and slaughtered like animals? How much aggression has Russia shown its neighbors in comparison to the military advantage they have over their neighbors, which could mean the complete destruction of those neighbors if Putin so chose?
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:05 pm to MichiganTiger
quote:
...placation of an evil dictator hell bent on overthrowing democratic countries and our right-winged politician commentary that is placating Putin's desire to overthrow a democratic country? Seems like many right-winger's are looking to join the leftist Chamberlain on the bench of fool-hardy isolationism in the face of evil. Wonder what Churchill would think of the tea-party wing of the GOP that appears to be gaining in isolationistic popularity on this board and with the mainstream GOP leadership as well.
The problem with your statement, other than being disingenuous, is context. I have yet to meet a single conservative who is an isolationist. There might be a few, but I haven't met them. What you define as being isolationist, or "America First," is simply the realization that maybe, just maybe our priorities have been seriously misguided for decades.
And while you're most likely trolling, keep in mind, historically conservatives, supported the following MAJOR foreign policy decisions:
1) Building up our military during the Cold War, while liberals cried that we would start WWIII.
2) Gulf War 1
3) Our response to 9/11 in Afghanistan, and our commitment for 20 years
4) The invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent occupation.
After all of that, what do we actually have to show for it? Other than winning the Cold War, very little. In fact, one could argue that the evolution of conservatives moving to a more "less foreign intervention" belief is actually grounded in conservative principle.
Yet, principles aside, how could one not take a look back, and look at the trillions of dollars spent, the loss of American life, and the utter incompetence of our government of full display, and NOT start to question the intelligence of getting involved in yet another foreign country that has nuclear weapons?
I mean, it's like we couldn't wait 20 minutes for the insanity of our Afghanistan withdrawal to leave the news cycle before you started hearing those same people warning us of the impending danger of the Russian mobilization on the Ukranian border.
Yet, here we are, again, with the same, tired mantra of trust us, it will be different this time.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:13 pm to MichiganTiger
where do these neocon retards get the idea that the US was isolationist in the 1900s? we were not isolationist. in fact we fought a bunch of conflicts during that time period. the Philippines was a direct territory of the US-we had troops and everything there-until 1946 when we granted them full independence.
US was not a closed off country. stop with the lies. we were neutral, non interventionist. not isolationists. you absolute brainlet.
US was not a closed off country. stop with the lies. we were neutral, non interventionist. not isolationists. you absolute brainlet.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:20 pm to troyt37
quote:It is an analogy, not an assertion of identity.
You’re not only equating Neville Chamberlain with conservatives, you’re equating Putin with Hitler? Have I got that right?
quote:Partial list: Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgia, Crimea, Donbas, Syria, Ukraine.
how many countries has Russia annihilated and subjugated?
quote:Not all expansionist autocrats are also genocidal, but Putin opponents DO have a pattern of falling from the upper-story windows of tall buildings.
How many citizens of a certain sect have been led off to concentration camps and slaughtered like animals?
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:22 pm to Goonie02
quote:
where do these neocon retards get the idea that the US was isolationist in the 1900s?
They read it somewhere so it has to be true
Been fighting these retards for years. Non intervention =\= isolation.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:36 pm to MichiganTiger
Ukraine isn't a democrat country. It is a thugocracy, at best.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:37 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
It is an analogy, not an assertion of identity.
Asking “what is the difference between” calls for a comparison or contrast between two things. I simply pointed out that the analogy was unbelievably shitty, and myopic.
quote:
Partial list: Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgia, Crimea, Donbas, Syria, Ukraine.
So arguably all the countries that WERE the Soviet Union not that long ago. I figure if California decided to come clean and declare themselves a communist country, we’d probably kick their arse too.
quote:
Not all expansionist autocrats are also genocidal, but Putin opponents DO have a pattern of falling from the upper-story windows of tall buildings.
You let me know when 20 million or so do it in a period of about 6 years, okay?
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:39 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
They read it somewhere so it has to be true
Been fighting these retards for years. Non intervention =\= isolation.
The US just didn't want to get involved in Europe. we were fairly active in South America and Asia. everyone knew the treaty of Versailles was going to cause another war, it was just a matter of when.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:41 pm to MichiganTiger
You want more dead people. Just like most liberals.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 2:46 pm to AggieHank86
Hey dumbass, Ukraine has been fighting for 9 years. Where the hell have you been?
They have been killing their own people who don't want to live under KEEEV since 2014 when we orchestrated a coup.
They have been killing their own people who don't want to live under KEEEV since 2014 when we orchestrated a coup.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News