A Republican that sounds more democratic than the Democrats?

“Max Blumenthal asks libertarian Rep. Thomas Massie why he joined only two other members of Congress in voting against a resolution declaring that “the United States stands fervently with the Ukrainian people,” and urging military support to Kiev in its fight against Russia. Massie also articulated his opposition to military escalation, new sanctions and the Biden administration’s ban on Russian oil imports.”

He doesn’t want our tax dollars spent in the Ukraine.

1 Like

Libertarians aren’t Republicans… We actually believe in limited government and fiscal responsibility.

The resolution expands the conflict into Belarus and is open ended military support to this new war… That’s why he voted no.

1 Like

Yeah, so?

Belarus is an aggressor as well, is it not?

Russian client state.

Again… Spoken like a true war hawk.

We ought not encourage, or fund, any expansion of this war.


It’s not an “expansion.”

Belarus was involved from the beginning.

Bad argument.

Belarus can let Russia invade Ukraine from their borders if they want to… They chose their side against Ukraine. We, the USA, don’t need to expand any conflict into Belarus… Ukraine can go in there if they are able to as, clearly, Belarus has declared war on UKRAINE.

We can, and should, continue to give weapons to the Ukraine… If they use those against Belarus… Fine.

You’ve said it yourself… We don’t have a defense alliance with Ukraine… How do you justify any resolution that enables expanding the conflict to Belarus other than you want war with Russia.

1 Like

You better plan on staying awhile. It never ends quickly. Good luck! :upside_down_face:

Edit: speaking of Satellite thread of course

1 Like

I’ve said my piece… I’m out… Like we should stay OUT of Belarus… :grin:


Good job! Viruses can occur by staying in this area.

Belarus assisted in the invasion of Ukraine from the beginning.

So again, it’s not an expansion.

As such, Belarus is just as damnable as Russia is in this for aiding and abetting the aggressors, and should be counteracted and sanctioned just as strongly.

As we say in criminal law: they are a PARTY to the offense.


Wrong… Sanctioning Belarus is one thing… Expanding the conflict into Belarus is another.

1 Like

There is NO such expansion in the resolution.

Here’s the text:


It simply states that Belarus assisted Russia in its invasion of Russia, which is a fact, and that Belarus’ dictator, just like Putin, should be held accountable for it.

It IN NO WAY suggests that we fight either one, much less expand the war there.

Nice try, but epic fail.

You’ve been debunked.

Acknowledge that you (and this Congressman) are wrong on this and move on please.


Interesting how someone laughs after getting debunked, eh?

Show me where in the text it says we should go fight either Russia or Belarus, much less expand the war there.

You can’t, can you.

All right then.

Did you read the full resolution…?

What does holding a dictator accountable mean… :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Now that you’ve been debunked move along and admit you’re a war hawk.

1 Like

Quote: What does holding a dictator accountable mean

Answer: sanctioning his country and holding him accountable under international law.

Same for Putin.

Holding him accountable doesn’t necessarily mean using military force against him, if that’s what you were dumb enough to think (and it sounds like you were). I’m guess that only you and two congresspeople misread it in such a way.

If that’s how you interpreted it, then reading comprehension was obviously not one of your stronger subjects.

NOWHERE does it say any such things.

Again, you’ve been debunked. NOWHERE in the text of the document does it suggest that we expand the war into Belarus, or even use military force of any kind against either Russia or Belarus. You may be under the delusion that it does, but that’s simply false. So stop asserting falsehoods and misrepresenting the facts.

Move along now.

And now that you’ve been debunked, admit that you lied about saying that the text called for an expansion into Belarus. It doesn’t. It simply says we’ll hold Belarus’ dictator accountable, which does NOT necessarily mean going to war against him.

I certainly don’t advocate such a thing, and I’m pretty sure the people that wrote the resolution didn’t either. So please don’t intentionally make any misrepresentations to that effect.

Yeah, wouldn’t that be an absolute disaster? If we stepped into Belarus Russia will attack our troops, I have no doubt about it! The beginning of WW3!

1 Like

Finally, a level head among so many foolishness! The US should never get into a war against Russia! Never!