Kansas Crimson

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 1:58 pm no thank you to progressives.

(Here’s your friendly reminder that all you other guys too are squarely on Team Mich)

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 1:56 pm I’m trying, ringo.

If we as voters elect progressive candidates into positions of power, then maybe, maybe, we can reign in the MIC, and slowly reallocate all the bloat toward things that actually improve the material conditions of human beings, rather than destruct them.

But, like DC said…

I mean...you know that the "progressives" are the most aggressive war-supporters in this case, right?

You also get that, historically, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton, to name just two, have been aggressively "interventionist," supporting every war they could...and then some.

Hell, you know even Bernie "I honeymooned in Soviet Union" Sanders is an aggressive supporter of intervention today?

What "progressives" do you think are gonna save us from the MIC?

Seriously, in this thread the only one trying to hold Merica accountable is Qusdahl, and look how you’ve treated they/them for it!

more bullshit

i’m probably more critical of this country on any number of fronts than anyone here

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:00 pm and are you sure I didn’t answer them?

Or is it that you just didn’t like my answers, so you just knee jerk dismissed them, as has often been the case in this thread?

(Maybe I’ve been guilty of it too, but I’m trying to set a better example.)

If I could at least try asking, what WOULD have been an acceptable answer? Let’s have a war?

yes, i’m sure

you said vote, and then systemic change. while those are answers, they’re incredibly (intentionally?) vague, telling me that you really haven’t given any of this much thought beyond the same tropes you seem destined to come back to…[US] imperialism and capitalism bad (which, unless i’m mistaken, nobody has disagreed with)


and then you deflected and tried to whataboutism with US leaders

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:03 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 1:56 pm I’m trying, ringo.

If we as voters elect progressive candidates into positions of power, then maybe, maybe, we can reign in the MIC, and slowly reallocate all the bloat toward things that actually improve the material conditions of human beings, rather than destruct them.

But, like DC said…

I mean...you know that the "progressives" are the most aggressive war-supporters in this case, right?

You also get that, historically, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton, to name just two, have been aggressively "interventionist," supporting every war they could...and then some.

Hell, you know even Bernie "I honeymooned in Soviet Union" Sanders is an aggressive supporter of intervention today?

What "progressives" do you think are gonna save us from the MIC?

Yea, I know.

Like they/them said a few pages back, liberalism is a right wing ideology.

Not “progressives” but an actually progressive platform.

You know there’s actually views to the left of Biden and Cankles and even Bernie, right?

LOL

Bernie failed to win the Democratic nomination. Twice.

How you gonna get those guys with "views to the left of Biden and Cankles and even Bernie" elected?

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:03 pm
i’m probably more critical of this country on any number of fronts than anyone here

True statement.

Q is critical of EVERYTHING.

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:06 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:00 pm and are you sure I didn’t answer them?

Or is it that you just didn’t like my answers, so you just knee jerk dismissed them, as has often been the case in this thread?

(Maybe I’ve been guilty of it too, but I’m trying to set a better example.)

If I could at least try asking, what WOULD have been an acceptable answer? Let’s have a war?

yes, i’m sure

you said vote, and then systemic change. while those are answers, they’re incredibly (intentionally?) vague, telling me that you really haven’t given any of this much thought beyond the same tropes you seem destined to come back to…[US] imperialism and capitalism bad (which, unless i’m mistaken, nobody has disagreed with)


and then you deflected and tried to whataboutism with US leaders

Sorry those answers are vague. They’re…huge thoughts. I don’t have a perfect plan to implement it all, I admit.

But I think a good start would be..oh…let’s say…getting you guys all stoned as balls at the Frontier Drive Inn this summer.

I didn’t mean that as a whatabout, necessarily. I meant it more as commentary on how you guys pick and choose which war crimes are bad and which are OK, based on some sense of patriotism or something.

Or just some sense of “better we do it to them than then to us,” which is a huge part of Merican world views.

Think of it this way: if aliens came and just observed our planet, do you think they’d say “oh these guys here invaded (again) this country they’ve beefed with since always, them BAD, but these guys who flooded that country with weapons and also drop more bombs in more places than anyone ever, them GOOD”

I just dunno how you guys can pick and choose…again, except for the michhawk effect.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:12 pm LOL

Bernie failed to win the Democratic nomination. Twice.

How you gonna get those guys with "views to the left of Biden and Cankles and even Bernie" elected?

Again, like you said in the overrated thread…







…sooo I guess the answer is, systemic change, then.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:18 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:12 pm LOL

Bernie failed to win the Democratic nomination. Twice.

How you gonna get those guys with "views to the left of Biden and Cankles and even Bernie" elected?

Again, like you said in the overrated thread…







…sooo I guess the answer is, systemic change, then.

Ah.

As Lenin (or was it Lennon?) put it:

You say you'll change the Constitution
Well ya know
We all wanna change your head

You tell me it's the institution
Well ya know
You better free your mind instead

“…[US] imperialism and capitalism bad (which, unless i’m mistaken, nobody has disagreed with)“


Then why’d I get called a Russian spambot so many times for suggesting it before?

And to be clear, I think our "strategy" in Ukraine -- such as it is -- is courting global and domestic disaster, is poorly thought-out, and is, inarguably, proof positive that Eisenhower was right.

At the same time, I don't think "both sides bad!" is an actual position, much less the premise for strategic decisions.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:21 pm

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:18 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:12 pm LOL

Bernie failed to win the Democratic nomination. Twice.

How you gonna get those guys with "views to the left of Biden and Cankles and even Bernie" elected?

Again, like you said in the overrated thread…







…sooo I guess the answer is, systemic change, then.

Ah.

As Lenin (or was it Lennon?) put it:

You say you'll change the Constitution
Well ya know
We all wanna change your head

You tell me it's the institution
Well ya know
You better free your mind instead

VLADIMIR ILYICH ULYANOV!!!

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:24 pm And to be clear, I think our "strategy" in Ukraine -- such as it is -- is courting global and domestic disaster, is poorly thought-out, and is, inarguably, proof positive that Eisenhower was right.

See, I got a renewed hope for this thread once you came back around.

You articulate this shit better than me. Cuz when I tried to suggest just as much, I got derided as a putin parrot.

At the same time, I don't think "both sides bad!" is an actual position, much less the premise for strategic decisions.

“Both sides bad” is indeed an oversimplification. My angle was more, let’s actually understand just what the fuck our own country has been up to, and how it relates to this current situation.

But, again, I was attacked for saying it, and everyone else insisted that the whole Ukraine problem really was some simple matter of good versus evil, and our own actions have no relevancy, cuz Ukraine really is nothing more than a simple age-old battle of good versus evil, and to suggest anything but is straight from the Kremlin.

(For real, DC - you. would. not. fucking. believe. just how many times Japhy has downplayed literal fucking Nazis!)

“Both sides bad” is indeed an oversimplification. My angle was more, let’s actually understand just what the fuck our own country has been up to, and how it relates to this current situation.

could be wrong, but the reason you got pushback is that you thought “we” should be having this conversation while innocent people are dying and having their homes invaded and destroyed

i made the rather apt analogy (imo) early on that it was akin to talking about gun control in the midst of a mass shooting

you then, also, brought the nazi bs into it, which is very much a putin talking point (almost EVERY “european” country, russia for certain, has a nazi/neo-nazi movement/problem)…as if that was a legitimate reason for the invasion in the first place

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:34 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:24 pm And to be clear, I think our "strategy" in Ukraine -- such as it is -- is courting global and domestic disaster, is poorly thought-out, and is, inarguably, proof positive that Eisenhower was right.

See, I got a renewed hope for this thread once you came back around.

You articulate this shit better than me. Cuz when I tried to suggest just as much, I got derided as a putin parrot.

At the same time, I don't think "both sides bad!" is an actual position, much less the premise for strategic decisions.

“Both sides bad” is indeed an oversimplification. My angle was more, let’s actually understand just what the fuck our own country has been up to, and how it relates to this current situation.

But, again, I was attacked for saying it, and everyone else insisted that the whole Ukraine problem really was some simple matter of good versus evil, and our own actions have no relevancy, cuz Ukraine really is nothing more than a simple age-old battle of good versus evil, and to suggest anything but is straight from the Kremlin.

(For real, DC - you. would. not. fucking. believe. just how many times Japhy has downplayed literal fucking Nazis!)

more bullshit.


you got an oxygen tank? the withers of your moral high horse is nearing the fucking space station.

how many of the civililians purportedly massacred in Bucha were nazis?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 1:26 pm

I just, again, think it’s bonkers to have no awareness or sense of cause and effect as so the west’s actions, or to insist that they have nothing to do with anything here.

You keep saying this. That is NOT what is happening in this thread.

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 2:39 pm

“Both sides bad” is indeed an oversimplification. My angle was more, let’s actually understand just what the fuck our own country has been up to, and how it relates to this current situation.

could be wrong, but the reason you got pushback is that you thought “we” should be having this conversation while innocent people are dying and having their homes invaded and destroyed

He keeps saying "we need to understand" this or that better, when in reality it's mostly just Ousdahl who needs to understand things better before trying to be the focal point of these discussions.

Seriously Ousdahl. Let one of the other more informed posters be the PG on this thread. You should sit on the bench and play your role. You can sit next to me and Kyle Cuffe. We don't know what the hell is going on either.

You're bloviating to a group of about 12 guys. About 8 are extremely intelligent and informative. You should do more listening to them and less telling them what you think they don't understand about something solely because you don't understand it.

dammit illy....why ya gotta call me out like that. hahaha