News
Use this community to share news articles.
I tried not to make rules for this community but y'all wylin'. I'll keep it quick and to the point:
-
Mildly biased headlines and articles are fine, but please do not share opinion pieces or strongly slanted articles here.
-
Reporting content that does not break those rules prohibited.
-
Baiting and drama farming is prohibited. If you're not sure whether or not you're in this category, ask yourself if what you're about to post or comment adds to the discussion of the topic at hand, or if you are trying to get a rise out of someone, make bad-faith accusations against one's character, etc. There's some leeway here because I have a sense of humor though, so don't let this rule scare you.
-
Endorsing or supporting extrajudicial, nonexecutive or nonwar violence is prohibited.
-
Using slurs is expressly prohibited.
-
Using the Poisoning The Well fallacy to attack sources shared in a post is presently not allowed (this rule may change in the future, and isolated instances will not subject you to a permanent ban)
view the rest of the comments
You make good points here. Is there any particular reason you think option 2 is better than option 3? The way I see it, with option 3 the war is over more quickly, Russia is (most likely) defeated and we can finally move on to other orders of business.
I like option 2 better than option 3 because I don't think America should go back to "their is an international issue send troops" mentality. We are known for being to trigger happy with that. While I love the idea of sending troops and putting putin in his place where does that end? Where do we draw the line on when sending troops is acceptable or not? I couldn't say what is right or wrong for sure or if my thoughts are even the right ones to have.
I do know their is a time and a place to send troops I just don't know when that may be in this instance. They are not an "ally" but someone is doing something bad to them. So send equipment/funds is my middle ground.
Very fair take! Respect.