Opinion of people who support both Israel and Russia

[Horus]

I find this to be the most noxious and submissive combination of FP views, but more than a few folks, like Vivek and Trump fall into this category. What do you think of this fairly common combo on the right?

[Goldwater]

Bad, like all Russia supporting traitors.

[Vice President Christian Man]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

[Horus]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

[Vice President Christian Man]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

I guess I worded it wrong, but generally speaking people who have a bad position (or positions) don't make them HP's by default even if their position is one.

[BigZuck08]

Depends on the person

[TheReckoning]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

Has Vivek/Trump supported actively giving aid to Russia? What makes you think they’re pro-Russia as opposed to being neutral?

[Greedo punched first]

Paul Gosar? Dana Rohrabacher?

[Horus]

Paul Gosar? Dana Rohrabacher?

Hawley, Gaetz, Jordan... Probably close to half of the GOP caucus

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Vivek does not fall into this category. He's not an ally of Israel.

Either way, this is probably by far the smallest quadrant. While they may not be quite as morally noxious as Russia/Palestine, they tend to be either ruthless realpolitik types with no regard for civilian lives or old Jewish people with horror stories of Babi Yar.

[John Dule]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

Has Vivek/Trump supported actively giving aid to Russia? What makes you think they’re pro-Russia as opposed to being neutral?

Neutrality in the face of moral crisis is not neutrality.

[Horus]

Vivek does not fall into this category. He's not an ally of Israel.

Either way, this is probably by far the smallest quadrant. While they may not be quite as morally noxious as Russia/Palestine, they tend to be either ruthless realpolitik types with no regard for civilian lives or old Jewish people with horror stories of Babi Yar.

Vivek does not want to fund Israel, but he's against all foreign aid. He has said that he morally agrees with them and wishes they'd go further.

So he's an ally, just not an ATM.

[Pericles]

It's more intellectually honest than splitting the difference, and having a 'might makes right' view of the world is understandable despite being wrong.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Vivek does not fall into this category. He's not an ally of Israel.

Either way, this is probably by far the smallest quadrant. While they may not be quite as morally noxious as Russia/Palestine, they tend to be either ruthless realpolitik types with no regard for civilian lives or old Jewish people with horror stories of Babi Yar.

The thing is being pro Russia isn’t being in favor of Realpoltick from an American perspective as Russia becoming stronger isn’t in our interests at all . Russia being able to do regime change in Ukraine would make them significantly stronger and make it harder for us to remain the sole super power .

I would say most of the people who are Pro Russia/Israel are probably older Indians overall

[OSR stands with Israel]

It's more intellectually honest than splitting the difference, and having a 'might makes right' view of the world is understandable despite being wrong.

If Ukraine was actually being run by Nazis who wanted to Genocide Russians and routinely commit terrorist attacks in Russia then this analogy would make sense but they are not so this analogy makes no sense at all .

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Vivek does not fall into this category. He's not an ally of Israel.

Either way, this is probably by far the smallest quadrant. While they may not be quite as morally noxious as Russia/Palestine, they tend to be either ruthless realpolitik types with no regard for civilian lives or old Jewish people with horror stories of Babi Yar.

The thing is being pro Russia isn’t being in favor of Realpoltick from an American perspective as Russia becoming stronger isn’t in our interests at all . Russia being able to do regime change in Ukraine would make them significantly stronger and make it harder for us to remain the sole super power .

I would say most of the people who are Pro Russia/Israel are probably older Indians overall

I've heard quite a few people say "We need to maintain good relations with Russia to take on China", which I see as fundamentally flawed logic.

[Pericles]

It's more intellectually honest than splitting the difference, and having a 'might makes right' view of the world is understandable despite being wrong.

If Ukraine was actually being run by Nazis who wanted to Genocide Russians and routinely commit terrorist attacks in Russia then this analogy would make sense but they are not so this analogy makes no sense at all .

The West Bank was never run by Hamas and they are under a totally unfair system of occupation that violates so many of their rights. Maybe things could have gone differently but Israel's policy right now is to rule over and exploit the Palestinian people without giving them either their own state or rights within Israel. That is the same basic goal that Russia has in Ukraine.

[OSR stands with Israel]

It's more intellectually honest than splitting the difference, and having a 'might makes right' view of the world is understandable despite being wrong.

If Ukraine was actually being run by Nazis who wanted to Genocide Russians and routinely commit terrorist attacks in Russia then this analogy would make sense but they are not so this analogy makes no sense at all .

The West Bank was never run by Hamas and they are under a totally unfair system of occupation that violates so many of their rights. Maybe things could have gone differently but Israel's policy right now is to rule over and exploit the Palestinian people without giving them either their own state or rights within Israel. That is the same basic goal that Russia has in Ukraine.

It’s still not a comparison at all because Ukraine didn’t attack Russia with the help of its Eastern European neighbors multiple times , break many attempts at peace etc .
 

[OSR stands with Israel]

Vivek does not fall into this category. He's not an ally of Israel.

Either way, this is probably by far the smallest quadrant. While they may not be quite as morally noxious as Russia/Palestine, they tend to be either ruthless realpolitik types with no regard for civilian lives or old Jewish people with horror stories of Babi Yar.

The thing is being pro Russia isn’t being in favor of Realpoltick from an American perspective as Russia becoming stronger isn’t in our interests at all . Russia being able to do regime change in Ukraine would make them significantly stronger and make it harder for us to remain the sole super power .

I would say most of the people who are Pro Russia/Israel are probably older Indians overall

I've heard quite a few people say "We need to maintain good relations with Russia to take on China", which I see as fundamentally flawed logic.

It is extremely flawed logic because all this does is trade one authoritarian potential superpower with another as letting Russia take over Ukraine As a way to take on China would literally make Russia a superpower . Like this would make sense if the deal was we’d let Russia have their own way in line Syria or something but letting them take Ukraine is not in our interests at all .

[TheReckoning]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

Has Vivek/Trump supported actively giving aid to Russia? What makes you think they’re pro-Russia as opposed to being neutral?

Neutrality in the face of moral crisis is not neutrality.

By this logic, was Abraham Lincoln being pro-Russia when he didn’t do anything to oppose their conquest of Turkic tribes in Central Asia?

Neutrality is absolutely a real thing.

[John Dule]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

Has Vivek/Trump supported actively giving aid to Russia? What makes you think they’re pro-Russia as opposed to being neutral?

Neutrality in the face of moral crisis is not neutrality.

By this logic, was Abraham Lincoln being pro-Russia when he didn’t do anything to oppose their conquest of Turkic tribes in Central Asia?

Neutrality is absolutely a real thing.

What exactly do you think Abe Lincoln could have feasibly done about such a thing at that time, stupid?

[TheReckoning]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

Has Vivek/Trump supported actively giving aid to Russia? What makes you think they’re pro-Russia as opposed to being neutral?

Neutrality in the face of moral crisis is not neutrality.

By this logic, was Abraham Lincoln being pro-Russia when he didn’t do anything to oppose their conquest of Turkic tribes in Central Asia?

Neutrality is absolutely a real thing.

What exactly do you think Abe Lincoln could have feasibly done about such a thing at that time, stupid?

Do you think the US government never expressed anything about foreign affairs at that time? Lol.

[wnwnwn]

A non negible number of western conservatives.

[John Dule]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

Has Vivek/Trump supported actively giving aid to Russia? What makes you think they’re pro-Russia as opposed to being neutral?

Neutrality in the face of moral crisis is not neutrality.

By this logic, was Abraham Lincoln being pro-Russia when he didn’t do anything to oppose their conquest of Turkic tribes in Central Asia?

Neutrality is absolutely a real thing.

What exactly do you think Abe Lincoln could have feasibly done about such a thing at that time, stupid?

Do you think the US government never expressed anything about foreign affairs at that time? Lol.

Do you think the US government had the resources, ability, or manpower during the Civil War to remedy an invasion taking place on the other side of the planet with access only to 1860s technology, before the advent of the modern US Navy? If you're going to play idiotic gotcha games, you need to at least come up with a moderately relevant parallel to reference.

[TheReckoning]

Supporting Russia isn't a good thing, but I suppose it depends on why people chose to take that position in the first place.

I don't understand what you mean here. I cannot think of any good reason to support Russia in their imperialist war of conquest. Supporting Russia either means you genuinely support imperialism, or it isn't enough of a deal breaker because "the west is always bad."

Has Vivek/Trump supported actively giving aid to Russia? What makes you think they’re pro-Russia as opposed to being neutral?

Neutrality in the face of moral crisis is not neutrality.

By this logic, was Abraham Lincoln being pro-Russia when he didn’t do anything to oppose their conquest of Turkic tribes in Central Asia?

Neutrality is absolutely a real thing.

What exactly do you think Abe Lincoln could have feasibly done about such a thing at that time, stupid?

Do you think the US government never expressed anything about foreign affairs at that time? Lol.

Do you think the US government had the resources, ability, or manpower during the Civil War to remedy an invasion taking place on the other side of the planet with access only to 1860s technology, before the advent of the modern US Navy? If you're going to play idiotic gotcha games, you need to at least come up with a moderately relevant parallel to reference.

Again, do you really think the US government only began to express opinions or views on issues external of the USA after the advent of the airplane?

Lincoln never said a peep about the conquest of Central Asia because he was…. drumroll, please… neutral on it.