Videospirit

The problem with you, is you look at this war and you go "It's Nato's fault", and that basically becomes your sole issue of focus to the point nothing else really matters to you and you spend almost every post you make blaming NATO for things. Tone is hard to tell over the internet, so maybe it's just extreme disappointment rather than dislike for NATO, but the effect of your actions is you basically work in favour of Russia because of your constant destructive criticism of NATO, whether you intend to or not. And you're also weirdly defensive of Nationalist, who has a freakish hard on for his fantasized Russian Victory. Neither of these things make you come across as pro Ukraine.

I don't know if you're a Russian cheerleader explicitly, but you definitely like Russia more than you like NATO. Maybe Russia isn't your favourite thing ever, but to approve of Russia's actions more than NATO's actions in regards to Ukraine shows a fundamental lack of moral character to the point you are a Russian Cheerleader in practice if not intent. NATO is not at war with Russia, they are under no obligation to send support to Ukraine, any support Ukraine receives from NATO is purely discretionary on the part of NATO's member states. To make the Ukraine war about NATO at all shows your state of mind is Anti-NATO in the first place. Personally I would like for every other country on the planet to provide their full support to Ukraine driving out Russia, but I'm not going to rant against countries for being less supportive than they could be when they have no treaties mandating they aid Ukraine. This was a one sided act of aggression on the part of the Russian state, and Russia alone bears the full responsibility for all consequences of Russia's actions, not Nato or anyone else. Anyone who desires peace in the world will want Russia to come out of this war with no officially recognized territorial concessions. Perhaps such people could accept a ceasefire with unrecognized illegal occupation of Ukranian territory, but if you think Russia should be allowed to lawfully annex territory for Peace, you don't want Peace, you want interbellum.

Don't quote me if you're not responding to the content of my post. You talking to yourself is kind of creepy and doesn't really add anything to this discussion either, but it's extra creepy when you direct your monologue towards other people.

Like, I'm not saying your prediction isn't a possible outcome of this war, but you are incredibly biased. You have this smug sense of superiority that you know exactly how this war is going to end, and you interpret everything you see in the most supportive way for your viewpoint you can even if you have to make shit up to do so. The simple fact of the matter is, the article you linked does not support your viewpoint beyond the simple fact that the President of Ukraine is considering a negotiated peace, although it preconditioned that negotiated peace on Ukraine being in a position of strength that would allow it to get want it wants in the peace settlement, which is not at all supportive of your beliefs. Now, your fantasy is that it's just Zelensky making efforts to make "Russia's inevitable Victory" more acceptable to the world, but regardless of whether that is the truth or not, the article does not say that and that belief that it's the true meaning of the article is entirely in your head with no evidence in reality. So you yourself are the most explicit example of someone who "cannot see the trees for your desires." You lack the capability to be unbiased, and your conviction that you are correct is so strong as to make you seem insane. TLDR: The article does not support your beliefs, and you're crazy for being certain it does.

What the hell does any of this have to do with your insane belief that the President of Ukraine is planning to surrender the occupied land to Russia soon, or the article you linked's supposed support for your fantastical position?

Than you are completely misrepresenting that article. It does not support your claims at all.

Ok, so you agree that Ukraine will Force Russia to accept peace and withdraw from Ukraine if Ukraine is given more support like that article is talking about? Because if you'd read it, you'd know that's what it says.

The problem is "What's best for his/her nation" is subjective, so nationalists are inherently destructive because no nation can universally agree on anything subjective, and since Nationalism is an extreme ideology, they want what's best and if they have to oppress dissenters to achieve "what's best" for their nation that's what they'll do.

I think you're getting Patriots and Nationalists confused. Nationalists don't give 2 shits about their countries values, they want their country to be the best, and they want the power to shape it to their desires. That desire for power means they admire people like Putin who have that power over their own countries, and see him as worthy of emulation, and anything that challenges Putin's perceived success is a direct assault on their power fantasy worldview.

Seems the Kursk Operation has succeeded. Thousands of Troops have been withdrawn from occupied Ukraine to respond.

At no point did I say the migrants have a right to migrate to the US. My points are as follows: 1. Migrants ultimately add to the strength and economy of the United States, allowing them into the country will not cause the collapse of America or any other serious crises. It's not something you actually need to be concerned about about as a regular citizen. 2. The cost to Americans necessary to keep them out would be immense, so much so that none of your politicians can agree on a proposal to end the practice. All the methods that could achieve the goal are extremely impractical. Just securing the US border alone would be a massive undertaking, and you would need to completely ban all legal travel by non citizens to America as well, which would have a devastating impact on the US economy. It's much easier to just accept that people are going to migrate to the country whether you want them to or not. 3. There is a third way to prevent immigration. That is to make America a country that is not desirable to live in. Why you would entertain this approach baffles my mind as if undocumented immigrants don't want to live in a country, citizens quality of life isn't much better. Still, by all means adopt "Make America a shithole" as your political slogan if you feel that strongly about it. See point 3 above. It comes down to "Do you want to make the process inexpensive? Or do you want to make the process difficult?" because you can't have both. A ban on working in the US just costs the US money without any benefit if you're going to accept the applicant in the end anyway. Accepting any migrant who genuinely wants to work and live in America is net benefit as well.

Rofl "Mixed households of American citizens and undocumented immigrants qualify for household based benefits!" That's your argument? You either want to take away rights from American citizens, want to split up households by taking their children away from their parents, or hate your constitution but I'm not sure what. Regardless you aren't making the argument you say you're making. And it's also ignoring the fact that undocumented immigrants still pay taxes despite their personal ineligibility for most services paid for by those taxes, paying far more in taxes than even the stuff you're complaining about. Social Security alone probably would have failed by now if it wasn't for undocumented immigrants.

I'd like to say it's because Biden doesn't control your country, but I'm not confidant he would fix the problem even if he was given the ability to implement whatever policies he wanted. It really is not difficult for your government to just order a shitload of condos built and give lease to own contracts to homeless citizens though. They don't do it because their donors don't want them to do it. If you consider homelessness to be intolerable you'll have to convince your government to fix the problem. At least some democrats are likely open to the idea so I'd start there, as Republicans mostly seem interested in making the problem worse. Citation Needed. Undocumented Immigrants don't get benefits because... they aren't documented in your system to get benefits, it's right there in the name. I'm not aware of any issues Biden has given to veterans either. He seems to support veterans. Has he vetoed any legislation providing veteran benefits? Has he tried to have veterans removed from any government programs under his authority? This comment just sounds like pure delusional nonsense with no basis in reality. If Veterans aren't getting enough support, you need to complain to the Republicans who control the house to pass legislation to give them that support.

Yes, pretty much exactly that. Being concerned about those things is fine, but calling a failure to do so a crises is Xenophobia. And what exactly are you trying to say about China or India? That the countries are weak and unable to take an influential role in the world or protect themselves because they... have too many people? The only reason China and India are major world powers today is because of their population. For the most part it doesn't work? Only a very small number of applicants are accepted every year compared to the number of individuals who wish to migrate to the US. Props to the people who succeed in legally migrating to the US, nothing wrong with that, but most immigrants have no choice but to choose alternative routes. Not that I'm necessarily saying the US needs to have an open border, but it wouldn't be a big deal if it did, so having a defacto half open border because the US bureaucracy, both Republican and Democrat, can't figure out any way to process the sheer number of migrants isn't any kind of crises. "all of these countries"? As for Health Care and Housing, the US is the richest country in the world. They could solve both whenever they want. Housing is easy because you have more than enough labour and material to build housing to meet your needs but simply choose not to because sky high property values make more profit for less work. Healthcare might take more work to develop sustainably, but you could easily expand your healthcare capacity immensely to the point you can meet your growing needs over 20 years, and short term deficiencies could be solved by prioritizing legal immigrants and citizens. Undocumented Immigrants don't really expect to receive the full benefits of American citizens to begin with. These shortages are all artificial.

CDN FOX seems to be living in their own reality that contradicts actual reality and there's no talking sense into such foolishness so I've put them on complete ignore as arguing with them is a waste of time and they frankly don't deserve it. I'm not sure if they can still see my posts, but don't bother replying to me in the future, I won't see it. Yes, All the jews in Arab occupied Palestine got exterminated while it was under Arab occupation after 1948. Oh wait... that didn't happen. You're a joke who has to imagine Arabs as genocidal boogeymen to justify your hatred of them. Stop acting like a bigot. I'm honestly not sure what the world would be like today if the Arabs had won in 1948. Jews would certainly have a much better reputation in the world as Israel would never have existed to drag their name through the mud, but they likely wouldn't have a sovereign state of their own because they never would have formed a state of Israel in the first place and thus wouldn't have any legal claim to territory for the Arabs to "give back" to them. So sold their lease, sold their sovereignty, does it really matter? Unless god personally descends to revoke the Palestinians lease, you got no legal argument.

Yes, subjectively some Americans may feel other Presidents are more criminal, but objectively Trump's list is so absurdly long and most Presidents aren't objectively criminal at all. What an American way of thinking about things. The world doesn't revolve around America. In fact, Trump actively worked to erode America's influence around the world during his presidency so America is even less important to the general trends of the globe than ever. Cost of living has gone up everywhere in the world, it's not something America is responsible for. As for a "less peaceful" world? Trump encouraged war between Israel and Palestine instead of diplomacy despite the looming deadlines of the Oslo accords approaching by moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, Trump gave Putin endorsement to arrange forces for his invasion of Ukraine, Trump publicly toyed with the idea of nuking countries he didn't like. Is it any wonder the world is less peaceful now than it was before Trump's presidency? Trump has arguably done more to destabilize world peace than any American President in Living Memory, which is surprising since he hasn't even personally started any wars. In Comparison Biden hasn't started any wars and has tried to repair America's relations and influence. I'll admit I don't take the border situation as seriously as right wingers. Xenophobia isn't really a respectable basis for governing policy, and the more people living in America the stronger the country becomes. Your country is popular, what can I say. People feel safer living in America under Biden than they did under Trump, huge success that, but it does mean your country is going to have more people trying to live in it which puts more stress on your borders. What have republicans in charge of the house proposed to fix the problem? What's your preferred solution? Turn America into a shithole that nobody wants to move to? As for people on the streets chanting "Death to America, Death to Israel" well, I suppose you can blame Biden for that. Biden's US has steadfastly opposed Palestinian membership in the United Nations, if it wasn't for the recent US veto Palestine would have a much stronger negotiating position to end Israel's occupation of their land and achieve Peace. But Biden at least has been critical of Israel, whereas Trump has openly encouraged Israel to exterminate every last Arab in Palestine. I can't imagine how the people in the streets situation would have been any better under any Republican President than under Biden, and you act like there weren't protests under Trump or something or as if an attempted coup was less serious than some college campuses being occupied. I mean I can imagine ways the situation could be worse, Military law and extra judicial executions or political imprisonment of protestors, or civil war perhaps, but maybe you see murdering protestors as an improvement and are upset that Biden isn't a psychopath.

Uh... you do know that Trump is objectively the most criminal President the United States has ever had right? The man has scammed more people than almost anyone on the planet. It's just... public record all of the shit he's guilty of doing. It's a long list. Why do you find it unthinkable that such a man could also be guilty of more serious crimes?

Palestine: "End the occupation of our land so we can return to peace." Israel: "I'd rather not. Maybe if you give up your sovereignty and become a puppet state of Israel with 0 military we'd consider it. That's totally a thing that other sovereign states on planet earth do right?" CdnFox: "Clearly Israel is open to peace and it's the Palestinians who don't want peace."

Well now that we've cleared up the God gave them the land and they gave it away so no longer have the biblical claim to the land history lesson, we can get back to talking about modern borders of Israel. 0 International recognition. There isn't a single other nation on the planet that recognizes it as part of Israel. Israel is a rogue state. The world has adopted a status quo that forbids the military annexation of territory from another sovereign state since the formation of the united nations. Like any law, it isn't perfect since rogue states like Israel or Russia or Turkey can break that law if they wish, but we've gone decades since world war 2 and the number of nations that have outright violated that norm can be counted on one hand, and the rest of the world remembers these violations and refuses to recognize them. Now, some territory has been annexed militarily since than and accepted by the world, but in all cases that was a result of decolonization or civil war where borders and statehood weren't clear, and happened relatively quickly after decolonization. Turkey Israel and Russia are the only nations on the planet to violate this, just 3 countries! Morocco can be considered a gray zone because their efforts fell into the decolonization efforts, except the colony fought back and gained some level of independence militarily without managed to regain the entire colony, but even if you include Morocco that's only 4 nations. None of Turkey Israel or Russia have received international recognition of their annexations. There are nearly 200 countries on the planet, but only 3 of them have claimed to annex territory from another sovereign state. How many countries annexed territory from another sovereign state in the 60 years before the formation of the united nations? Way more than 3! This norm needs to be defended for the sake of world peace, and every state that violates it needs to be treated as the Rogue state threatening world Peace it is. As such, the original 1948 proposed borders for Israel have no real weight because they were never ratified and military conflict settled the borders, Israel got to keep whatever of Palestine they could hold militarily in 1948, and the majority of the planet accepts that as Israeli Territory. The rest of Palestine became Arab territory. Defying that makes Israel a Rogue state. It's that simple. If Israel wants to regime change Palestine, whatever, I don't like it, but war is war, they can be forgiven if that's their objective. But what they absolutely need to do to be forgiven is give Palestine their land back after the war, and you should want them to do that too for the sake of world Peace. Israel has had decades to give Palestine their land back though, and the cause of the end of the ceasefire was Israel's refusal to return their land not some desire to genocide Israel. This is why Israel gets so much hatred and Israel, as a Nation, deserves it.

The Fall of Judea was the end of Jewish Sovereignty over the "promised land". The area was a territory of other nations(Babylon, Persia, Rome) etc. after that, not an independent sovereign state. It's pretty clear that any bestowal by God ended at that time, it was entirely the efforts of men that led to modern Israel.

So you're saying Moses is the one who granted Israel to the Jews, not God? Well regardless of whether it was Moses or God who granted Israel to the Jews, The Jews gave it to Babylonia when Jeconiah surrendered to Babylonia so maybe it was supposed to be theirs forever but they gave it away.

What hypocrisy.

Why does whether or not Ukraine is a NATO ally matter whether it would make sense to "launch an attack on Russia" as you claim? National interests are under threat from Russian aggression either way. National interests of "I don't want to legitimize being invaded by a stronger country" should exist for every country on the planet except like, China, so all of them have motive to prevent Russian conquest. The same way the US came to South Vietnam's aid without dragging NATO into a world conflict? Yeah? As long as Ukraine is the battlefield and not Russia proper, they would do exactly that. Same reason Russia isn't going to use nukes over Ukraine, but will if people invade Russia proper.

You're pretty ignorant of de jure huh? Please show the original document signed by god granting Jews sovereignty over Israel. If God's mandate was truly eternal, surely this document will still exist in perpetuity.

Why would Russia's allies attack Ukraine if Ukraine's allies defend it? None of Russia's treaties require their allies to join their invasion against Ukraine, and Russia's allies almost certainly don't want to go to war with the EU or NATO. I'm not saying people should invade Russia, they should just kick Russia out of Ukraine than Fortify the hell out of the border. If Russia failing to Conquer Ukraine is a serious enough setback for Russia that Russia's allies will provoke world war 3 in response, world war 3 is going to happen because it means Russia's allies are already committed to starting an era of wars of conquest. Do you have no understanding of foreign policy?