Russia attacking Ukraine 2/16?

[Horn6721]

China offered to mediate a cease fire. Also appeared to criticize Russia for Russia's disregard for civilian safety.
Wonder if it was said with a straight face

 

[Musburger1]

Here’s the thing- you don’t own it! If you would just admit that you think liberal democracy and free markets are a flawed system, that you prefer centrally planned authoritarianism and strong man rule, at least we could have honest conversations. Instead, you drop snippets critical of the US from RT, hoping that they will lead the community to your way of thinking. It’s a dishonest way of arguing and it’s never going to work.

The system is only as good as its safeguards (namely that corruption doesn't erode the checks and balances). If you think that we still have pristine, free markets now you are delusional.

 

[OUBubba]

A guy who rationalizes and carries water for a murderous dictator who's orders are killing innocent men, women, and children is lecturing me and questioning my Christianity because I pointed out that this woman is hot. That's gold.

That's gold jerry! Gold!

 

[Musburger1]

After seeing that Fauci implemented basically a shell game to fund biolabs in China of all places, why would it be out of the question that he is involved in Ukraine?

 

[OUBubba]

Doesn't matter what I think. What matters is that Russia feels they were forced to take action and they did. Most likely neither side will see it play out like they expect.

So broadband in St. Petersberg is still up. Cool.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Keep slandering me. Keep lying about me. Keep repping the world system. It's all a joke I guess.

The issue as I see it is that you assume positive intent for demonstrated bad actors (see: Putin in Chechnya, Georgia) but apply an entirely different lens to US actions. The US is not innocent but in comparison to Putin's actions we should be considered choir boys when looking at our mutual resumes.

 

[AC]

I don’t understand Musberger’s position. He keeps it too shrouded! TaylorTRoom could be right. IDK. We need the Durham Investigation to indict more of these US criminals……the list is long.

 

[Musburger1]

So broadband in St. Petersberg is still up. Cool.

(A little graveyard humor)

 

[Musburger1]

I don’t understand Musberger’s position. He keeps it too shrouded! TaylorTRoom could be right. IDK. We need the Durham Investigation to indict more of these US criminals……the list is long.

I think a lot of skeptical people of the government such as myself would like to see transparency and justice happen. The Durham Investigation, the Epstein ring and the scope of it, Fauci and the pharmaceuticals, and so on. How much serious investigative coverage and release of information is devoted to getting to the bottom of such matters?

 

[Mr. Deez]

Keep slandering me. Keep lying about me. Keep repping the world system. It's all a joke I guess.

You're calling people's religious beliefs into question, but I'm the slanderer. Whatever, dude. Enjoy the Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal books.

 

[Musburger1]

I don’t understand Musberger’s position. He keeps it too shrouded! TaylorTRoom could be right. IDK. We need the Durham Investigation to indict more of these US criminals……the list is long.

If you are asking what we should do from this point, I'm at a loss. I think both the West and Russia has gone beyond the point of no return. There has been a complete break. If either side capitulates, they lose credibility. Yet if they don't, the idea that there will be a winner and a loser isn't certain. There could be two losers.

 

[Monahorns]

The issue as I see it is that you assume positive intent for demonstrated bad actors (see: Putin in Chechnya, Georgia) but apply an entirely different lens to US actions. The US is not innocent but in comparison to Putin's actions we should be considered choir boys when looking at our mutual resumes.

"assume positive intent" This is a lie. I know you like to jump on Deez's bandwagon when he starts fighting with the Right. But that's what it is. Putin started an unjust war. But you are right. I don't think the Pentagon and the intelligence community, and the neoconservative establishment are choir boys compared to anybody. That is a purely Leftist fairy tale. But this is complex. The Constitution is great. Our government today gives us more freedoms than others in the world. That is all great. But you and others ignore that because it doesn't fit in your Leftist, neoconservative fair tale about people who don't agree with them. Deez chooses to do the Leftist calculation on these issues, which is not "people in good faith disagree" but "people who disagree with me are morally monsters". Label and smear people who disagree with you on the Right. But provide cover for people who disagree with you from the Left.

 

[Monahorns]

You're calling people's religious beliefs into question, but I'm the slanderer. Whatever, dude. Enjoy the Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal books.

15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.16 You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?17 So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.18 A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.20 So then, you will know them by their fruits.

Religious beliefs aren't something that shouldn't be discussed. It's actually how Christians become more like Christ. We talk about the fruit we see coming out of each others' lives.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Religious beliefs aren't something that shouldn't be discussed. It's actually how Christians become more like Christ. We talk about the fruit we see coming out of each others' lives.

Religious beliefs and the fruit are fine to discuss. That isn't the problem. The problem is you. You haven't earned the right or gained the knowledge to lecture me about it. Who the hell are you? You don't know a friggin' thing about me. You don't know what I do or what fruits come out of me. You don't know what kind of husband or father I am. You don't know what I do for others or what I do to spread and promote God's Word. So you can spare me your self-righteousness and dole it out to people you actually know.

 

[AC]

Tr

I think a lot of skeptical people of the government such as myself would like to see transparency and justice happen. The Durham Investigation, the Epstein ring and the scope of it, Fauci and the pharmaceuticals, and so on. How much serious investigative coverage and release of information is devoted to getting to the bottom of such matters?

Truth Social
Goes live March 30th.

 

[bystander]

Religious beliefs and the fruit are fine to discuss. That isn't the problem. The problem is you. You haven't earned the right or gained the knowledge to lecture me about it. Who the hell are you? You don't know a friggin' thing about me. You don't know what I do or what fruits come out of me. You don't know what kind of husband or father I am. You don't know what I do for others or what I do to spread and promote God's Word. So you can spare me your self-righteousness and dole it out to people you actually know.

 

[bystander]

Religious beliefs and the fruit are fine to discuss. That isn't the problem. The problem is you. You haven't earned the right or gained the knowledge to lecture me about it. Who the hell are you? You don't know a friggin' thing about me. You don't know what I do or what fruits come out of me. You don't know what kind of husband or father I am. You don't know what I do for others or what I do to spread and promote God's Word. So you can spare me your self-righteousness and dole it out to people you actually know.

This illustrates opinion versus action. We all have opinions. We wouldn't necessarily assert them if we were in power. We howl at the moon. We are frustrated. We don't have all the information. It's free speech and a "think tank" of a forum. I would bet that those who consistently disagree with me would probably buy me a beer if we were in person because I'm such a sweetheart of a guy! And it's pretty well true. It's kind of like this:

"If you don't like my opinion then don't ask or don't read what I say."

But it's a forum and we have limitations when it comes to mitigating blunt talk and reconciling it with who we really are.

 

[Monahorns]

Religious beliefs and the fruit are fine to discuss. That isn't the problem. The problem is you. You haven't earned the right or gained the knowledge to lecture me about it. Who the hell are you? You don't know a friggin' thing about me. You don't know what I do or what fruits come out of me. You don't know what kind of husband or father I am. You don't know what I do for others or what I do to spread and promote God's Word. So you can spare me your self-righteousness and dole it out to people you actually know.

I know how you comment on this board. So I'll comment on it. Deal with it.

 

[Seattle Husker]

"assume positive intent" This is a lie. I know you like to jump on Deez's bandwagon when he starts fighting with the Right. But that's what it is. Putin started an unjust war. But you are right. I don't think the Pentagon and the intelligence community, and the neoconservative establishment are choir boys compared to anybody. That is a purely Leftist fairy tale. But this is complex. The Constitution is great. Our government today gives us more freedoms than others in the world. That is all great. But you and others ignore that because it doesn't fit in your Leftist, neoconservative fair tale about people who don't agree with them. Deez chooses to do the Leftist calculation on these issues, which is not "people in good faith disagree" but "people who disagree with me are morally monsters". Label and smear people who disagree with you on the Right. But provide cover for people who disagree with you from the Left.

Just my observation but you consistently say take Putin at his word then react accordingly (eg. move missiles out of Eastern Europe, give guarantees not to bring in new members to NATO, etc.) yet with US foreign policy you assume we aren't honest actors. It's as if Putin doesn't have a 20+yr track record for us to reference. What did Putin do to deserve a pass on considering his past action when prognosticating his true intentions? You clearly reference our own US history in meddling internationally. It's a naive approach to complicated foreign policy issues at best.

To be sure, both the US and Russia are looking out for their own interests. In Ukraine and Eastern Europe, the US strategy of pulling these countries closer to the West has involved far less bloodshed. If Ukraine's desire to stand up and fight their invaders is any indication, the US has won the ideological war. Russia is simply spilling blood to hold onto whatever influence they had. Putin isn't even advocating for Communism but rather some skewed version of history that all these lands he's conquering belong to Russia. He's inventing excuses as he goes (e.g. "denazification").

 

[OUBubba]

I know how you comment on this board. So I'll comment on it. Deal with it.

Total dick move. It's OK. I'm Methodist.

 

[nashhorn]

Bio labs? Not in the know enough to condone or condemn but if that destruction is Putin’s cause why would he not undertake strategic strikes? Certainly not a full scale invasion. That is unforgivable.

 

[OUBubba]

Bio labs? Not in the know enough to condone or condemn but if that destruction is Putin’s cause why would he not undertake strategic strikes? Certainly not a full scale invasion. That is unforgivable.

You can't listen to Q guy about anything real. That's like listening to a Democrat in your world.

 

[Seattle Husker]

You can't listen to Q guy about anything real. That's like listening to a Democrat in your world.

The best part is Q guy questioning Internet Research Agency guy unaware they sit on the same side of the table.

 

[bystander]

You can't listen to Q guy about anything real. That's like listening to a Democrat in your world.

I like Democrats...

 

[Monahorns]

Just my observation but you consistently say take Putin at his word then react accordingly (eg. move missiles out of Eastern Europe, give guarantees not to bring in new members to NATO, etc.) yet with US foreign policy you assume we aren't honest actors. It's as if Putin doesn't have a 20+yr track record for us to reference. What did Putin do to deserve a pass on considering his past action when prognosticating his true intentions? You clearly reference our own US history in meddling internationally. It's a naive approach to complicated foreign policy issues at best.

Give me some specifics of his past actions in the past 20 years that you think are emblematic. I think some of his worst are the political assassinations.

I also hold the US actors to their words too. The neoconservatives have written out what they want to accomplish in the world. I don't give anyone a pass. I read their words and judge them and their actions. I also consider the geopolitical context. What has it been since 1991? It has commonly been described as a unipolar moment. How does that further explain what is happening?

I have been consistent not naive. That is the neoliberal smear campaign coming out of you.

To be sure, both the US and Russia are looking out for their own interests. In Ukraine and Eastern Europe, the US strategy of pulling these countries closer to the West has involved far less bloodshed. If Ukraine's desire to stand up and fight their invaders is any indication, the US has won the ideological war. Russia is simply spilling blood to hold onto whatever influence they had. Putin isn't even advocating for Communism but rather some skewed version of history that all these lands he's conquering belong to Russia. He's inventing excuses as he goes (e.g. "denazification").

You say the situation is complicated and then you treat like a simple binary. Can't all the things you said be true, and at the same time it be a wise course of action to de-escalate? That is all I have ever advocated. In one sense there is a binary choice ultimately. Either US and Russia and all the other actors de-escalate and negotiate peace. Or everyone continues to escalate into a nuclear war. I just want to avoid that.

 

[huisache]

I am confused. What is the difference between a “Leftist neo-conservative” and a neo-liberal?

some of the paranoid impersonators seem to use the terms interchangeably

so please straighten out this shyster red conservative states right Democrat/Shivercrat

 

[AC]

Bio labs? Not in the know enough to condone or condemn but if that destruction is Putin’s cause why would he not undertake strategic strikes? Certainly not a full scale invasion. That is unforgivable.

Strategic Strikes is what Putin is doing, not a full scale invasion.

 

[AC]

 

[Seattle Husker]

Give me some specifics of his past actions in the past 20 years that you think are emblematic. I think some of his worst are the political assassinations.

In none of the leadup to the Ukraine war did you recognize the history below when assessing Putin's intentions.

Military incursions:
- 2008 Georgia is the best corollary to what is happening in Ukraine. The only difference there is that Putin pulled back after solidifying the independence of the separatist areas and the subsequent genocide of Georgians in those areas. 6 years after the war ~25k Georgians were still displaced.

- 1999 Chechnya if you want an ready example of Putin's brutality. He raised Groznya to the ground killing 10's of thousands. Looking forward, this is what's in store for Kyiv and Karkhiv.

Other Russian bad actor evidence:
- Russian hacking: DNC/Clinton campaign in 2016 and Solar Winds hack in 2020.

I also hold the US actors to their words too. The neoconservatives have written out what they want to accomplish in the world. I don't give anyone a pass. I read their words and judge them and their actions. I also consider the geopolitical context. What has it been since 1991? It has commonly been described as a unipolar moment. How does that further explain what is happening?

I pointed the finger at the Project for a New American Century for more than a decade as an example of the NeoCons putting on paper exactly what their aims were and why we were in Iraq for the 2nd world war. Hint: It was much more than "Sadam was a bad hombre" but rather a stated desire to project American power abroad.

So, I'm extrapolating that because the NeoCons were dumb enough to state their intentions and Putin lies about his own you're taking them the both at their word? That's how you get to Neocons "bad" and Putin is simply looking out for his nations interest?

I have been consistent not naive. That is the neoliberal smear campaign coming out of you.

Not a smear campaign but an observation. Think of it like holding up a mirror for you to assist you recognizing a blind spot. Maybe you have read too much Ron Paul?

You say the situation is complicated and then you treat like a simple binary. Can't all the things you said be true, and at the same time it be a wise course of action to de-escalate? That is all I have ever advocated. In one sense there is a binary choice ultimately. Either US and Russia and all the other actors de-escalate and negotiate peace. Or everyone continues to escalate into a nuclear war. I just want to avoid that.

Clearly the issue is too complicated to outlay on a message thread. I'm summarizing for ease over conversation. The point is that your de-escalation ideas only go one direction. The West capitulates to Putin's demands. Demands that he makes up out of whole cloth to suit the moment. I point to the naivety in believing what Putin says. Answer me this, if Putin was truly an honest broker would he rule the Russian media with an iron fist? Controlling the media is rule #1 in a fictitious Idiot's Guide to Autocratic Rule.

 

[AC]