Page 30 of 31

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 2:40 pm
by vnatale
stuper1 wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 1:30 pm



The people of Serbia, Iraq, Libya and probably others that I haven't thought of might want to have a word with you on whether NATO has ever been used offensively.

Putin made numerous public statements over the past decade or so saying that NATO involvement in Ukraine was a red line for Russia. I'm not exactly privy to private communications between the two countries, but if I find any documented communications, I'll be sure to post them. It's not like you can find balanced coverage from the mainstream media on these topics. Everything is slanted toward one side, because they know who butters their bread.


I don't accept the view that the mainstream media is so powerful. Yes, pre-internet and when we had only three major TV networks.

But for all of us we have access to multiple sources of information, covering every side of the political spectrum.

CNN is always cited as having this major influence yet all they have is about 500,000 viewers.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 4:00 pm
by stuper1
vnatale wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 2:37 pm
stuper1 wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 1:24 pm

So, you think the German people would turn to a raving lunatic madman and let him kill millions of Jews and others if those German people hadn't been made the unjustified scapegoats of WW1? It seems unlikely to me. If the peace treaty at the end of WW1 had been a bit more gracious, those German people wouldn't have been hardened by literal starvation, etc., and wouldn't have turned to a madman. But who knows, I could be wrong.
You are making that statement from the benefit of hindsight.

First of all Hitler became the country's dictator by trickery. The German people did not vote for him to be dictator.

Second of all, in spite of him being a dictator, I recently read that around 1938, if he'd stopped there, he'd have been viewed as one of the greatest men in history for what he accomplished for the country of Germany. It was not until post 1938 that he fully transformed into what you describe above. Therefore at the time the Nazi Party was voted in (and I believe without even a majority vote) the German people were not voting for the Hitler as we all now know him.

Did you read the book excerpts I had above? It points out that the treaty was justified in the way it treated Germany and, perhaps, was not stringent enough. It also addresses how the German people liked to blame it all on that treaty while accepting none of the responsibility for their country's conditions.
Whoever wrote your book needs to learn some common sense. The reason Chamberlain made so many concessions to Hitler at Munich and leading up to Munich was because he knew Germany had been mistreated in the Versailles Treaty so he was trying to make up for it after the fact, but by then it was too late, the damage was done and Germany was already led by a madman.

As they say, those who won't learn from the past are destined to repeat it. If Biden and Zelensky lead us into an unneeded WW3 with Russia/China/India, maybe more people will wake up to what is going on. I don't think that is likely to happen, but all it takes is a random flock of birds being misidentified by radar and missiles can be flying. It's really not smart to ratchet up tensions when both sides have nuclear weapons at the ready. Reports are that Ukraine had all but agreed to a peace deal with Russia in March, and the US vetoed it and told them to fight on -- the obvious motives being to try to weaken Russia and of course to make more money for the military contractors, not to mention everybody else who gets a little cut on the action.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 5:55 pm
by vnatale
stuper1 wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 4:00 pm

vnatale wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 2:37 pm

stuper1 wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 1:24 pm


So, you think the German people would turn to a raving lunatic madman and let him kill millions of Jews and others if those German people hadn't been made the unjustified scapegoats of WW1? It seems unlikely to me. If the peace treaty at the end of WW1 had been a bit more gracious, those German people wouldn't have been hardened by literal starvation, etc., and wouldn't have turned to a madman. But who knows, I could be wrong.


You are making that statement from the benefit of hindsight.

First of all Hitler became the country's dictator by trickery. The German people did not vote for him to be dictator.

Second of all, in spite of him being a dictator, I recently read that around 1938, if he'd stopped there, he'd have been viewed as one of the greatest men in history for what he accomplished for the country of Germany. It was not until post 1938 that he fully transformed into what you describe above. Therefore at the time the Nazi Party was voted in (and I believe without even a majority vote) the German people were not voting for the Hitler as we all now know him.

Did you read the book excerpts I had above? It points out that the treaty was justified in the way it treated Germany and, perhaps, was not stringent enough. It also addresses how the German people liked to blame it all on that treaty while accepting none of the responsibility for their country's conditions.


Whoever wrote your book needs to learn some common sense. The reason Chamberlain made so many concessions to Hitler at Munich and leading up to Munich was because he knew Germany had been mistreated in the Versailles Treaty so he was trying to make up for it after the fact, but by then it was too late, the damage was done and Germany was already led by a madman.

As they say, those who won't learn from the past are destined to repeat it. If Biden and Zelensky lead us into an unneeded WW3 with Russia/China/India, maybe more people will wake up to what is going on. I don't think that is likely to happen, but all it takes is a random flock of birds being misidentified by radar and missiles can be flying. It's really not smart to ratchet up tensions when both sides have nuclear weapons at the ready. Reports are that Ukraine had all but agreed to a peace deal with Russia in March, and the US vetoed it and told them to fight on -- the obvious motives being to try to weaken Russia and of course to make more money for the military contractors, not to mention everybody else who gets a little cut on the action.


What is your support / documentation for what you assert in your first paragraph?

Where can one find these reports about a peace deal in March?

Finally, as for the book author needing common sense I'm putting here just the beginning of a lengthy review of the book:

"5.0 out of 5 stars Extraordinary. The Most Educational Book on WW2 I Have Read
Reviewed in the United States on December 30, 2010
Verified Purchase
There are more books on WW2 than on any other historical subject. This is the most complete and insightful account of this global conflagration that I know of. As he states in the Introduction, Gerhard Weinberg focuses more on the "why" than the "how" of the events he covers. There are countless books on the gritty hour-by-hour course of various battles, many not particularly good. Weinberg narrates the events of the war, but he is most interested in the broader, global perspective, as his title makes clear. Weinberg has studied this subject for the last 60+ years, and his understanding of WW2 is profound. It is a delight to read his thoughtful prose. Though the book may seem lengthy at 900 pages, on every page are the often original insights that make this treatise exceptionally rewarding and devoid of monotony.
By considering this "World War" as the global phenomenon that is clearly is, Weinberg is able show how all the events hang together in a unified whole, even in theaters separated by thousands of miles and marked cultural differences. I will give some examples that I found fascinating.
As a prelude to WW2, Weinberg makes clear that the perception of post-WW1 Germany as ruined by the reparations required in the Versailles treaty and thus spoiling for revenge against France, Great Britain, and the USA, is largely a myth. Germany was largely untouched by the fighting in WW1, unlike France and Belgium, and had secured adequate (often American) loans with which to arrange a manageable schedule of reparations payments to the Western Allies. Germany rebounded more quickly than either France or Britain from the post-WW1 malaise brought about by the tremendous costs of fighting the war borne by the major European combatants. While the incomprehensible inflation suffered by Weimar Germany was very real, some of it was brought about intentionally by the Germans as a way to sabotage their payment of reparations.
As Germany under Hitler gained a jump on rearmament over Britain and France, Hitler was determined to start the fighting of the succession of wars he planned in his strategy of world-conquest. Hitler did not want to fight on more than one front at a time (after the disaster of Germany's multi-front experience in WW1), so he wished to pick and choose the timing of the series of wars he deemed necessary for the attainment of ultimate German victory. In this way, Weinberg argues that Hitler sought to start his wars in 1938, and that Neville Chamberlain's Munich compromise, in which Czechoslovakia ceded the Sudetenland to Germany, actually thwarted Hitler's timing and made him all the more determined not to be "cheated" out of war in 1939, leading to Germany's September 1st invasion of Poland."

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 11:24 pm
by vnatale
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 31911.html

Vladimir Putin ‘living in fear for his life as army retreats’, Zelensky aide says
‘There is no forgiveness for tsars who lose wars,’ the military aide said

Russian president Vladimir Putin is “living in fear for his life” as his army retreats, a senior Ukrainian military aide said.

Earlier this month, Russia announced it was withdrawing from the Kherson region, marking one of the most embarrassing defeats for Mr Putin and a potential turning point in the war which has reached its ninth month.

The loss of Kherson, the only regional capital Russia had captured in the conflict, dealt a heavy blow to plans to establish a land corridor to Crimea and secure a water supply to the Russian-controlled peninsula.

“[Putin] is very afraid because there is no forgiveness in Russia for tsars who lose wars,” Oleksiy Arestovich, an adviser to the Ukrainian president’s chief of staff, told The Times.

“He is fighting for his life now. If he loses the war, at least in the minds of the Russians, it means the end. The end of him as a political figure. And possibly in the physical sense.”
Ukraine’s victory over Kherson came after a series of humiliating retreats by Kremlin forces in the Kharkiv and Donbas regions.

“This has forced even people who are very loyal to Putin to doubt that they can win this war,” Mr Arestovich said.

He said Kherson’s liberation had triggered renewed Russian strikes on the country’s infrastructure and plans for a fresh offensive from Belarus, a Russian ally to the north of Ukraine. Mr Putin’s troops advanced on Kyiv from Belarus during the early stages of the war, but were forced to retreat after stiff resistance.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2022 11:28 pm
by vnatale
https://raheemkassam.substack.com/p/rus ... e-to-peace


Raheem Kassam's Substack.

Russia and Ukraine Came to Peace Terms in April... Then Boris Johnson Intervened.
Of all people, it was Fiona Hill who revealed the details.

Raheem Kassam
Aug 31
Fiona Hill – the shrill, Trump impeachment witness, alongside World Economic Forum grandee Angela Stent – gave something rather inconvenient away in their latest article for Foreign Affairs magazine. I have archived it here, for the non-subscribers like me.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:40 am
by I Shrugged
vnatale wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 12:20 pm
I Shrugged wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 11:38 am
stuper1 wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 11:24 am


And this is where you are so wrong. It takes two to tango. Kennedy was able to negotiate, because Kruschev was willing to negotiate. Putin tried to solve this thing diplomatically so many times and guess who wouldn't talk with him and just kept pushing NATO expansion more aggressively?
Interesting if true.
A relevant side note is that Trump Impeachment One was not because he wanted the Ukes to investigate Biden. It was because he was not hawkish enough on Ukraine. I conclude our military and state department wanted this war. There isn’t much evidence to the contrary. Is there?
What you say is completely contrary to all available evidence. What available evidence do you have to support your assertions? His famous "perfect phone call" supports which opinion?
I watched the trial.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Thu Nov 24, 2022 1:38 pm
by SilentMajority
vnatale wrote:
Wed Nov 23, 2022 11:24 pm
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 31911.html

Vladimir Putin ‘living in fear for his life as army retreats’, Zelensky aide says
‘There is no forgiveness for tsars who lose wars,’ the military aide said

Russian president Vladimir Putin is “living in fear for his life” as his army retreats, a senior Ukrainian military aide said.
Hahahahahah

A "Zelinsky aide" says something about Putin and the independent reports it as news??? Bwahahahah

This is a new low even for that online rag. This is like saying "Soviet premier Stalin is "living in fear for his life" Hitler aide says.

Truly pitiful.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 12:56 pm
by stuper1
Yes, and also pitiful that this this so-called news report gets reposted here as if it adds anything of value to the conversation. People should use a little thought before they repost stuff. If it's obviously propaganda, or has a high likelihood of being propaganda, then just don't repost it and amplify it's effect. This is how we avoid getting to WW3 with nuclear missiles flying is by not ratcheting up tensions with a nuclear-armed adversary. Every person can play a little part in showing a bit of wisdom. Clamoring for regime change in Russia isn't going to help the situation. If the Russians want a new leader, they are fully capable of achieving it. They don't need the rest of the world trying to hector them into it. From reports I've read, they are very happy with their current leader. Speaking for myself, and based on very limited knowledge, so I fully admit I could be wrong, but if I were Russian, I suspect I would be very happy with Putin as a leader because he is not shy to protect Russian interests, including non-economic, cultural interests, which are important for a strong society.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 1:32 pm
by SilentMajority
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 12:56 pm
Yes, and also pitiful that this this so-called news report gets reposted here as if it adds anything of value to the conversation. People should use a little thought before they repost stuff. If it's obviously propaganda, or has a high likelihood of being propaganda, then just don't repost it and amplify it's effect.
There's so much propaganda everywhere now... It's like the talent pool is seriously diluted. Rags like the independent are reduced to quoting Zelinsky sides and senior Ukrainian military about Putin. This is one step up from saying "anonymous sources" or "some people are saying".

They can't even afford good propaganda writers because they're in such demand everywhere.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:00 pm
by vnatale
stuper1 wrote:
Tue Nov 22, 2022 3:38 pm

dualstow wrote:
Tue Nov 22, 2022 3:09 pm

We are butchers, for sure. Although we don’t kill our own people overseas with polonium or novichok.


I would take those "reports" with a grain of salt. Similar to the reports in Syria of Assad gassing his own people, which seem very likely to have been invented propaganda.

As I recall, Obama assassinated a US citizen with a drone strike without any due process, and nobody seemed too concerned about it (except for a few people who can actually think for themselves instead of believing everything that the mass media preaches to them and forces down their throats 24/7).


There was a whole Senate hearing this past February 2022 on the appropriateness of the United States using killing drones.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?517840-1/ ... ne-strikes

FEBRUARY 9, 2022
Hearing on the Legacy of Drone Strikes
The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the legal impact, financial cost, and human toll of U.S. drone strikes conducted over the past two decades. Topics included the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, congressional oversight of the drone program during four presidential administrations, and compensation for survivors and families of civilians killed in drone strikes.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:27 pm
by stuper1
vnatale wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:00 pm
stuper1 wrote:
Tue Nov 22, 2022 3:38 pm
dualstow wrote:
Tue Nov 22, 2022 3:09 pm
We are butchers, for sure. Although we don’t kill our own people overseas with polonium or novichok.
I would take those "reports" with a grain of salt. Similar to the reports in Syria of Assad gassing his own people, which seem very likely to have been invented propaganda.

As I recall, Obama assassinated a US citizen with a drone strike without any due process, and nobody seemed too concerned about it (except for a few people who can actually think for themselves instead of believing everything that the mass media preaches to them and forces down their throats 24/7).
There was a whole Senate hearing this past February 2022 on the appropriateness of the United States using killing drones.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?517840-1/ ... ne-strikes

FEBRUARY 9, 2022
Hearing on the Legacy of Drone Strikes
The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the legal impact, financial cost, and human toll of U.S. drone strikes conducted over the past two decades. Topics included the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, congressional oversight of the drone program during four presidential administrations, and compensation for survivors and families of civilians killed in drone strikes.
Ok, and did the AUMF allow for using military force against US citizens without due process? I'm going to guess it didn't, otherwise it would have been declared unconstitutional very quickly. My point is that Obama is still held up as the paragon of a wise statesman, because he doesn't make mean Twitter posts, but in fact he could easily be charged with murder. The people who clutch at their pearls about some silly outlandish statement by Trump end up supporting people who are cold-blooded murderers, but such murders seem to be no problem as long as they are done with dignity.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:36 pm
by vnatale
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:27 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 5:00 pm

stuper1 wrote:
Tue Nov 22, 2022 3:38 pm

dualstow wrote:
Tue Nov 22, 2022 3:09 pm

We are butchers, for sure. Although we don’t kill our own people overseas with polonium or novichok.


I would take those "reports" with a grain of salt. Similar to the reports in Syria of Assad gassing his own people, which seem very likely to have been invented propaganda.

As I recall, Obama assassinated a US citizen with a drone strike without any due process, and nobody seemed too concerned about it (except for a few people who can actually think for themselves instead of believing everything that the mass media preaches to them and forces down their throats 24/7).


There was a whole Senate hearing this past February 2022 on the appropriateness of the United States using killing drones.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?517840-1/ ... ne-strikes

FEBRUARY 9, 2022
Hearing on the Legacy of Drone Strikes
The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the legal impact, financial cost, and human toll of U.S. drone strikes conducted over the past two decades. Topics included the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, congressional oversight of the drone program during four presidential administrations, and compensation for survivors and families of civilians killed in drone strikes.


Ok, and did the AUMF allow for using military force against US citizens without due process? I'm going to guess it didn't, otherwise it would have been declared unconstitutional very quickly. My point is that Obama is still held up as the paragon of a wise statesman, because he doesn't make mean Twitter posts, but in fact he could easily be charged with murder. The people who clutch at their pearls about some silly outlandish statement by Trump end up supporting people who are cold-blooded murderers, but such murders seem to be no problem as long as they are done with dignity.


I listened to the whole thing. The Democrats were the ones most upset, believing that all the presidents, starting with Obama's predecessor and continuing through the incumbent have all taken actions that they believe each of the four presidents did not have the power to do so. The Republicans were more like, these are terrorists we are talking about and any way we can kill them is fine with us and there will always be civilian casualties.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:09 pm
by stuper1
And so it's okay for us to kill terrorists without due process, but it's not okay for Putin to do it, and the only reason most people don't see any contradiction here is because they believe anything their television tells them.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:26 pm
by vnatale
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:09 pm

And so it's okay for us to kill terrorists without due process, but it's not okay for Putin to do it, and the only reason most people don't see any contradiction here is because they believe anything their television tells them.


I cannot counter all your false premises.

You have a winning argument if your premises are true but, unfortunately, not one of them is true.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:03 am
by dualstow
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:09 pm
And so it's okay for us to kill terrorists without due process, but it's not okay for Putin to do it, and the only reason most people don't see any contradiction here is because they believe anything their television tells them.
You don’t have to go all ad hominem on everyone who doesn’t share your worldview, which is most people. Wouldn’t it be more satisfying, stuper, to just quietly know that the rest of the western world is fooled while you know better?

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:01 am
by stuper1
dualstow wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:03 am
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:09 pm
And so it's okay for us to kill terrorists without due process, but it's not okay for Putin to do it, and the only reason most people don't see any contradiction here is because they believe anything their television tells them.
You don’t have to go all ad hominem on everyone who doesn’t share your worldview, which is most people. Wouldn’t it be more satisfying, stuper, to just quietly know that the rest of the western world is fooled while you know better?
What would be more satisfying to me is if the US would stay out of other countries' business and stop using my tax money to get so many people killed needlessly ... fighting to the last Ukrainian.

Here's another apt example I came across last night while reading Pat Buchanan's "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War": Czechoslovakia didn't get any war guarantees from Britain and France, and so didn't resist when it was being carved up by neighboring countries who wanted their land and people back that had been taken from them by the Versailles Treaty. By the end of the war, the people in these lands formerly known as Czechoslovakia had suffered about 100,000 dead.

By contrast, Poland got war guarantees from Britain and France, and so decided to fight when Germany demanded Danzig back (Danzig was a very German place that was given to Poland by Versailles). Well, the guarantees from Britain and France basically amounted to nothing, and Poland suffered 6,000,000 dead by the end of the war. Even stranger is that Britain actually was trying to signal to Poland to give up Danzig because of its historic ties to Germany, but Poland got the wrong signal.

Both Poland and Czechoslovakia ended up in the Soviet bloc after the war of course, but Czechoslovakia had a lot less dead people.

The lesson for Ukraine is that if you're a small country next to a big, bad country, and if you actually house many people who ethnically are from the big, bad country, you'd better mind your P's and Q's -- don't go aligning yourself with the enemies of the big, bad country, unless you want to get a lot of your own people killed. Again, this is realism versus idealism.

By the way, you might want to re-check what an ad hominem attack is like. An ad hominem attack is mudslinging meant to divert attention away from the real issue. The statement I made about people believing whatever their television tells them is hardly a diversion; it's at the heart of the problem.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:30 am
by stuper1
stuper1 wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:01 am
dualstow wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:03 am
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:09 pm
And so it's okay for us to kill terrorists without due process, but it's not okay for Putin to do it, and the only reason most people don't see any contradiction here is because they believe anything their television tells them.
You don’t have to go all ad hominem on everyone who doesn’t share your worldview, which is most people. Wouldn’t it be more satisfying, stuper, to just quietly know that the rest of the western world is fooled while you know better?
What would be more satisfying to me is if the US would stay out of other countries' business and stop using my tax money to get so many people killed needlessly ... fighting to the last Ukrainian.

Here's another apt example I came across last night while reading Pat Buchanan's "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War": Czechoslovakia didn't get any war guarantees from Britain and France, and so didn't resist when it was being carved up by neighboring countries who wanted their land and people back that had been taken from them by the Versailles Treaty. By the end of the war, the people in these lands formerly known as Czechoslovakia had suffered about 100,000 dead.

By contrast, Poland got war guarantees from Britain and France, and so decided to fight when Germany demanded Danzig back (Danzig was a very German place that was given to Poland by Versailles). Well, the guarantees from Britain and France basically amounted to nothing, and Poland suffered 6,000,000 dead by the end of the war. Even stranger is that Britain actually was trying to signal to Poland to give up Danzig because of its historic ties to Germany, but Poland got the wrong signal.

Both Poland and Czechoslovakia ended up in the Soviet bloc after the war of course, but Czechoslovakia had a lot less dead people.

The lesson for Ukraine is that if you're a small country next to a big, bad country, and if you actually house many people who ethnically are from the big, bad country, you'd better mind your P's and Q's -- don't go aligning yourself with the enemies of the big, bad country, unless you want to get a lot of your own people killed. Again, this is realism versus idealism.

By the way, you might want to re-check what an ad hominem attack is like. An ad hominem attack is mudslinging meant to divert attention away from the real issue. The statement I made about people believing whatever their television tells them is hardly a diversion; it's at the heart of the problem with the western world.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:37 pm
by Mountaineer
No wonder the participants in this thread have such varying opinions. Putin never did, to the best of my knowledge, invade the Ukraine. I think Russian troops directed by Putin did - but Putin? I doubt it. Words matter. Sorry, I couldn't resist after all the pages of opining by those who can do just about zilch toward influencing an outcome. This is on par with watching/listening to the daily "news" and basing ones well-being on it. ;)

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:02 pm
by SilentMajority
dualstow wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:03 am
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:09 pm
And so it's okay for us to kill terrorists without due process, but it's not okay for Putin to do it, and the only reason most people don't see any contradiction here is because they believe anything their television tells them.
You don’t have to go all ad hominem on everyone who doesn’t share your worldview, which is most people. Wouldn’t it be more satisfying, stuper, to just quietly know that the rest of the western world is fooled while you know better?
It is a discussion board, the purpose of which is an outlet for opinions and such. The premise that stuper said that most people believe anything the TV says is probably true, but it's a shrinking population. A vocal minority of the country believe and support what the TV tells them. Most people are too busy with their own lives to care and then there are people who think for themselves which is a small group.

I think most people do not support the indiscriminate killing of people by the US government and oppose the US government support of the Kiev regime. It's just a minority in the western world that supports it. It might only be a vocal minority on this discussion board even.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:06 pm
by SilentMajority
stuper1 wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:01 am
dualstow wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 7:03 am
stuper1 wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:09 pm
And so it's okay for us to kill terrorists without due process, but it's not okay for Putin to do it, and the only reason most people don't see any contradiction here is because they believe anything their television tells them.
You don’t have to go all ad hominem on everyone who doesn’t share your worldview, which is most people. Wouldn’t it be more satisfying, stuper, to just quietly know that the rest of the western world is fooled while you know better?
What would be more satisfying to me is if the US would stay out of other countries' business and stop using my tax money to get so many people killed needlessly ... fighting to the last Ukrainian.

Here's another apt example I came across last night while reading Pat Buchanan's "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War": Czechoslovakia didn't get any war guarantees from Britain and France, and so didn't resist when it was being carved up by neighboring countries who wanted their land and people back that had been taken from them by the Versailles Treaty. By the end of the war, the people in these lands formerly known as Czechoslovakia had suffered about 100,000 dead.

By contrast, Poland got war guarantees from Britain and France, and so decided to fight when Germany demanded Danzig back (Danzig was a very German place that was given to Poland by Versailles). Well, the guarantees from Britain and France basically amounted to nothing, and Poland suffered 6,000,000 dead by the end of the war. Even stranger is that Britain actually was trying to signal to Poland to give up Danzig because of its historic ties to Germany, but Poland got the wrong signal.

Both Poland and Czechoslovakia ended up in the Soviet bloc after the war of course, but Czechoslovakia had a lot less dead people.

The lesson for Ukraine is that if you're a small country next to a big, bad country, and if you actually house many people who ethnically are from the big, bad country, you'd better mind your P's and Q's -- don't go aligning yourself with the enemies of the big, bad country, unless you want to get a lot of your own people killed. Again, this is realism versus idealism.

By the way, you might want to re-check what an ad hominem attack is like. An ad hominem attack is mudslinging meant to divert attention away from the real issue. The statement I made about people believing whatever their television tells them is hardly a diversion; it's at the heart of the problem.
Don't forget the Finnish example. They lost territory and hundreds of thousands of lives by refusing the Soviet offer/demand rather than gain territory and save lives. No certainty as to how it would have played out otherwise but that's what happened. The Polish example and the Finnish one should have been instructive to Kiev but they are taking their marching orders from Washington.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:07 pm
by SilentMajority
Mountaineer wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 1:37 pm
No wonder the participants in this thread have such varying opinions. Putin never did, to the best of my knowledge, invade the Ukraine. I think Russian troops directed by Putin did - but Putin? I doubt it. Words matter. Sorry, I couldn't resist after all the pages of opining by those who can do just about zilch toward influencing an outcome. This is on par with watching/listening to the daily "news" and basing ones well-being on it. ;)
What is the purpose of an internet discussion board?

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:15 pm
by SilentMajority
Anyone have any thoughts for how things will play out this winter?

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:57 pm
by dualstow
stuper1 wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 11:01 am
By the way, you might want to re-check what an ad hominem attack is like. An ad hominem attack is mudslinging meant to divert attention away from the real issue. The statement I made about people believing whatever their television tells them is hardly a diversion; it's at the heart of the problem.
No it is not. Ad hominem is purely going after the person and not the argument. You’re not just disagreeing with “television,” but with the bulk of scholars and writers in the western world who have something to say about Putin. Experts who study Putin and Russia, and write volumes on the subject. Going against them doesn’t mean you’re wrong. What’s wrong is saying that people who generally agree with that host of scholars instead of you have gotten to where they are via CNN.

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 5:01 pm
by dualstow
SilentMajority wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:02 pm

I think most people do not support the indiscriminate killing of people by the US government and oppose the US government support of the Kiev regime. It's just a minority in the western world that supports it. It might only be a vocal minority on this discussion board even.
Because…the Russians aren’t doing any indiscriminate killing?

Re: Putin Invades Ukraine II

Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 5:10 pm
by dualstow
SilentMajority wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 2:02 pm
It is a discussion board, the purpose of which is an outlet for opinions and such. The premise that stuper said that most people believe anything the TV says is probably true, but it's a shrinking population. A vocal minority of the country believe and support what the TV tells them. Most people are too busy with their own lives to care and then there are people who think for themselves which is a small group.

I think most people do not support the indiscriminate killing of people by the US government and oppose the US government support of the Kiev regime. It's just a minority in the western world that supports it. It might only be a vocal minority on this discussion board even.
So the Americans are rubes but over in Kazakhstan or Singapore they know better. I wonder what magic allowed them to overcome the same reports that have entranced people in the U.S. Or are they just watching RT.