3. Pretty ironic considering your own plan is to sacrifice all the young reproductive age/fighting age conservatives left in EU / USA in foreign wars. This is exactly how we got to the point where EU and USA are communist countries in the first place.
To chime in with Marduk here, not only are you putting words in my mouth, you are
completely out of touch with reality.
First off, there is no current plan to send US forces in to fight the war, and unless things go nuclear, I wouldn't support such plans anyways.
And if we
did get involved for some insane reason?
Do you know how many people the USA lost fighting in the Vietnam war, which lasted
twenty years?
About 58,000, less than a year's worth lost to traffic accidents.
Do you know how many people the USA lost fighting in Korea, which lasted 4 years?
Roughly 36,500, or about two thirds as many as in the Vietnam war.
Do you know what casualty rates were like in Iraq and Afghanistan while the US was trying to nation-build in the ME?
You were more likely to be shot in
Chicago than as a US soldier in those countries.
The US has an unparalleled ability to fight wars while taking minimal casualties, because we place an
immense value on human life over war material or the land being fought over. This is something that's baked into our culture, and
neither side of the culture war is willing to accept large scale losses, so our army is built around avoiding them. There are some flat-out traitors on the left who think American soldiers dying is good, but they don't have any meaningful control over the military.
The idea that the US is in danger of having its younger generation depopulated by getting involved in a shooting war is completely absurd, and supposing such just shows how out of touch you are with reality.
