Fat Trudeau becomes unglued when a Canadian doesn't support his corrupt war in Ukraine

[CdnFox]

21 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Bull Shit! You do not know what could have been.

Sure i do. Just like i knew when they gave putin crimea he was going to come back for the rest of it. And he did.

This is as easy to predict as it is to predict that if i push a cup off the table it will fall thanks to gravity. Its' a probability so high as to be a practical certainty.

And lets be honest - deep down you know it too. The only reason you get angry about it is it doesn't fit the narrative you've emotionally invested in.

But yeah - this was going to happen.

[Nationalist]

Just now, CdnFox said:

Sure i do. Just like i knew when they gave putin crimea he was going to come back for the rest of it. And he did.

This is as easy to predict as it is to predict that if i push a cup off the table it will fall thanks to gravity. Its' a probability so high as to be a practical certainty.

And lets be honest - deep down you know it too. The only reason you get angry about it is it doesn't fit the narrative you've emotionally invested in.

But yeah - this was going to happen.

OK so...important notice...CdnFox can predict the future.

Bye...

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Question: Were the Russians selling arms to the Iraqis during "shock and awe"?

OF course not - russia was on the side of the coalition and signed off on the UN war.  You dont sell weapons to the OTHER SIDE in a war - the US isn't selling any weapons to russia right now are they,

Iraq invaded kuwait not only without permission from moscow, but without even telling them it was going to happen. The russian minister was traveling with an American counterpart the day it happened. Moscow was furious. 

Not sure why it's relevant. 

if we're going to talk middle east then the us during russia's afghanistan would be relevant - the us supplied arms and training and yet somehow we didnt' see an escalation

[CdnFox]

15 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

OK so...important notice...CdnFox can predict the future.

Yep - i predict if you push a cup off the table it will fall downward not upward. I'm freaking amazing! Hopefully i won't get burned as a witch

Some things are very easy to predict. they follow easy to measure and calculate paths and there's sufficient previous experience to predict future behavior. There's nothing difficult about it.  Most guys can accurately predict that if they sleep with another woman their wife will be unhappy about it. IT's not hard to work out. 

Apparently for you the idea is shocking,    LOL "What!?! She's ANGRY?!? Who could have predicted THIS!!!?!?"

Putin's attack on ukraine was barely any harder to predict than that. Everyone with a brain knew it was only a matter of time. Nato had squat all to do with it.

Remember his stated original purpose was to go in after nazis. The nazis were the problem - thats why the war had to happen. He never mentioned nato.

There was always going to be a 'convenient excuse'. One way or another when he felt the time was right he was going to try to take over ukraine. And he did. Try that is.

 

15 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Bye...

Awwwww muffin - don't go away mad!  I get that you feel like sticking your head in the sand and humming because reality isn't matching up with your preferred narrative, but it would be better to be a grown up about it and simply accept your narrative needs work and isn't accurate.

But i guess running away with your tail between your legs is easier.  Well whatever   -  you do you.

[Nationalist]

It is clear as a bell now, that there will be a direct war between NATO (some of it anyways) and Russia over Ukraine.

@ 45:15

Now...before some war monger starts cryin' away about the source of this...the British official in this video said what he said. That the MSM refuses to report this is...not surprising.

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Now...before some war monger starts cryin' away about the source of this...the British official in this video said what he said. That the MSM refuses to report this is...not surprising.

ummm - you would be the war monger. You've excused the russian war, you've pushed regularly for the idea that the us will enter the war, and now you're pushing the idea that nato is about to enter the war.

The people speaking against all of that or complaining about the source would not be 'warmongers'. The word you were looking for there is the 'sane'.

We're not going to war in ukraine.

[Dougie93]

10 hours ago, Nationalist said:

That was 50 years ago.

A war between the USA and Russia was something that could never be allowed to happen. 

Today the USA is marching towards it. And why? What for? Why force the world into a war that is unnecessary and has zero justification?

the 1972 treaty stabilized the Cold War 50 years ago

but the Bush Administration withdrew from the treaty to pursue Ballistic Missile Defense in 2001

Ballistic Missile Defense is inherently destabilizing

because it signals that you are no longer relying on Mutual Vulnerability (MAD)

but are rather preparing to fight and win a nuclear war ( Counterforce )

when the Obama Administration deployed Aegis Ashore BMD to Romania in 2012

that set NATO and Russia on a collision course

in terms of why, it is simply miscalculation

America & Russia will not go to war directly by plan

it would happen by miscalculation, misapprehension and / or mistake

again, this is a frozen conflict, the thermonuclear weapons remain on hair trigger alert

once it is destabilized and an arms race ensues, it takes on a life of its own, with its own logic

because it is a deterrence standoff, backing off is not a safe thing to do

you are forced to confront the adversary in order to deter him

until he blinks and backs down

the last time this happened was in the Cuban Missile Crisis

that is the sort of crisis which is the catalyst, for one side or the other or both to back down

basically, we have to take things right to the brink, stare into the abyss, in order to have a resolution

that is existential risk of course, that is where the war could start by miscalculation at the brink

but neither side is likely to back down until we get there, so that is the trajectory we are on

they don't call it the Balance of Terror for nothing

Edited March 8, 2023 by Dougie93

[OftenWrong]

It should be noted that the world doomsday clock was recently moved a little closer to midnight.

"This year, the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moves the hands of the Doomsday Clock forward, largely (though not exclusively) because of the mounting dangers of the war in Ukraine. The Clock now stands at 90 seconds to midnight—the closest to global catastrophe it has ever been."

https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/

 

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

the 1972 treaty stabilized the Cold War 50 years ago

but the Bush Administration withdrew from the treaty to pursue Ballistic Missile Defense in 2001

Ballistic Missile Defense is inherently destabilizing

because is signals that you are no longer relying on Mutual Vulnerability (MAD)

but are rather preparing to fight and win a nuclear war ( Counterforce )

when the Obama Administration deployed Aegis Ashore BMD to Romania in 2012

that set NATO and Russia on a collision course

in terms of why, it is simply miscalculation

America & Russia will not go to war directly by plan

it would happen by miscalculation, misapprehension and / or mistake

again, this is a frozen conflict, the thermonuclear weapons remain on hair trigger alert

once it is destabilized and an arms race ensues, it takes on a life of its own, with its own logic

because it is a deterrence standoff, backing off is not a safe thing to do

you are forced to confront the adversary in order to deter him

until he blinks and backs down

the last time this happened was in the Cuban Missile Crisis

that is the sort of crisis which is the catalyst, for one side or the other or both to back down

basically, we have to take things right to the brink, stare into the abyss, in order to have a resolution

that is existential risk of course, that is where the war could start by miscalculation at the brink

but neither side is likely to back down until we get there, so that is the trajectory we are on

they don't call it the Balance of Terror for nothing

Love Iron Maiden. Anyway...

If this is how the world is to face nuclear holocaust...again...I'm not down for it. That may be irrelevant in the end, but this is nuts. Ukraine is on the other side of the planet. It represents no real value, other than grain maybe.

It's Bullshit and it's just wrong.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

It should be noted that the world doomsday clock was recently moved a little closer to midnight

I wouldn't view it to be like a clock, it's not a countdown

the thermonuclear war is like a gravity well, if you get too close, it could drag you down to DEFCON 1

but it's not about time, it's not a clock

it's more like an orbit

we are orbiting DEFCON 1 below us in the abyss

so rather than a countdown, it's more like a decaying orbit

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I'm not down for it.

I'm Generation X

we were born into this frozen conflict, this was the world we grew up in

thus we simply had to live life like there might not be a tomorrow

mom & dad could not save us, so we had to grow up fast

hence our generational anthem . . .

[CdnFox]

52 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Ukraine is on the other side of the planet.

But russia is right across the straight to our north. You know that, right?

And they've been disputing their border with us. You know that too right?

So to pretend that this issue involves countries 'on the other side of the world' is simply not accurate. Russia is not some remote distant country that we have no interaction with.

It is extremely to our advantage to have russia weak militarily. It's not like this has no impact on us

[Dougie93]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Ukraine is on the other side of the planet. It represents no real value, other than grain maybe.

the Russians are revanchist against America for the Soviet self inflicted defeat in the Cold War

Ukraine is just a proxy

the front line is not in Europe, it is over the Pole

Canada is the no man's land between the adversaries

Edited March 9, 2023 by Dougie93

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

I'm Generation X

we were born into this frozen conflict, this was the world we grew up in

thus we simply had to live life like there might not be a tomorrow

mom & dad could not save us, so we had to grow up fast

hence our generational anthem . . .

Huh...can't say I like that one.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

But russia is right across the straight to our north. You know that, right?

And they've been disputing their border with us. You know that too right?

So to pretend that this issue involves countries 'on the other side of the world' is simply not accurate. Russia is not some remote distant country that we have no interaction with.

It is extremely to our advantage to have russia weak militarily. It's not like this has no impact on us

Might have been a good idea to make Russia an ally when the opportunity might have been there...eh?

[CdnFox]

56 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Might have been a good idea to make Russia an ally when the opportunity might have been there...eh?

And have the much better armed united states who shares a land border with us as our enemy instead?

I can safely rule out a successful military career for you

[myata]

Trump says would give a mad dictator part of other people's country to have imaginary "peace". Wherever some sh*t is going on you'll sure to find the red-haired buffoon right in the middle of it, bathing and enjoying the spotlight. Unmistakable.

Edited March 9, 2023 by myata

[Nationalist]

10 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the Russians are revanchist against America for the Soviet self inflicted defeat in the Cold War

Ukraine is just a proxy

the front line is not in Europe, it is over the Pole

Canada is the no man's land between the adversaries

If that happens we're all likely toast.

[Nationalist]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And have the much better armed united states who shares a land border with us as our enemy instead?

I can safely rule out a successful military career for you

Now why would that happen?

[Dougie93]

10 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Huh...can't say I like that one.

it none the less perfectly articulates my generational ethos

you'd better live life to the fullest, right now

as on the brink of thermonuclear war, there might not be a tomorrow

[Dougie93]

48 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

If that happens we're all likely toast.

but avoiding an interpolar thermonuclear exchange is not as simple as merely capitulating in the face of it

[Nationalist]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

it none the less perfectly articulates my generational ethos

you'd better live life to the fullest, right now

as on the brink of thermonuclear war, there might not be a tomorrow

Doug...I can't. My sense of respect and honor won't allow me to live my life that way. I only pray I instill enough respect and honor in my kids, to not engage in this line of thinking.

[Nationalist]

5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

but avoiding an interpolar thermonuclear exchange is not as simple as merely capitulating in the face of it

Toast is toast Doug. Regardless of the side you choose. Everyone loses.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Now why would that happen?

If we were part of russia which is the mortal enemy and right on their doorstep?

I dunno - ask cuba.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

but avoiding an interpolar thermonuclear exchange is not as simple as merely capitulating in the face of it

truer words were never spoken.

Living in fear of the bad guys rarely convinces them to leave you alone,