Let’s have a war!

[ousdahl]

Other than Rota, who was, according to him the only one who knew about this beforehand, I don't see why. Seems like a pretty obscure person.

Welp, that was quick. Rota resigned.

yea, that seems appropriate.

Trudeau at least apologized, too, I think.

but, you know who hasn't publicly offered one peep of remorse about fist-pumping a literal SS nazi since it happened?

Zelensky.





(mjl, forgive me if you still have me on ignore, I don't mean to go illy on you, still. But, considering how the whole Ukrainian nazi thing only continues to get more and more blatant, I quote you in this instance on the chance maybe you are coming around to sharing the same concern as me...well, me and they/them)

[ousdahl]

You dodged the question bro.

It’s about awareness. And even if you’re determined to possess none, and since I asked first so I dunno if I should hand to answer yours until you answer mine, humor me.

are you willing to finally consider that maybe - just maybe - the US’s own warmongering might be part of the problem too?

Yes or no.

You continue to be…not in the same area code of the point. In a question about the possible parameters of a peace deal, the US’s own warmongering (whatever that means) is irrelevant.

In your opinion, should Ukraine be expected to give up one inch of its land (including Crimea)?

I have to think, based on your unwillingness to answer, that you believe the answer is something OTHER than an unqualified “no”. And to me, that’s (1) ludicrous, and (2) pro-Putin.

Jesus Christ.

AGAIN, fuck Putin and his war of needledickery.

AGAIN, let me express how incredibly upsetting it is for you to continue to call me pro-Putin.

AGAIN, I was only waiting to answer your question, until after you answered my question first - you know, since I asked first, and you've repeatedly dodged my question by asking what you apparently think will be some gotcha question of your own. in other words, YOU'RE the one displaying an unwillingness to answer!

or, am I supposed to assume that you calling me question "nonsense" and "irrelevant" is a reply of, "no," you don't think U.S. warmongering is any part of the problem with the war...that the U.S. has been lavishly furnishing with weapons...since before it was even a war?

but, in the interest of trying to be the bigger person here - let me just go ahead and answer your question anyway:

no.

I don't think Ukraine should be expected to give one inch to Russia.

happy?


now, regarding a peace deal and U.S. warmongering - I think one potential bargaining chip to get Putin to knock it off and leave may be for the U.S. to come out and say, "what if we agree to stop giving guns to the nazis on your doorstep?" Heck, there's even evidence to suggest if we quit giving guns to nazis sooner Putin would have never even bothered with the invasion!

but considering you're going full "how could more guns possibly be part of the problem here, more guns is actually the solution!" on a level not seen since, like, maybe lobster in the mass shooting thread? maybe there really is just no hope.

[ousdahl]

it’s been 170 pages of pretty much the same sort of distraction

it’s odd, to say the least

I suspect it has to do with using Twitter/X as a primary source of news. Since Elon adopts Putin’s talking points, and creates an ecosystem that, most charitably, is not-unfriendly to amplification of Putin’s talking points…what you get on Twitter/X is heavy on Putin talking points.

bro I've been very selective about what sources I share here.

I haven't posted a kooky tweet since February 2022, when, in the wake of the longest war in U.S. history in Afghanistan, which prompted what seemed like an all-time low in U.S. war machine credibility, I just couldn't help but think the U.S. war machine rhetoric that popped up not 6 months later along the lines of "stand with Ukraine no matter how long it takes! this is a literal battle of good vs. evil!" just seemed a little...fishy?

(LOL I just made a fishy pun to jfish! I digress...)

All my hot takes have been supported by, and info have been, what are otherwise accepted as respectable western sources - New York Times, WaPo, U.S. government websites, NATO, Zelensky's personal social media pages.

Or, if you'd like to try and prove me wrong, please do. Go ahead and find some post in this thread since the Ukraine war broke out in which I cite some kooky social media hack. And, just as I've been willing to do it on the hoops bored before, I'll willingly eat that crauw once again.

[KUTradition]

just because you don’t post them doesn’t mean you aren’t reading them, and that they aren’t influencing what you do post

just sayin’

[ousdahl]

Oh, absolutely.

The point is, even if a read a kooky tweet, I still assume it’s kooky, until I look it up and like NYT says “yea that really happened,” or like Zelensky’s like “yea that’s me with a soldier in my personal detail dressed like a Nazi”

Forgive me if I continue to be skeptical of the good guy bad guy comic book narratives, and only growing wearier of the “no matter how long it takes” rhetoric.

It all just reeks of “there’s WMDs in Iraq and we’ll be greeted as liberators!”

[KUTradition]

yes, we all know

[ousdahl]

Are you still all in?

Almost 2 years down, and still no end in sight, do you still think the only solution to this war is more guns more bombs more war?

And, do you still think Ukrainian Nazis are still just Russian propaganda?

[Overlander]

Are you still all in?

Almost 2 years down, and still no end in sight, do you still think the only solution to this war is more guns more bombs more war?

And, do you still think Ukrainian Nazis are still just Russian propaganda?

If only Ukraine was the only country with "Nazis".

[ousdahl]

If only!

But, as far as I know, Ukraine is the only country with Nazis 1. normalizing the open display of Nazi ideology throughout military ranks, up to and including among the president’s own personal detail, and 2. receiving weapons paid for by you and me.

[KUTradition]

Are you still all in?

Almost 2 years down, and still no end in sight, do you still think the only solution to this war is more guns more bombs more war?

And, do you still think Ukrainian Nazis are still just Russian propaganda?

are you still going to misrepresent my views?

jfc

not once did i ever say Ukrainian nazis were JUST russian propaganda

it is absolutely true that they were used by putin as some sort of justification, even when the population that MIGHT be considered nazi/neo-nazi remains relatively small

labeling me a war monger is disingenuous. i don’t like, nor want war. but, certain actions REQUIRE certain consequences…it’s as simple as that. the putins of the world can’t be allowed to invade and annex their neighbors, and that’s exactly what is happening, and has been in progress since ~2008

when are YOU going to learn from history?

[ousdahl]

sorry dude, didn't mean to misrepresent anyone's views, especially not yours.

while we can only hope the nazi population in Ukraine remains relatively small, there's plenty to suggest it may be bigger. They appear to be the tail that wags the dog, at least.

while I don't want to label you a war monger nor be disingenuous, please understand that statements like "certain actions REQUIRE certain consequences" seem to at least imply...if not something that sounds hawkish, then I don't know what? but again, forgive me if I'm reading that wrong, and feel free to elaborate.

and if it's not hawkish, then is it safe to assume it's more dovish, perhaps diplomatic? Can we pleeeease explore that potential?

(oh, and if me labeling you a war monger feels disingenuous, just imagine how I feel after all the times you and others have labeled me pro-Putin! Again and again! Even after I've condemned Putin, again and again!)

and, yes, history. There's all sorts of historical angles we could dig up to add all sorts of context and understanding. I've tried, too. I really have.

so, what would you like me to learn from history? I think I can infer a bit, but at the risk of misrepresentation, perhaps it's best you just explain.

[KUTradition]

we’ve been round this circle before

all you say is more diplomacy

there are, quite literally, lunatics in this world for which diplomacy doesn’t work. there always have been, there always will be…people who commit crimes against humanity (or authorize as much)

these are people that can’t be reasoned with and who don’t value the rule of law

i’m really struggling with how difficult it seems for you to grasp this concept

[ousdahl]

there are, quite literally, lunatics in this world for which diplomacy doesn’t work.

you mean like these guys?

The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn't sign that.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_218172.htm

[KUTradition]

you’re broken

[MICHHAWK]

it would be cheaper and faster for us to just blow those two $#!thole$ off the map.

[jfish26]

You dodged the question bro.

It’s about awareness. And even if you’re determined to possess none, and since I asked first so I dunno if I should hand to answer yours until you answer mine, humor me.

are you willing to finally consider that maybe - just maybe - the US’s own warmongering might be part of the problem too?

Yes or no.

You continue to be…not in the same area code of the point. In a question about the possible parameters of a peace deal, the US’s own warmongering (whatever that means) is irrelevant.

In your opinion, should Ukraine be expected to give up one inch of its land (including Crimea)?

I have to think, based on your unwillingness to answer, that you believe the answer is something OTHER than an unqualified “no”. And to me, that’s (1) ludicrous, and (2) pro-Putin.

now, regarding a peace deal and U.S. warmongering - I think one potential bargaining chip to get Putin to knock it off and leave may be for the U.S. to come out and say, "what if we agree to stop giving guns to the nazis on your doorstep?" Heck, there's even evidence to suggest if we quit giving guns to nazis sooner Putin would have never even bothered with the invasion!

This nonsense illustrates my point. When you START from a position of adopting Putin’s talking points, there’s no peace deal that can make sense.

You agree that Ukraine should not be required to give up one inch of its land as a predicate to, you know, getting Russia to stop shooting at Ukraine.

Why in the world would Ukraine agree to stop short of adequately preparing for the NEXT invasion? Which would be…the third since 2014?

Ukraine doesn’t owe Russia shit.

What happened here is that Russia BADLY miscalculated Ukraine’s willingness and ability - with the west’s help - to defend itself. But a “negotiated” peace that stops short of Ukraine being able to defend itself next time, is not peace at all.

[Sparko]

Fish. Thread.

[KUTradition]

anyone actually interested should look at the full details of russia’s MULTIPLE treaty drafts, with both NATO and just the US alone

[TDub]

that might require reading more than 140 characters at a time and most likely no emphatic emojis.

You're asking a lot.

[ousdahl]

You continue to be…not in the same area code of the point. In a question about the possible parameters of a peace deal, the US’s own warmongering (whatever that means) is irrelevant.

In your opinion, should Ukraine be expected to give up one inch of its land (including Crimea)?

I have to think, based on your unwillingness to answer, that you believe the answer is something OTHER than an unqualified “no”. And to me, that’s (1) ludicrous, and (2) pro-Putin.

now, regarding a peace deal and U.S. warmongering - I think one potential bargaining chip to get Putin to knock it off and leave may be for the U.S. to come out and say, "what if we agree to stop giving guns to the nazis on your doorstep?" Heck, there's even evidence to suggest if we quit giving guns to nazis sooner Putin would have never even bothered with the invasion!

This nonsense illustrates my point. When you START from a position of adopting Putin’s talking points, there’s no peace deal that can make sense.

You agree that Ukraine should not be required to give up one inch of its land as a predicate to, you know, getting Russia to stop shooting at Ukraine.

Why in the world would Ukraine agree to stop short of adequately preparing for the NEXT invasion? Which would be…the third since 2014?

Ukraine doesn’t owe Russia shit.

What happened here is that Russia BADLY miscalculated Ukraine’s willingness and ability - with the west’s help - to defend itself. But a “negotiated” peace that stops short of Ukraine being able to defend itself next time, is not peace at all.

So lemme just try to agree with you here.

I’d would be so pleased if Russia just take the L and goes home pronto, and Putin is tried and convicted of war crimes and spends the rest of his miserable life rotting in a cell.

So, then what?

Do you and I keep furnishing Ukraine with weapons? I’m guessing so, since you mention prepping in case of yet another future invasion.

And, as for the war-torn Ukraine - is nato also gonna help rebuild all that, just like we did with, say, Afghanistan?