Cardi B goes off on Biden!

[faysalaaa 5,336]

19 minutes ago, FfFfFfFF said:

I agree with the point that the war is explicitely endangering Ukrainian lives and constant unconditional military aid is in part the reasons why Ukrainians keep losing their lives in an attritional war with no chance of winning (they are being sold the hope that Ukraine will expand back to its Soviet-drawn borders, if they don't settle for a ceasefire). But NATO expansion also did some good when it comes to other Easter and Central European countries (granted, before Ukraine broke camel's back – but here is a reminder that not all of NATO's actions are to be demonized).

Yes I do agree NATO does good, and morally speaking, Ukraine should have the right to choose NATO if they want. But we also have to deal with the reality that NATO being on the borders of Russia could threaten another World War.

[FfFfFfFF 58,113]

4 minutes ago, faysalaaa1 said:

Yes I do agree NATO does good, and morally speaking, Ukraine should have the right to choose NATO if they want. But we also have to deal with the reality that NATO being on the borders of Russia could threaten another World War.

Another impediment when it comes to Ukraine is issue of approval levels of NATO from its various ethnic minorities (Ukraine, unlike most other Eastern and Central European countries which were accepted into the organization, is incredibly intertwined with Russia geographically and socially and in many parts of Ukraine, anti-NATO Russians form the majority - or formed, because most of them live in the territories which joined Russia. Crimea for instance never wanted wanted to be part of NATO/ or ''the Western world'', so when Kyiv and Washington made it seem that is going to happen, Russia helped Crimea secede from Ukraine).

But something that needs to be understood is that Russia and the US are equally imperialistic - the fact that so many countries in the region joined NATO is to seek protection from ''the enemy of their enemy'', ie: the US. If not for Ukraine and Belarus- for different reasons, NATO should still a viable option for the rest of the countries in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus that are up in the air and which Russia has territorial ambitions on. Them joining NATO (for real, not the Ukraine way) would prevent new wars that could affect them: Georgia, for instance, could join without its de facto separatist territories and Moldova could be allowed to join by merging with NATO member Romania.

[Dennis 8,391]

24 minutes ago, faysalaaa1 said:

But we also have to deal with the reality that NATO being on the borders of Russia could threaten another World War.

Except that Russia has now literally either threatened the territorial integrity of, invaded or pretty much vassalized every european country that hasn't joined NATO: Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus. If anything, it's like the only wars that happened are wars between Russia and Non-Nato countries in the region.

I don't blame countries for wanting to join NATO. And it shouldn't be up for others to decide. If a majority of Ukrainians support that choice, then they should be able to seek whatever protection they want. The idea that Russia can impose its will on its neighbor is not acceptable. They're free to either try to diplomatically attract nations to join their side, or impose sanctions/embargo if they're unhappy (similar to what U.S did with Cuba when it aligned with USSR). But annexing the territory is not acceptable. If they chose to impose sanctions on Ukraine for their choice or cut off gas supply as leverage, nobody would be invading Russia for it. They're a sovereign nation and they can use whatever leverage they want to achieve their interests. But they're not entitled to annex other people's land.

[Not The Real Gaga 7,582]

1 hour ago, Dennis said:

In my opinion, it's not enough. Celebrities should do more. They say "tax the rich" knowing that it's not gonna happen, so it's cheap talk.

First of all the materialistic mentality of wasting millions/billions of dollars on different version of luxury assets has got to stop, when there are people starving.

They are celebrities. They can influence the culture. Enough with a private jet travel, enough with the car collections. Nobody is saying they should starve themselves or not have fun. But you don't need to take a private jet every time you travel. You don't need 10 sports cars sitting in your garage just for you to switch things up whenever you're bored.

That excessive lifestyle is what's causing social inequality.

We can wait for the government to fix, which it won't, or we can start a cultural change and shame these wasteful spenders.

I'm no where near the level of wealth of these people. And yet sometimes I can't help but feel the urge to donate to college students on tiktok live and twitch knowing how difficult it was for me to manage college and personal finances. And it gives me more joy than wasting money on things I don't really need. Yes you're not obligated to help others. But if you're waiting for the government, it's not gonna happen. Money is power. These celebrities have a lot of it. They can change millions of lives if they really want to.

 

 

Cultural change ain't gonna happen. Governments changing systems is more realistic, but it will take many, many years to see the benefits.

Celebrities can't change lives. Please don't give them more power than they actually have.

 

[PunkTheFunk 125,703]

7 hours ago, FATCAT said:

 Someone needs to tell the good sis that the president doesn’t decide the City or State budgets for New York 

Yes, but cities and states still rely on funding from the federal government 

[Gagaism 12,471]

2 hours ago, Not The Real Gaga said:

 

 

Cultural change ain't gonna happen. Governments changing systems is more realistic, but it will take many, many years to see the benefits.

Celebrities can't change lives. Please don't give them more power than they actually have.

 

Well, actually they can help. The thing about the given power here is ego which is another thing. People can easily help one another without thinking that the action has nothing to do with giving them power to controlling or do whatever they want to just because of their help. 

[srslyepic 40]

So annoying... her options will be Biden or Trump. That's just what it is. We are too close to the next election to have any other candidate rise and gain enough traction to be a real contender.

It's idiotic to think the choice is Biden or <some perfect candidate>. If you don't vote, that's a vote for Trump because the MAGA/GOP base is very loyal and will turn out no matter what.

Voice your dislikes about actions/policies/age/etc... but at the end of the day, refusing to vote and getting Trump elected is not going to make ANY of those better. Trump is farther away from her on every single thing she's yelling about.

[Concertaholic 6,578]

9 hours ago, faysalaaa1 said:

Shes upset that hes sending billions of dollars to fund foreign wars while people in America are struggling. New York was just one example she used to show how Americans are struggling. Biden just sent 100 Billion dollars to aid two wars.

If Russia is allowed to take over Ukraine then they may feel empowered to go into NATO territory so funding the defensive forces of Ukraine are of upmost importance. At that point America would possibly cease to exist since we would pulled into a nuclear WW3 with Russia. People need not be so short sighted 

[FfFfFfFF 58,113]

28 minutes ago, Concertaholic said:

If Russia is allowed to take over Ukraine then they may feel empowered to go into NATO territory so funding the defensive forces of Ukraine are of upmost importance. At that point America would possibly cease to exist since we would pulled into a nuclear WW3 with Russia. People need not be so short sighted 

This sounded plausible in 2020, but we're in 2023 now (soon 2024). It's now time we ditch the false idea that either Ukraine receives NATO's entire stockpile of weapons and money or the Russian Army invades Berlin. 

Propaganda makes it seem Russia is utterly incompetent and capable of shallowing up Europe at the same time – neither are true, though the messaging is directed at different segments of the public to increase support for the war, and it's efficient but when they mix they make up for some awkard narratives.

[TheDreamking 52]

When people do not understand how anything works. Poor Sis. 
 

[StarstruckIllusion 53,564]

Honestly a great vid of political analysts backing Cardi up. 

Rich people saying this stuff is a good thing, actually

[faysalaaa 5,336]

8 hours ago, FfFfFfFF said:

Another impediment when it comes to Ukraine is issue of approval levels of NATO from its various ethnic minorities (Ukraine, unlike most other Eastern and Central European countries which were accepted into the organization, is incredibly intertwined with Russia geographically and socially and in many parts of Ukraine, anti-NATO Russians form the majority - or formed, because most of them live in the territories which joined Russia. Crimea for instance never wanted wanted to be part of NATO/ or ''the Western world'', so when Kyiv and Washington made it seem that is going to happen, Russia helped Crimea secede from Ukraine).

But something that needs to be understood is that Russia and the US are equally imperialistic - the fact that so many countries in the region joined NATO is to seek protection from ''the enemy of their enemy'', ie: the US. If not for Ukraine and Belarus- for different reasons, NATO should still a viable option for the rest of the countries in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus that are up in the air and which Russia has territorial ambitions on. Them joining NATO (for real, not the Ukraine way) would prevent new wars that could affect them: Georgia, for instance, could join without its de facto separatist territories and Moldova could be allowed to join by merging with NATO member Romania.

Yes I agree with everything you said..

I just dont like when people say America is just trying to help and save lives, when their main goal is imperialism, even if it comes at the cost of the Ukrainian people. This is imperialist world powers fighting for expansion, its not a humanitarian aid! There is no good side to this, America is and Russia are both doing the same thing.

The best argument for what America is doing is to say its a necessary evil we have to do to not allow Russia to take over the world. But be honest about it, dont say its a humanitarian crisis to save Ukranians.

[faysalaaa 5,336]

5 hours ago, Concertaholic said:

If Russia is allowed to take over Ukraine then they may feel empowered to go into NATO territory so funding the defensive forces of Ukraine are of upmost importance. At that point America would possibly cease to exist since we would pulled into a nuclear WW3 with Russia. People need not be so short sighted 

Do you know why Russia wanted to take over Ukraine though? NATO is knocking at Russian borders and giving them an excuse to annex Ukraine. And it looks like Ukraine will eventually be annexed to Russia, so whats the point of this? Why not avoid the war and not provoke Russian expansion?

[faysalaaa 5,336]

9 hours ago, Dennis said:

Except that Russia has now literally either threatened the territorial integrity of, invaded or pretty much vassalized every european country that hasn't joined NATO: Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus. If anything, it's like the only wars that happened are wars between Russia and Non-Nato countries in the region.

I don't blame countries for wanting to join NATO. And it shouldn't be up for others to decide. If a majority of Ukrainians support that choice, then they should be able to seek whatever protection they want. The idea that Russia can impose its will on its neighbor is not acceptable. They're free to either try to diplomatically attract nations to join their side, or impose sanctions/embargo if they're unhappy (similar to what U.S did with Cuba when it aligned with USSR). But annexing the territory is not acceptable. If they chose to impose sanctions on Ukraine for their choice or cut off gas supply as leverage, nobody would be invading Russia for it. They're a sovereign nation and they can use whatever leverage they want to achieve their interests. But they're not entitled to annex other people's land.

Ofcourse what Russia is doing is wrong, but when it comes to the biggest imperial world powers, its hard to bring morality into this. We have to think about things practically, specially if WW3 is under threat.

[Emvee 8,827]

I don’t give a **** about anything happening in Ukraine after this whole thing with Israel and Gaza. Russia is a **** government so I don’t care if they exhaust their military there.  The rest of Europe is already in NATO or surrounded by NATO countries. You have to be joking to suggest Putin would risk invading Poland or Finland now. 

It really exposed how shamelessly hypocritical the US is and that the Ukraine war is in fact a proxy war for geopolitical purposes. We are expected to put our head downs and work while the elites play their war games as they always have.