myata

No, we were talking about you, not some abstract cheerleaders. It's you who chose to be blind to almost exact, step in step repetition of a brutal aggression by a brutal totalitarian dictator citing some meaningless generalities. It's you who has to be happy with thugs and bandits annexing their possessions and always ready to "negotiate". It was all about you all along, and you didn't even notice. How ironic.

Hamas attack on Israel today shows that the example of blatant force is spreading quickly in the less developed and more authoritarian parts of the world. The blueprint is very similar. The results, devastating. And with West in a state of uncertainty, it may not take long to see quite a different world emerging around us. The world in which a brutal aggression can be executed with complete impunity, with the right connections. Where rules and justice have no meaning. Where anyone can be attacked anywhere and any time. Where nukes are shared and spread among the dictators with no consequences or controls. The sense of self-admiration and extreme reluctance for bold and energetic decisions can be a risky position in this potential future. What would it take to prevent it? Some thoughts. 1. Utter and complete defeat of Putin's aggression. Far more than an isolated episode, this is a) a claim to end the rules based order established after WWII; b) an invitation for aggressors and tyrants to join the Axis and rule with no limits; and c) a blueprint to follow. Short of defeating it, the dark future cannot be prevented. 2. Establishing strict and enforceable control over nukes. Dictator thugs cannot have it. That understanding has to come to enforceable policy supported and executed by all responsible members of the world community. Russia and North Korea are first, obviously. Without it, dark nuke infested future cannot be prevented. 3. Establishing effective and enforceable mechanisms of resolution of legitimate disputes and prevention of armed conflict. The response to unprovoked use of arms, aggression and invasion has to be quick, effective and severe. Thugs must know and see the consequences and the instruction by experience has to continue until it settled into their minds that aggression as absolutely the worst course of action for them. 4. Opening up international mechanisms of security to all countries that value and implement democracy. Failure to do so may edge some countries to build associations with the Axis in hopes of gaining at least some security. It won't help them, in the long run. And it can ruin the foundation of trust and force for collective security. These are just some thoughts.

A thief or robber "annexed" your wallet so it's their now and you have to "negotiate". Aha, that's entirely different, right? Go figure.

Because you said so. Keep rambling. But you have nothing to say. That's what you desire somewhere deep because you want to cheer for brutal dictator thugs. Like you can, right? And it's guaranteed that nothing bad will happen? But your saying it is only your petty wishing and nothing more. There are people with resolve and courage who will stand up to the thug and defeat him. And you cannot even dare to think it's possible. This is the only statement you can make, factually. This is what is happening: he's burning his equipment and cannon fodder at a lightning speed and still could not hold. At some point his cannon fodder will get tired and will turn their rifles only because it's more likely to survive that way and nothing to lose. And that will be the end of Putin. And it's not just me saying that but it's already happened, based on experience. And his "annexations" that nobody (except maybe folk like you see above why) takes seriously will land him in a tribunal or a bunker just like before. And you will watch it mumbling something dumb and useless. This is what's happening and what is going to happen. Get yourself ready. But sure. A thief or robber "annexed" your wallet so it's their now and you have to "negotiate". This how you understand the law like centuries of democracy never happened.

So that's how you would have decided in 1940-41. No way around that, no. And the future, follows. Putin barging into a sovereign neighbor European country, just like, exactly like Hitler in 1940 is only "politics" and "flailing". OK. Keep going, this line of thought will take you right to the dismal end. And I couldn't care a broken dime. Because nothing you're saying is new. Can't stand up to this. Just survive anyhow. "Negotiate" with a bandit by giving him all he wants. All of that is in the past. It not about Ukraine silly: it's in what direction of the arrow of time you are going. Got it, finally?

Putin is like, "everyone". Keep going. It'll sure take you somewhere.

One can only hope that there's still sufficient intelligence and responsibility on both sides of the House to chose reason over the chaos. No one will gain from it: thinking so moved from naive to plain dumb and irresponsible.

Blindness needs no wikipedias. Hitler is as Hitler does. It's up to one's intelligence and ethics to convince themselves to not see; apologize and trivialize hitlers. Of course, far from the first, except this time around there will be no "naivity" and "first time" excuses.

OK, standing up to Hitlers is "absurdity", unchallenged. Letting Hitlers run amok has to be the new wisdom. Sanity test: which direction is mentality of these Canadians evolving to? Is it future, sure?

And that is the perception, emanation that spreads in the Western world. The old prosperity model has run out of steam. New directions and models are needed desperately but the political, administration system does not have incentives and rewards for new, quite on the contrary it always rewards mediocrity and the least meaningful action. The gap between the resolve and energy needed to start on a new direction and tiny, infinitesimal steps that are possible. We may not find a good answer in this setting. And then, the binary system exacerbates it even further as each side of the duet is looking to hang as much as possible on the opponent while promising everything impossible only to get to the chair. They cannot and not really interested in the solutions for the society. Works well as it is (for them) so why fixing? And the next cycle, and on.

What logic? "Negotiate with Hitler" logic? Nothing changed in the logic of standing up to brutal, fascist thugs since, it's only in your panicking mind you are grasping for some non-existent explanations and straws. I asked you a simple, clear question: if people with your mindset were deciding the fate of the world in say, the 1940, what world would we be living now? You don't have an answer or wouldn't say it aloud. So you are down to little tricks and deceptions to calm the mind disturbed by that obvious split between the assumed position of lofty goodness and the absence of will and resolve to act. And what else? "Negotiate", was it the word? Is that what we call it that when someone pulls a gun on you and demands all that you have, what defines you? A normal five year old knows the word. You couldn't say it because it would break the view of the world that you struggle to keep in contrast to the stark reality. What world will your children live in if you let brutal thugs like Putin, Un and Iran run free and wild in it? No answer. Wouldn't answer. Avoiding answering by any trick. Your little hope now is that the fight will end for any of the straw reasons - is it because it shows you what you could do, could be and cannot be? Just wondering. But it's nothing new really - I'm sure there were loads by a ton of those who cried and called to negotiate with Hitler in 1940 when all looked like one couldn't win against such a monstrous and brutal war machine. In evolution there are no final answers. Every generation has to face challenges and come up with answers that will define them, and the future. The answer given four generations back gave the world a few decades of relative peace. But today you can certainly come up with a different one. Wanna know where it'll take you: further ahead or in the dark and violent past?

And the case of McCarthy of course clearly shows that there can be no useful compromises with the lying authoritarian mob: like the ring of the story it can only bring one down to its level; any claims to use it for anything good are only an illusion or more likely, self-deception and just deception. If good, thinking people cannot find middle ground to work on and for, the country can be in a serious trouble.

We can create our reality. No reality is given for free and for granted. Two alternative realities were within the horizon of possibilities last century. People of courage and will chose one, and set it in. Folks like you cannot get it because they always eat what they are fed and go to sleep when told. They fight when they are sure of winning and lie down, call it "negotiating" if you like otherwise. Nothing new here, they were here always yawn. Good night.

I have no reasons to lock into partisan agendas so I checked the record on the first McCarty election in January of this year. As it appears he was elected with no help from Democrats, so I don't get what kind of agreement he could have had. The election took the record-setting 16 votes. It's fully legitimate for both parties to put forward their candidates however, by round ten it was clear that a Democrat House speaker isn't going to happen this time. At this point Dems had a choice: to approach responsible Republicans and attempt to make the House work without a direct manipulation of the extreme. That was a choice and a possibility: a window to make a step back to normality. Any agreement they make would be clear and transparent, in most part. There would be no hooks for the extreme to influence and broader support for Ukraine, that is in the interests of the whole free world at the time when a new Axis of Tyranny is rising. GOP won the House; it is logical that they would have the speaker, and in the interests of the House and the country, that it would a responsible individual with integrity. What could be wrong with that? It looks to me (but I may not know everything) that the Dems decided to play the zero sum game instead: what hurts the Republicans should be good for them (and for the democracy?). Only we deserve to rule, by the way, did you notice how close it sounds to what trumpists are saying? And Joe in the street just may not grasp the difference. As a direct result, the favorite for the position is loyalist of Trump, and the possibility of chaos in the House ever higher. Congrats. Chaos is just what Trump's crowd needs before the election, its their favorite habitat. Looks like you're doing it again, ohoh. It remains to be said that it looks like the culture of partisanship is ingrained very deeply in both parties. That's not great however one looks at it.

I see your point. Might makes right. You'll fight him if you think you're stronger and otherwise, lay down and negotiate. Point clear. And your mind will do the rest. Except with some fights you never know, until you take it on. Same Russia was way bigger than now, relative to Europe; the conclusion to WWI looked even easier than to you now (because you always judge the fight by the size, even what you hear not see or tested it - cov.. no, caution often does that). And then, it cracked. And it'll crack again, sure, it's only a matter of time. And ones like you, what will happen to their fears, and forecasts? Just garbage of history. No good way forward. Just think of it this way: if people like you took the upper hand in the West of early 1940s: nothing to do with us; negotiate with Hitler; let's see what happens next; what world would we be living in now? How would it look like? Anyone of clear thought and memory would see it right away.

The way you think really defeats me. Look the psycho shot "only" a few dozen innocent shoppers but could have taken out whole block with a bomb. This makes him "good", doesn't it like you said, "gentle spanking" no?! In what f-ing universe, which brains and how, work this way? And the "law" remember, what was that about? Any brutal thug on a murder spree from now on merits an honest negotiation? No, just incomprehensible. Beyond my ability to connect with your idea.

Stop parroting bullshit. It means that you're letting go of your sound mind and your brain. An armed bandit barged into your house, you "negotiate", what? Folks like you tried to negotiate with Hitler and remember what happened? To folks like Hitler, Putin Un brutal dictator thugs your love for negotiations means only one thing: you are weak and won't stand up to them. Remember? Brain is your friend. You were born with it for a reason - not so?

"Poland was used to disable Nazis". Putin invaded Ukraine but "it is used", in a bizarre alternative world. I seriously have no interest in people who decide to turn their brain off and ignore the reality. The outcome of this war will define the future of the world. There's no way we can have United Nations with any meaning, EU will go sideways even NATO will be compromised if this evil is allowed to go with impunity and spread. How can you try and prosecute petty African tyrants, after this? What will the word "terrorist" mean, after killing 50 civilians in one strike for no reason? Your cheering forecasts for brutal thugs are worth nothing except showing who you are. If Hitler managed to hold on till ... he may not lose, great. But Ukraine has to win to survive and ensure normality in the world. And it will, with the help of all normal people in the world. While the folks like you will comment and sneer on the sidelines. Who cares though? You had the time and the brain, and it's only up to you what you do with them.

Sure. And the guy who calls them "geniuses" and "very honorable", where would he lean? In your honest and objective view?

"Spoiler - the conservatives are behind it and are all russian spies. Not even kidding" No kidding. Who's crying, whining and sighing there in your plain sight? Who's spreading the message in cute little lying ways go no further than this very topic? What does it look like? What do the messengers look like? No, trust your own eyes not whines and shouts, always. It never works well the other way. This is not about Ukraine, it's about who will be next letting Hitlers run free and wild. What, you have a guarantee of protection, in the brave new dictator thug world?

We, citizens shouldn't allow abuse or misuse of power by any individual or a party. When democracy is undermined, everyone will end up worse and quite possibly (history knows examples) in trouble. When political system is in a dead end, it may be up to the citizens to prevent it from taking the whole society down with it. The story of German fascism should give us warnings about such events.

This is a regular, predictable and expected product of extreme partisanship: to survive we need to move out ever further, polarize and stretch the society. Very obviously it won't have a good ending. But the problem is that in the political system the priorities and incentives are almost exactly the opposite, and in that little world it makes all the sense. However, it won't stop there. As the events show, it won't rest until it takes the whole society with it.

The connection was right there, maybe you missed it? Putin, in your definition, is a fascist dictator. A certain character believes him to be "a genius" and just in case, another totalitarian dictator, "very honorable". So we have two fascist dictators by your definition, and another character who holds them in very high esteem. Now to your question: what would the aforementioned character have to do with "right wing"? In your definition.

Doesn't it like speak for itself? Who is Putin (in your definition)? A fascist, totalitarian dictator. Who is Join Un (your defition)? A brutal totalitarian dictator. Then, if the former is "genius" and the latter, "very honorable" who the speaker is? This is a very simple question. Only plain logic.

Prolific, pathological and disgusting lying. Genetic, too?