trumpty plumpty

[pdub]

Russia didn't want neighboring countries to act independently and join NATO.
They were intimidated and wanted to show they weren't fucking around and invaded Ukraine.

Countries joining NATO, I guess depending on your thoughts on the Western world, could be maybe a 3 out of 10 on the scale of doing something wrong - if you really amped up the Western world/NATO is up to no good.

Invading another country with military force TO TAKE OVER THEIR LAND AND PEOPLE is at worst a 9 out of 10 on the scale of doing something wrong.

I'd put countries as wanting to join NATO a 1 out of 10 in terms of doing something wrong, because, you know, countries should be able to generally make those level of decisions, but I admit some bias. I'd put Russia invading Ukraine as a 10 out of 10 but also admit bias.

[pdub]

If the United States' fucking lunatic tyrannical egomaniac of a leader really acts on aggressively trying to take over Greenland then it will be a 10 out of 10 in the scale of doing something wrong and I'd hope we get kicked out of any alliances and Europe teams up to stop us.

[jfish26]

Holy fuck.
Can someone shut down the power on this ride?

I have been criticized (fairly!) for continuing to put quarters into this rusty, K-Mart-parking-lot-ass merry-go-round.

But I think what it reveals about how and why misinformation works is super, super important.

No matter what he or anyone says, Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) did not win in a landslide. He (and with him, authoritarianism) won on the margins.

And what we are seeing here, every day, is that very well-meaning people can get absolutely twisted in knots, lost in a deliberately-staged thicket of half-truths and shiny objects, to the point where they cannot (for example) distinguish between aggressor and target.

Did Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) win because Ous voted for Cornel West? Of course not.

But did Trump (and with him, authoritarianism) win because of deliberately-staged thickets, just like this one, ensnaring and destabilizing just enough well-meaning people in just the right places?

I think so, yes.

[pdub]

I hope - and I think - that all of the Canada/Greenland/Panama/Mexico stuff is a feint.

To distract from what’s gonna be a whole hell of a lot of promises that are not just broken, but ignored altogether. As if they were never made.

Exactly this.

[KUTradition]

speaking of…now trump will end the Ukraine war in 100 days

because they want it done right, for lasting peace

[jfish26]

speaking of…now trump will end the Ukraine war in 100 days

because they want it done right, for lasting peace

How does it slot in with Infrastructure Week, and also healthcare overhaul?

[pdub]

speaking of…now trump will end the Ukraine war in 100 days

because they want it done right, for lasting peace

Before taking office or 100 days, same diff.

[KUTradition]

speaking of…now trump will end the Ukraine war in 100 days

because they want it done right, for lasting peace

How does it slot in with Infrastructure Week, and also healthcare overhaul?

concepts…

[BiggDick]

As for your last paragraph - could you please distinguish what we have been doing in Ukraine from “actual imperialist behavior?”

Happily.

In Ukraine, we have been aiding a sovereign nation in defending against an expansionist aggressor.

And yet, the one who is accused of my insight and knowledge behind these subjects being 1” deep is me.

In using force - whether economic, military or otherwise - to (say) take Greenland as our own, we would be the expansionist aggressor.

Was gonna not bother, except I want to quote this for posterity.

If the U.S. does leverage some force - whether economic, military or otherwise - against Greenland, I expect you to speak up in defense of Greenland at a volume and intensity comparable to what you’ve afforded Ukraine, including sustained condemnation of the United States and its unprovoked, unilateral aggression.

(But I kinda get the feeling you won’t…just like you haven’t for oh so very many other examples)

This is only complicated if you are intensely interested in making it so.

Who knew global politics could be so simple?

[Sparko]

If I worried about the price of eggs, I would definitely vote in someone who would mismanage an avian flu pandemic. Because strategy. Shiny object.

[BiggDick]

Holy fuck.
Can someone shut down the power on this ride?

I have been criticized (fairly!) for continuing to put quarters into this rusty, K-Mart-parking-lot-ass merry-go-round.

But I think what it reveals about how and why misinformation works is super, super important.

No matter what he or anyone says, Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) did not win in a landslide. He (and with him, authoritarianism) won on the margins.

And what we are seeing here, every day, is that very well-meaning people can get absolutely twisted in knots, lost in a deliberately-staged thicket of half-truths and shiny objects, to the point where they cannot (for example) distinguish between aggressor and target.

Did Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) win because Ous voted for Cornel West? Of course not.

But did Trump (and with him, authoritarianism) win because of deliberately-staged thickets, just like this one, ensnaring and destabilizing just enough well-meaning people in just the right places?

I think so, yes.

Without biting into every single Whopper offered on this BK Value Menu…

Allow me to just once again mention how funny it is to hear an argument that one should be compelled to vote for a candidate other than the one they support or agree with the most, when the argument is actually offered against authoritarianism!

[twocoach]

As for your last paragraph - could you please distinguish what we have been doing in Ukraine from “actual imperialist behavior?”

Happily.

In Ukraine, we have been aiding a sovereign nation in defending against an expansionist aggressor.

And yet, the one who is accused of my insight and knowledge behind these subjects being 1” deep is me.

In using force - whether economic, military or otherwise - to (say) take Greenland as our own, we would be the expansionist aggressor.

Was gonna not bother, except I want to quote this for posterity.

If the U.S. does leverage some force - whether economic, military or otherwise - against Greenland, I expect you to speak up in defense of Greenland at a volume and intensity comparable to what you’ve afforded Ukraine, including sustained condemnation of the United States and its unprovoked, unilateral aggression.

(But I kinda get the feeling you won’t…just like you haven’t for oh so very many other examples)

This is only complicated if you are intensely interested in making it so.

Who knew global politics could be so simple?

Any attempt to "take over" Greenland will be met with aggressive complaints.

Any attempts to take over Greenland that included US forces raping and murdering women and children civilians as the Russian forces did in Ukraine will be met with the same level of complaints that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has had.

That said, this is a giant nothing burger. Trump isn't going to do anything of the sort. This will just magically stopped getting talked about down the line.

[twocoach]

speaking of…now trump will end the Ukraine war in 100 days

because they want it done right, for lasting peace

+ 2 weeks

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

I had a brief work meeting this morning. Someone asked when the Super Bowl is.
I said February 9th. They asked if we get the day off of work on Monday the 10th. Huh?!?!?
Gutter being Gutter I responded, President Trump said he is going to declare the day after the Super Bowl as a National holiday - so yes - we will all have the day off.
Every single person in the meeting believed me.
Nevermind we have a process in this country in which Congress is supposed to have/get "a say" in it.
Not too sure why I shared that. Sorry!

[jfish26]

As for your last paragraph - could you please distinguish what we have been doing in Ukraine from “actual imperialist behavior?”

In using force - whether economic, military or otherwise - to (say) take Greenland as our own, we would be the expansionist aggressor.

Was gonna not bother, except I want to quote this for posterity.

If the U.S. does leverage some force - whether economic, military or otherwise - against Greenland, I expect you to speak up in defense of Greenland at a volume and intensity comparable to what you’ve afforded Ukraine, including sustained condemnation of the United States and its unprovoked, unilateral aggression.

(But I kinda get the feeling you won’t…just like you haven’t for oh so very many other examples)

Sigh. We have been here before. SHOW YOUR WORK, or kindly stop putting words in my mouth.

[jfish26]

Holy fuck.
Can someone shut down the power on this ride?

I have been criticized (fairly!) for continuing to put quarters into this rusty, K-Mart-parking-lot-ass merry-go-round.

But I think what it reveals about how and why misinformation works is super, super important.

No matter what he or anyone says, Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) did not win in a landslide. He (and with him, authoritarianism) won on the margins.

And what we are seeing here, every day, is that very well-meaning people can get absolutely twisted in knots, lost in a deliberately-staged thicket of half-truths and shiny objects, to the point where they cannot (for example) distinguish between aggressor and target.

Did Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) win because Ous voted for Cornel West? Of course not.

But did Trump (and with him, authoritarianism) win because of deliberately-staged thickets, just like this one, ensnaring and destabilizing just enough well-meaning people in just the right places?

I think so, yes.

Without biting into every single Whopper offered on this BK Value Menu…

Allow me to just once again mention how funny it is to hear an argument that one should be compelled to vote for a candidate other than the one they support or agree with the most, when the argument is actually offered against authoritarianism!

That…is not what I said. But keep tilting, those windmills won’t knock themselves down.

[Shirley]

As for your last paragraph - could you please distinguish what we have been doing in Ukraine from “actual imperialist behavior?”

Happily.

In Ukraine, we have been aiding a sovereign nation in defending against an expansionist aggressor.

And yet, the one who is accused of my insight and knowledge behind these subjects being 1” deep is me.

In using force - whether economic, military or otherwise - to (say) take Greenland as our own, we would be the expansionist aggressor.

Was gonna not bother, except I want to quote this for posterity.

If the U.S. does leverage some force - whether economic, military or otherwise - against Greenland, I expect you to speak up in defense of Greenland at a volume and intensity comparable to what you’ve afforded Ukraine, including sustained condemnation of the United States and its unprovoked, unilateral aggression.

(But I kinda get the feeling you won’t…just like you haven’t for oh so very many other examples)

This is only complicated if you are intensely interested in making it so.

Who knew global politics could be so simple?

Full disclosure: I originally described the depth of your knowledge as a unit equalling 1/1,000 of a meter, but felt that was too harsh.

Proof I don't get credit for anything.*



*For instance, all the diseases I prevented by vaccinating thousands of children. Where's the "thanks"?

[BiggDick]

Thanks.

Also, heads up: I don’t think it’s appropriate to direct your “depth of knowledge” putdowns at perhaps the only poster who is willing to consider a geopolitical conflict might potentially be a tad more complicated than we realize.

[BiggDick]

I have been criticized (fairly!) for continuing to put quarters into this rusty, K-Mart-parking-lot-ass merry-go-round.

But I think what it reveals about how and why misinformation works is super, super important.

No matter what he or anyone says, Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) did not win in a landslide. He (and with him, authoritarianism) won on the margins.

And what we are seeing here, every day, is that very well-meaning people can get absolutely twisted in knots, lost in a deliberately-staged thicket of half-truths and shiny objects, to the point where they cannot (for example) distinguish between aggressor and target.

Did Trump (and, with him, authoritarianism) win because Ous voted for Cornel West? Of course not.

But did Trump (and with him, authoritarianism) win because of deliberately-staged thickets, just like this one, ensnaring and destabilizing just enough well-meaning people in just the right places?

I think so, yes.

Without biting into every single Whopper offered on this BK Value Menu…

Allow me to just once again mention how funny it is to hear an argument that one should be compelled to vote for a candidate other than the one they support or agree with the most, when the argument is actually offered against authoritarianism!

That…is not what I said. But keep tilting, those windmills won’t knock themselves down.

Not what you said verbatim, sure.

But as far as general message, I dunno…in the wake of the recent election, I seem to recall you going for third-party-voter blaming and “look at how much worse certain particular issues could get now that you didn’t wanna vote for the party I like” sorts of sentiments.

[BiggDick]

In using force - whether economic, military or otherwise - to (say) take Greenland as our own, we would be the expansionist aggressor.

Was gonna not bother, except I want to quote this for posterity.

If the U.S. does leverage some force - whether economic, military or otherwise - against Greenland, I expect you to speak up in defense of Greenland at a volume and intensity comparable to what you’ve afforded Ukraine, including sustained condemnation of the United States and its unprovoked, unilateral aggression.

(But I kinda get the feeling you won’t…just like you haven’t for oh so very many other examples)

Sigh. We have been here before. SHOW YOUR WORK, or kindly stop putting words in my mouth.

See, I feel like I HAVE shown my work. About a number of issues here!

The thing is, you tend to respond by very conspicuously neglecting to understand those issues, or ignoring those issues completely, while also frequently trying to derail every other geopolitical discussion you can into another one of your Ukraine/Russia rants. For instance, how did we get from Greenland to borscht?

Now, if you really want me to show my work, I suppose I can. Can I ask for you to please assure me you might display more good faith than you have previously in considering that work?

And can you also help me navigate how to do so while trying to not bother the “shut down the power on this ride,” “Asperger’s” crowd too much?