Kansas Crimson

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 12:43 pm

KUTradition wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 12:31 pm militant aggression =\= defense of sovereignty

and what, exactly, is my preferred narrative?

as far as I can tell, while you do acknowledge that nazis are a problem, you seem determined to discredit any evidence of nazis being problem in Ukraine specifically, and shrug off the fact they're getting weapons from you and me, as if that's somehow immaterial to the Ukraine conflict as a whole. Apparently, you'd rather ignore nazis in favor of sticking it to Russia.

It seems to have "now is not the time to talk about gun violence" vibes. If it's not appropriate to address nazis in a war involving nazis, when IS it appropriate?

That, and you seem to like the warm fuzzy "freedom and democracy" rhetoric, as if the best way to promote as much is arms, arms, arms! and as if it would be unfree and undemocratic to afford the people of the regions in conflict some free and democratic vote of their own.

on the most general level possible, you seem to have difficulty grasping some comprehensive anti-war stance, while I've apparently gone all in on it.

I dunno. I don't wanna fight. I guess the only reason I still bring it up is, the off chance we actually make some constructive progress in this discussion. And, maybe, just maybe, I can convince you and others that an anti-war stance is a good stance to be taking now, and going forward.

and I don't mean to gaslight, so don't let me. If you'd like to clarify your narrative and views, please do.

There is a giant gaping chasm between "we're giving them (Ukraine nazis) tens of bajillions of Mich's tax dollars worth of weapons" and "any evidence of nazis being problem in Ukraine". It's not an all or nothing thing.

Maybe you just don't realize the fundamental absurdity of your claim since I don't think you even meant to make it. You just lump everyone in the entire Ukrainioan military as "nazis" because it is easier to support your argument but then blast people attempting to apply some actual scale and reality to the situation. It's a created, forced, unnecessary argument and does nothing but dissolve into poop flinging.

see, from my point of view, I"m the only one actually "attempting to apply some actual scale and reality to the situation"

everyone else seems to just summarily shrug the situation off, in favor of the good guy bad guy narratives. And yet, like you said, it's not an all or nothing thing, right?

I just think we should actually understand the dynamic in Ukraine, understand the infighting, understand what's being done with the weapons you and I paid for, JUST LIKE OUR OWN GUMMINT ALREADY TRIED TO DO, before they shrugged it off in favor of more arms sales, more arms sales, more arms sales, then doubling down in a BIG way on more arms sales as soon as the arms sales got caught up in some bigger problem yet, as if the only thing our gummint is capable of, is arms sales.

I hope I haven't tried to "lump everyone in the entire Ukrainian military as "nazis" "

All I've meant is, it seems like the number of nazis in the Ukrainian military is some critical mass enough that we should probably reevaluate things a little

if there's a "fundamental absurdity" claimed in this here thread, it's that the issue of nazis should be dismissed on bad guy rhetoric grounds, cuz there's nazis everywhere, etc.

I'm the only one! look at me!

well I certainly don't want to be the only one

TDub, would you be willing to join me in my condemnation of nazis?

of course nazis are bad....literally nobody has said anything to the contrary

What percentage of Ukrainian solders are accused of being nazis?

it seems there is really just a difference in priorities here

one side is mainly worried about neo-nazis and the other is more worried about preventing putin from doing putin-things

EVERYONE that has participated in this thread, at least to my recollection, condemns nazis and is, in general, anti-war (maybe not dolomite, but whatever)

the neo-nazi situation isn’t going away anytime soon (if ever), and the US isn’t going to magically stop dealing with countries who have neo-nazi problems

putin (and his agressions), on the other hand, pose a much more immediate, identifiable, and approachable threat

i don’t disagree with any of your sentiments generally, ousie…i just think much of it is wishful thinking. eutopia doesn’t exist, and won’t ever, because humans will ALWAYS fuck shit up. it’d be nice if that wasn’t the case, but that is absolutely the reality of the situation

a battalion of an estimated 900 soldiers out of an estimated total of 700,000 (numbers estimated as of zjuly 2022).

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:09 pm I hope I haven't tried to "lump everyone in the entire Ukrainian military as "nazis" "

All I've meant is, it seems like the number of nazis in the Ukrainian military is some critical mass enough that we should probably reevaluate things a little

if there's a "fundamental absurdity" claimed in this here thread, it's that the issue of nazis should be dismissed on bad guy rhetoric grounds, cuz there's nazis everywhere, etc.

It only seems that way because you have read a lot about them without doing any research into the total size of the battalion involved, the total size of the entire Ukrainian army or the total size of Ukraine as a nation. Reading a lot about one thing without any context is exactly how propaganda turns a thing that isn't a big thing into a thing that seems like a big thing.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:57 pm Reading a lot about one thing without any context is exactly how propaganda turns a thing that isn't a big thing into a thing that seems like a big thing.

you just described the post presidency handling of dt.

see, but the thing is, I HAVE done some research. And, despite that, I still don't feel like I have a good grasp of the size or scope of the issue.

TDub mentions certain numbers. Where do we get those numbers? How reliable are they?

and I think that also must be weighed against the fact that, despite all these Ukrainian and western interests trying to downplay the whole nazi thing, why do so many nazis end up on display in western media anyway? I've posted images and stories from Reuters, AP, PBS, all sorts of other western sources that end up publishing Ukrainians wearing nazi symbols, speaking nazi rhetoric, glorifying nazi heroes.

Whatever exact number of "nazis" (or some other flavor of far right radical extreme ethno-fascist nationalist whatever) there are in Azov, can we at least agree that Azov is among the most notorious of the militants?

So why do they get the "celebrated" treatment from no less than the New York Times?

With all these feel good stories to humanize them, showing them hugging loved ones and such. Does that really not strike anyone else as, at the very least, kinda fishy?

I mean, contrast the way Azov is being treated (or not being treated) by our media and government, with the way Azov was being treated by our media and government in 2018:

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3804 ... neo-nazis/

KUTradition wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:53 pm it seems there is really just a difference in priorities here

one side is mainly worried about neo-nazis and the other is more worried about preventing putin from doing putin-things

EVERYONE that has participated in this thread, at least to my recollection, condemns nazis and is, in general, anti-war (maybe not dolomite, but whatever)

the neo-nazi situation isn’t going away anytime soon (if ever), and the US isn’t going to magically stop dealing with countries who have neo-nazi problems

putin (and his agressions), on the other hand, pose a much more immediate, identifiable, and approachable threat

i don’t disagree with any of your sentiments generally, ousie…i just think much of it is wishful thinking. eutopia doesn’t exist, and won’t ever, because humans will ALWAYS fuck shit up. it’d be nice if that wasn’t the case, but that is absolutely the reality of the situation

thought experiment:

what if, rather than mostly just sending weapons to Ukraine, the US was sending teachers instead?

i have it on fairly good authority. that outside of the internet whackjobs. almost no one gives any of this bull$#!t any thought at all.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 2:34 pm

KUTradition wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 1:53 pm it seems there is really just a difference in priorities here

one side is mainly worried about neo-nazis and the other is more worried about preventing putin from doing putin-things

EVERYONE that has participated in this thread, at least to my recollection, condemns nazis and is, in general, anti-war (maybe not dolomite, but whatever)

the neo-nazi situation isn’t going away anytime soon (if ever), and the US isn’t going to magically stop dealing with countries who have neo-nazi problems

putin (and his agressions), on the other hand, pose a much more immediate, identifiable, and approachable threat

i don’t disagree with any of your sentiments generally, ousie…i just think much of it is wishful thinking. eutopia doesn’t exist, and won’t ever, because humans will ALWAYS fuck shit up. it’d be nice if that wasn’t the case, but that is absolutely the reality of the situation

thought experiment:

what if, rather than mostly just sending weapons to Ukraine, the US was sending teachers instead?

then in all likelihood we’d no longer be sending anything to Ukraine, but rather to mother russia

i would rather we send our billion dollars a day to florida instead. so we can restore florida to its' pre ian glory.

mich suddenly loves government handouts!

until the democrats fill it full of their pork. democrats love the other white meat.

The only silver lining to your presence here is that it does somewhat limit your ability to poison the minds of your family.

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 2:38 pm i have it on fairly good authority. that outside of the internet whackjobs. almost no one gives any of this bull$#!t any thought at all.

actually, despite your best efforts, that IS a good point.

why are we so concerned with Ukraine? Why are we so uniquely concerned?

...to the exclusion of all the other violence and invasions and oppression happening in the world at any given time

including the violence and invasions and oppression in which the US is involved either directly or by proxy, but doesn't seem to get nearly the same attention (remember all the other war stuff I posted in this thread besides Ukraine, for which no one else even batted an eye?)

not to mention the coups! Holy shit, the coups! Ever you ever wanna go down the Qusdahl rabbit hole, just start poking around on cia.gov, much of this shit is well documented there.

what makes Ukraine so special? Why don't we also get #StandWithSyria, #StandWithPalestine, #StandWithOppressedPeopleOfAnyOtherColor and such? Not to mention our own country's total lack of self awareness about standing with oppressed peoples on our own soil (BLM says hi)

Why are certain war crimes so tragic (when anyone else does it), but other war crimes are acceptable collateral damage that the rest of the world should just have to put up with (when we do it). All just for the sake of remaining Mich's favorite country ever, I guess? (and to be fair, there are some other countries too that tend to get a pass, with one or two coming to mind in particular)

how are we able to so precisely pick and choose? how are we supposed to confidently know which fights are the good fights for the sake of freedom and democracy*, and which are just more bad guy warmongering?


*not to be confused with getting to vote in a free and/or democratic election.