International Its official! Sweden is as of now the 32nd member of NATO.

[Whippy McGee]

Wait. You just, in this thread, defended the invasion.


"Russian shill" is your invention. You totally just made that up. I think you're just kind of dim and have low morals. You see Russia as being on your side so you'll defend really shitty stuff they do.

Typical Democrat / Left Cult member.... you are completely misrepresenting what he said / believes and are now attacking it. Nice straw man, Hack.

It is wholly legitimate to think Ukraine is corrupt and that Russia is a bad actor and carrying much of the blame.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Sick burn, bro.

Just keep refusing to watch the clip.

 

[Jack V Savage]

this is very common around here. the midwits have only 2 levels:
1. Ukraine is winning!
2. any comment that doesn't boil down to Ukraine is Winning! is automatically made by a russian bot.

you can't discuss shit about the subject here in a serious way.

You guys are both completely lying, though. I pointed out that that guy is defending the invasion after he defended the invasion. I didn't call him a bot, and in fact, I explicitly said I think he's just dumb and tribalistic, and it's leading him morally astray.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Typical Democrat / Left Cult member.... you are completely misrepresenting what he said / believes and are now attacking it. Nice straw man, Hack.

It is wholly legitimate to think Ukraine is corrupt and that Russia is a bad actor and carrying much of the blame.

Did you read his posts? You don't have to always agree with fellow hacks, you know.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

You guys are both completely lying, though. I pointed out that that guy is defending the invasion after he defended the invasion. I didn't call him a bot, and in fact, I explicitly said I think he's just dumb and tribalistic, and it's leading him morally astray.

i wasn't referring to your post at all, since i haven't even read it.
it was a general comment about the level of discussion on this subject in here.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Just keep refusing to watch the clip.

The clip of Colbert saying, "actually ColemanwastheGOAT didn't post what you saw him post?"

 

[Jack V Savage]

i wasn't referring to your post at all, since i haven't even read it.
it was a general comment about the level of discussion on this subject in here.

Well, I'm a specific guy.

 

[Fox by the Sea]

Well, I'm a specific guy.

bully for you i guess.

 

[Whippy McGee]

I disagree. There was a people's revolution against the Russian puppet because he tried to get in the way of integration with the EU as that's in Russia's interest despite being popular among Ukrainians. After they got rid of him and instituted elections. In the beginning Zelensky wasn't even anti-Russia, he was a centrist populist who had support even in Russian speaking areas.

On the other hand NATO expands only if the countries entering wish to join, otherwise its impossible. To compare a military alliance with actual expansionism in the form of conquest and annexation is a ludicrous false equivalency with all due respect.

We can agree to disagree. I see the NATO expansion as purposeful, targeted, and against the agreements made. However, Russia line stepped in a huge way allowing an argument that NATO's expansion was warranted. I think everyone could have been far less aggressive and we'd be in a better world.

We had that little tyrant Putin threaten Nuclear War and mentioned Armageddon last week if we had NATO troops in Ukraine. Turns out.... we have NATO troops in Ukraine. We've made huge gains with NATO. We should consolidate those gains and make a deal with Russia on Donbass being autonomous from both Ukraine and Russia (for now). That's what Putin wanted and it's not a big ask at this time.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

We can agree to disagree. I see the NATO expansion as purposeful, targeted, and against the agreements made. However, Russia line stepped in a huge way allowing an argument that NATO's expansion was warranted. I think everyone could have been far less aggressive and we'd be in a better world.

We had that little tyrant Putin threaten Nuclear War and mentioned Armageddon last week if we had NATO troops in Ukraine. Turns out.... we have NATO troops in Ukraine. We've made huge gains with NATO. We should consolidate those gains and make a deal with Russia on Donbass being autonomous from both Ukraine and Russia (for now). That's what Putin wanted and it's not a big ask at this time.

Exactly. Both sides are 'at fault' if you actually believe either side wants peace.

This is all just a game of chess played by the powerful on either side. The people who actually live there are just collateral damage that neither side genuinely gives a shit about.

 

[Prutfis]

Will they actually pay their share or will the US carry water for them like we do the rest of Europe?

Will the US stop being 99.9 percent of the reason there is a need for an organization like Nato?

 

[Rod1]

We can agree to disagree. I see the NATO expansion as purposeful, targeted, and against the agreements made. However, Russia line stepped in a huge way allowing an argument that NATO's expansion was warranted. I think everyone could have been far less aggressive and we'd be in a better world.

We had that little tyrant Putin threaten Nuclear War and mentioned Armageddon last week if we had NATO troops in Ukraine. Turns out.... we have NATO troops in Ukraine. We've made huge gains with NATO. We should consolidate those gains and make a deal with Russia on Donbass being autonomous from both Ukraine and Russia (for now). That's what Putin wanted and it's not a big ask at this time.

There will be talks when Russian acknowledges Ukraine's right to exist as an independent country.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

The clip of Colbert saying, "actually ColemanwastheGOAT didn't post what you saw him post?"

What's interesting about guys like you is you actually don't want to be informed. You want to be ignorant. Weird.

 

[Rod1]

Exactly. Both sides are 'at fault' if you actually believe either side wants peace.

This is all just a game of chess played by the powerful on either side. The people who actually live there are just collateral damage that neither side genuinely gives a shit about.

Imagine there is this culture where men own women as property and there is this culture where women are free humans.

Now there are some women from culture A that manage to escape to culture B where they willing end up in a relationship.

Culture B then complains that Culture A is stealing their women, which are lawfully their property, Culture B says "No, these women came willingly to our society and are welcome here", Culture A refuses to acknowledge that argument because in Culture A women have no will, they are more like cattle who can only be transferred in ownership by their owner.

Who is right and who is wrong?

Both are right and both are wrong based on their own set of values, so this conflict is inevitable, either we accept the West is right or we don't and Russia is right.

Being "neutral" either means sheer ignorance of covert support for one side over the other.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Imagine there is this culture where men own women as property and there is this culture where women are free humans.

Now there are some women from culture A that manage to escape to culture B where they willing end up in a relationship.

Culture B then complains that Culture A is stealing their women, which are lawfully their property, Culture B says "No, these women came willingly to our society and are welcome here", Culture A refuses to acknowledge that argument because in Culture A women have no will, they are more like cattle who can only be transferred in ownership by their owner.

Who is right and who is wrong?

Both are right and both are wrong based on their own set of values, so this conflict is inevitable, either we accept the West is right or we don't and Russia is right.

Being "neutral" either means sheer ignorance of covert support for one side over the other.

Imagine a world where you could explain your views concisely and without need for silly hypotheticals.

 

[Rod1]

Imagine a world where you could explain your views concisely and without need for silly hypotheticals.

NATO is a free alliance where members enter willingly it doesn't "expands outwards" via force and violence, unlike Russia. So no, the West didn't provoked Russia in any way or form.

You seem to be unable to grasp this very simple fact which has been explained to you before.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

NATO is a free alliance where members enter willingly it doesn't "expands outwards" via force and violence, unlike Russia. So no, the West didn't provoked Russia in any way or form.

You seem to be unable to grasp this very simple fact which has been explained to you before.

If Mexico joined an alliance with Russia and China and they put missiles in Mexico pointed at the US, what would the US do?

 

[Rod1]

If Mexico joined an alliance with Russia and China and they put missiles in Mexico pointed at the US, what would the US do?

Why would Mexico feel the need to join a military alliance with Russia or China?

 

[Rod1]

without need for silly hypotheticals.

If Mexico joined an alliance with Russia and China

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Fair. Let's use a real world example.

Did the cuban missile crisis happen? What was our response.