User

How will reading the article help me figure out what it is you agree with in the article that backs up your question asking folks if they think it is legitimate to stoke violence? Because one of the examples in the article was removing protestors that are blocking your path. So, why do you think it is OK to use such physical force to impede others travels and then why would you act like it is wrong to remove them out of your way? You don't get to block people and then act indignant about their response in removing you, especially if you are also duplicitous enough to support the left-wing local authorities who let them do it or wait forever to remove them, and when they do not punish them.

Sigh. 1. No, you asserted that Ukraine was running out of manpower, as if it were hopeless to continue to help them, so we need to just get it over with... but you have yet to explain what you mean here or how it will end. My point was to merely show you that Ukraine does have manpower and they are currently recruiting more. So, how exactly is it that you support NATO "forcing" an end to this? 2. At the current rate of expenses... there is nothing I see that shows NATO can't afford to continue. If you are so worried about NATO finances, you must surely understand the Russian finances are even worse. So how are they going to afford to continue compared to NATO? 3. There was never a realistic peace deal in the works and it is pure speculation not really supported by the evidence that it was somehow all Johnson that went there and killed it. I am not sure how to take it seriously at all that you say "Russia is doing just fine" 4. The logical conclusion of the arguments you have been making is practically inviting Russia to invade more countries. Why shouldn't they if we follow your war plan, which is to just let them. People were saying it was crazy to think Russia would invade Ukraine 5 years ago. Hell, Putin was denying it up until the moment he did. And it is not just NATO countries... I guess Moldova could easily be next. Again... there was no serious consideration to join NATO. An offhand comment at a meeting where Putin says he is waiting for an invitation and will not stand in line is no serious diplomatic effort. Where did Putin pursue this goal outside of that offhand comment? And again... to what end had Russia done anything to offer major reforms to its country from being what amounts to essentially a dictatorship that's goals and objectives around the world, the morals and ethics they pursue, being counter to Western Culture? You just throw this crap on the wall and then act like you have just painted the Mona Lisa. So yet again, please explain exactly what you mean by this war must end now.

You going to ignore the question first asked to you here or what? You were asked: "When did trump announce that? Where is this announcement?" So... can you answer? Will you answer? Lets see where you are getting this nonsense. Maybe you will be honest enough to admit you got sucked into a leftist talking point that is a lie and you repeated it here not realizing it?

Well, no. Your other assertions here have been bothering me a lot. You have ignored most of it several times now. If we abandon Ukraine now... Russia isn't going to settle with the land they have, they will continue to press and conquer Ukraine. So I have no idea what you are talking about in regards to their keeping only a quarter of it. The fact that Russia is getting away with anything they have done so far "bothers" me. It should bother everyone. If we can support Ukraine and stop Russia from going farther that is a good thing. Abandoning Ukraine and effectively giving the war to Russia now would "bother" me.

No, it was a specious legal theory on how they could challenge the results they felt were fraudulent. Trump left office peacefully. This is such fear-mongering. I am surprised you are not using the typical leftist language that we almost lost our Democracy! We were this close! It would have been Dictator Trump, it was so close, only by the grace of God and Pence did our Democracy survive! That is all extreme leftist fear-mongering not rooted in any reality, just as your characterization is. Even if Pence went along with the nonsense, as you and others continually point out, it was clearly not legally correct, so it would have been clearly stopped. Just because Pence walks out and declared Trump the World Heavyweight Champion of the WWE and slaps a fake belt around him, doesn't mean he really is. The WWE isn't going to go, well fudge, I guess Trump is the WWE champ, Pence said so. You just keep arguing from the premise that it was a coup. I reject that, so constantly calling it a coup and acting outraged about it here... doesn't make it a coup. Its just a circular argument telling me it was a coup so I must be outraged about the coup... No, it is not pretty common at all for a losing Candidate to try to conspire to overthrow the government by selectively recounting ballots and trying to "interpret" them a certain way to most benefit him so he could steal the election... We mean... there was a peaceful transfer of power. Trump walked right out after. You keep alluding to it not being so: "For the first time in the nation's history, a sitting president refused the peaceful transfer of power upon which our democracy is predicated. " No, Trump did not refuse at all. We all watched him walk out of the Office and Biden is in Office.

I have coached many folks in Marksmanship in the military, including some Sailors... and I had an E5 in the Navy on the firing line with their rounds loaded backwards in the Magazine, wondering why they couldn't "make ready" their weapon... So, yeah, folks can be in the military and be pretty ignorant with firearms. Did you miss the photo the Navy posted last week on social media they got roasted for? It was one of the Officers on the ship shooting a rifle (at least posing like he was) with the scope on backward. As if that alone was not scary enough... how many people looked at that picture and approved it to be posted on social media? ROFL

Exactly which part of this article would you like us to review as you think it is an example of stoking violence?

Abandoning Ukraine doesn't result in a peace deal, it results in a Russian victory.

From my personal experience, knowing a lot of people who worked in Union shops... they are great if you have seniority, and suck for anyone else. Oh, you want to be a level B employee instead of C? Maybe in 5 years... maybe not. Layoffs? Ha ha sucker, all you level C go first! No hope of ever advancing unless someone above you moves. Absurd restrictions on your work, that are dictated by negotiations through the Union. You can't just show up and agree to take on more work for more pay. Oh, you want to run that piece of equipment over to someone? Oh no, that is Joes job, only Joe does that. You can't do that. No incentives to ever do more or work hard, as your pay will never change. If you can make 100 widgets an hour while others only make 40... it doesn't matter. In fact, most of the others will hate you because you are making them look bad. Is the Assembly line backed up somewhere? You get to stand around for hours and do nothing. Because you are not allowed to do anything else. Just stand there. Play on your phone.

So... are you abandoning the other discussion then? This is turning into a not fun game of whack-a-mole for me. I am, quite frankly, not entirely interested in your history revision here, leaving out a lot of details to make such specious conclusions. I mean, before Zelensky passed that law, Putin make the proclomation that several terroritories would be Russian forever... which prompted this response, not that Borris Johnson was characterized a month earlier as sabotaging peace talks... (which is also disputed) and missing a lot of context around the unrealistic demands being made at the time... “He does not know what dignity and honesty are. Therefore, we are ready for a dialog with Russia, but with another president of Russia,” Zelensky said on Friday. https://nypost.com/2022/10/04/zelensky-signs-law-declaring-talks-with-putin-impossible/ So... now your big argument is to contrast Ukraine and Russia as being morally equal (dumb and dumber) so why should we support Ukraine? This is not a serious assertion at all. Russia is the aggressor here, Putin is the arguably evil dictator. Ukraine is not Russia and Zelensky is not Putin. Trying to reduce them to being equal here is less than honest. As far as our attention span goes... again, the support we are giving them is a drop in the bucket compared to our budget and again, it is a great investment in how it has significantly reduced Russian capabilities.

You asked the following rhetorical questions: "Do you figure Russia is going to just leave? They aren't. So the plan is what? The complete destruction of the Ukrainian population?" The root of your position here is that we should not support Ukraine and their cause is hopeless, so either just let them die faster without our support or... they surrender because they can't fight anymore. No? And to your questions, you are driving at the point that Russia is more determined when you ask if I think they will just leave. No? 1. You can't be serious about Russia joining NATO. Russia joining NATO doesn't change what Russia is or was and how they still operate. Also... where do you get there was ever any serious attempt by Russia to want to join NATO? IT was suggested after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, but no serious attempts were made and since then Russia has not worked with us on many collaborative endeavors to show they are good partners. Seriously, where are you getting this from? 2. I am not advocating we go to full war to protect Ukraine, so what is your point? America can still have an interest in helping people if they are not in NATO. 3. Whatever incompetence Biden was a part of is not justification to support Russia now. It is reason to oppose Biden. I think we could have avoided the entire war if we spent the months we knew Russia was building up for an invasion sending Ukraine 60 billion in defense support BEFORE, not after. 4. Not silly at all. How many deaths have they sustained and how many combat ineffective wounds? Lets take the Russian inflated numbers and say that is 100,000 dead or wounded in Ukraine. There is 38 million people in Ukraine. Estimating about 20 Million of those 38 Million are in a reasonable fighting age category of 18 to 50. Hell, take out another 5 million for good measure, just in case they are disable or have blisters on their feet... That is 15 million people. That is 150 years of losses IF it was 100,000 a year, but that is 100,000 every 3 years... A never ending war in Ukraine presume Russia is willing to engage in war forever... I make no such presumptions their economy will sustain this and Putin will not live that long. 5. The war will likely end in some kind of peace deal that leaves Russia in at a minimum Crimea, obviously, and likely some amount of the Donbas as well, but we must continue to support Ukraine to make it too costly for Russia to continue beyond anything more.But it may take many years of a stagnant war front to get there. No, I do not support open war with Russia, but I certainly do support continuing to support Ukraine how we have been if not giving them better than our left over relics we are retiring.

Well, they claim they will, if their absurdly unrealistic demands are met, to go back to the borders of 1948, to include a 100% right of return of Palestinians and 100% withdrawal of all Jews. Even then, even if Israel met such an absurdly dead on arrival demand, does anyone really believe all the terrorism and hate for Jews stops there and they live in peace? No. Nothing has really changed since 1948 when they decided to go to war against Israel in the first place.

OK, you did not say surrender... but isn't that exactly what you mean when you want Ukraine to stop and you want us to stop helping them. No? Again, if your argument here is that it is not worth fighting Russia because they are more determined... why doesn't that apply to NATO? Or any other nation not NATO they invade next? Why wouldn't they invade more if the policy countries enacted was what you say... no point in fighting back, they are more determined! I am pointing out the absurdity of your argument here.

LOL, wait a minute. You have been saying this is so obviously a coup! It is so apparent! How can I not see it?! Then this: "The charges Smith brought are a) easier to prove" Yeah, if one of us is being disingenuous here, it certainly is not me. Obama outright said DACA was not Constitutional, he didn't have the power... and yet he did it anyway. Just about everyone except left wing Democrats all agreed that Biden did not have the power to unilaterally wipe out the Student Debt as he did... and it was found unconstitutional. There was nothing reasonable about them. They were both pure power grabs they just wanted to see if they could get away with... and Obama got away with his. Just like if any of the stupid plans and legal theories team Trump tried to execute on... they would have been tossed out under judicial review. And what the Democrats were trying to do with Al Gore, while not as convoluted, was just as wrong on its face. They were trying to selectively recount votes in the way that would most favor them to win the election. That was wrong, it was illegal, and the Courts seen through the scheme.

Yeah, if for some reason the war continues at this pace for another two centuries... This is your argument, not mine. That because Russia is more determined, according to you, unwilling to quit... then Ukraine must surrender just to get it over with. Russia can just start picking off each of the Eastern Block countries, Poland, etc... because it isn't worth fighting someone more determined than you, just surrender.

Seriously, your schtick is tiresome. I have already responded to you on this and provided sources as well. Listen to yourself... try to think about it. If they formed a human chain... with the purpose of blocking people, it stands to reason that people were blocked. In fact, the police started arresting the protestors because of that. You just assert garbage and then ignore the inconvenient facts that prove your comments are nonsense. Since you ignored it before, maybe this time you will read it:

You just assert garbage with no critical thought at all. Hamas controls Gaza. Hamas controls the borders into Gaza. How does Israel just distribute food directly to the people with Hamas in control? The amount of money that came in through Qatar is pocket change to the BILLIONS in international aid $$$ that flowed into Israel from around the world. Hamas was digging up pipes meant for infrastructure to turn them into rockets... but yeah, sure, it was the pittance of $$$ from Qatar that made all the difference. Seriously... where do you fabricate the absurd assertions you make?

You said: "And if Trump cancels elections and refuses to leave" How? How exactly is that a reasonable outcome to be prepared for? Trump doesn't have the power to just cancel elections or refuse to leave. No President does.

If my math is correct, we are looking at 250 years at this rate before they are completely destroyed. Well, I guess we should just disband NATO, surrender Europe to Russia in total... it certainly is not worth fighting anyone as determined as they are. Just get it over with now.... *eye roll*

It is an Israeli War Cabinet making decisions, which includes the major opposition leader. Netanyahu is not a dictator and they have the support of the Israeli people. So its even worse... you think he was actually excusing the bad actors, blaming the other side.

Yeah, its different, but the same kind of thing... instead of saying there are good people on "both sides" he did whataboutism and said there were bad people on "both sides"

No, they would not pass this, but that was not the point. I am glad that you agree the Democrat who came up with this legislation is pushing a bunch of nonsense and this legislation is nonsense.

Um, no. They already had a 2 state solution. The Arab world, including the Palestinians at the time, rejected that and went to war against Israel. As part of that war... Israel certainly did expel some Palestinians... it was war. They lost. If you don't want to suffer the consequences of losing a war... don't start a war.

Except, by whatever stats we do have, Russia is losing A LOT more. And it is not just manpower, it is the all the costs for the logistics. Ukraine can outlast Russia a lot better there with our help. Russia has also been having to conscript forces, pay mercenaries, and come up with ways to keep feeding men to the meat grinder. Let's not pretend things are going rosy with them.

The hypotheticals have to be plausible. If you want to propose that Trump might say he is going to turn into Godzilla and eat nuclear reactors while he stomps on large cities... are we supposed to be worried that will actually happen and spend time worrying about the consequences?