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

[myata]

19 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

They did not start this war. Ukraine's intent to put NATO on the 3,000kms of border between Ukraine/Russia and Ukraine/Belarus started this war.

Lie, lie. Norway, three Baltic states, Poland, Turkey were all members of NATO long before Ukraine.

Ukraine began to increasingly lean toward NATO only after Russia's occupation of Crimea in 2014, an unprecedented act of armed aggression in post WWII Europe.

In any civilized or even minimally sane society, a citizen has the right to protect themselves against a mad armed bandit by associating with other citizens. Only brutal totalitarian states question or deny that right.

Russia's brutal invasion leaves all of her neighbors the only choice: joining NATO or becoming Russia's forever puppet. Finland and Sweden are joining NATO, Ukraine is sure to follow. Even Russia' stooges like Hungary never going to leave NATO because they know what Russia is, felt it live for decades.

Really, there's nothing to discuss with Russia's propaganda machine. It's goal is not the truth but the opposite, continuation of brutality and oppression by spreading blatant, blustering lies.

Edited March 1, 2023 by myata

[WestCanMan]

14 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

oh, it's been much worse than this

back in the 80's when President Reagan ended Detente to instead confront the Soviets

the Europeans went Anti-Nuclear Anti-American apeshit

this is the most pro-American pro-confronting the Russians NATO that has ever been

Germany isn't onboard, that's huge, and prominent Turks are talking about leaving NATO entirely...

[WestCanMan]

14 minutes ago, myata said:

And here we go again. Which one of the two is it:

A. US is fighting a war in Russia

B. Russia broke into an independent European country (and a few more) and committed numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity

Is it really so hard to have eyes and connected brain, to take in and understand the visible reality? Why should it be?

If you think that what you wrote there is true, there's no point communicating with you on this issue. 

[WestCanMan]

6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

but all of sudden, the dirty Hippies have become the Hawks

Who cares what stupid wimps think? The patriots and the fighting men are not hawkish, and that's not good news for the warmongers. 

I signed on the dotted line to fight Russians when we were told that "Ivan and Igor are coming over the hill..." and I'd have no problem doing that right now if it came down to it. 

I never would have signed up for this crap. 

[myata]

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

that what you wrote there is true,

I didn't write that, not the God these are the facts, the reality. Can you tell the difference, anymore?

[WestCanMan]

11 minutes ago, myata said:

Lie, lie. Norway, three Baltic states, Poland, Turkey were all members of NATO long before Ukraine.

Ukraine began to increasingly lean toward NATO only after Russia's occupation of Crimea in 2014, an unprecedented act of armed aggression in post WWII Europe.

In any civilized or even minimally sane society, a citizen has the right to protect themselves against a mad armed bandit by associating with other citizens. Only brutal totalitarian states question or deny that right.

Russia's brutal invasion leaves all of her neighbors the only choice: joining NATO or becoming Russia's forever puppet. Finland and Sweden are joining NATO, Ukraine is sure to follow. Even Russia' stooges like Hungary never going to leave NATO because they know what Russia is, felt it live for decades.

Really, there's nothing to discuss with Russia's propaganda machine. It's goal is not the truth but the opposite, continuation of brutality and oppression by spreading blatant, blustering lies.

I can't get you up to speed here, basically all of that is wrong. Eg, Biden's only reason for being in Ukraine was to "get rid of corruption so they could join NATO". Go fish.

[myata]

8 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I never would have signed up for this crap. 

So you don't think that Canada should be in the NATO?

Or you'd be OK fighting Ivan and the other guy in Montenegro and Croatia, but not giving arms to Ukraine to defend herself against a brutal, unprecedented since WWII aggression?

Edited March 1, 2023 by myata

[myata]

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

basically all of that is wrong.

No sorry, facts of this reality cannot be wrong in the reality. In your little personal (alternative) universe, it's all different of course. Deny and rebuilt at will, it's all yours.

[WestCanMan]

Just now, myata said:

So you don't believe that Canada should be in the NATO?

Not now.

Quote

Or you'd be OK fighting Ivan and the other guy in Montenegro and Croatia, but not giving arms to Ukraine to defend herself against a brutal, unprecedented since WWII aggression?

If the US didn't provoke this using Ukraine as a proxy, that would be different. 

You don't understand why there's a war in the first place. 

[WestCanMan]

1 minute ago, myata said:

No sorry, facts of this reality cannot be wrong in the reality. In your little personal (alternative) universe, it's all different of course. Deny and rebuilt at will, it's all yours.

The fact is, you can see for yourself when the US started priming Ukraine for entry into NATO. Don't talk to me about who's in denial lol. 

[myata]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

Not now.

Thank you, that's honest and clear enough.

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

US didn't provoke this using Ukraine as a proxy

These are only meaningless words, mumbo jumbo. Ukraine had no active process to join NATO when she was invaded in 2014. You are a) surfing in your personal universe (OK, no further arguments); or b) if conscious and deliberately, lying.

[myata]

3 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

US started priming Ukraine for entry into NATO

And one more time, there's nothing wrong with seeking protection and security from a brutal murderous psycho. Especially, psycho shouldn't and couldn't have a say in that or tomorrow they'll tell you to walk backwards looking down only from 10.29 to 10.31. That's in any normal reality, no comments on private universes.

[Dougie93]

16 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Who cares what stupid wimps think? The patriots and the fighting men are not hawkish, and that's not good news for the warmongers. 

I signed on the dotted line to fight Russians when we were told that "Ivan and Igor are coming over the hill..." and I'd have no problem doing that right now if it came down to it. 

I never would have signed up for this crap. 

the left is the dominant polity in the West

actual conservatives are decisively in the minority

so the Russians have picked a fight with the much larger cohort

I didn't sign up to fight the Soviets per se

my idea was that we would be a conventional deterrent which would block the path to thermonuclear escalation

if the Soviets could not reach the Rhine river through the Fulda Gap within seven days, they could not win

if they could not win, they would not launch the war

[Dougie93]

40 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Germany isn't onboard, that's huge, and prominent Turks are talking about leaving NATO entirely...

don't know why you think Germany is not on board

Germany is actually shipping the most arms from Europe to Ukraine now

the Turks are not with Putin, they just fought a war against him by way of their proxy Azerbaijan in Armenia

the Turks have been loading the Ukrainians up with the same drones they gave to Azerbaijan

if there is a Western power sitting on the fence, it's the Israelis

the Israelis are the ones trying to stay out of it, due to their financial dealings with Russians

the Russians park tons of cash in Israel

Edited March 1, 2023 by Dougie93

[WestCanMan]

Instead of you guys just tripping all over yourselves, maybe just try this Chat GPT thing.

I asked it "When did Ukraine start talking about joining NATO" and the reply was: 

Quote

Ukraine first expressed interest in joining NATO in 2002, when it declared that NATO membership was a key priority of its foreign policy. At that time, Ukraine was already participating in NATO's Partnership for Peace program and had signed an agreement with NATO to deepen their cooperation.

Since then, Ukraine has continued to pursue closer ties with NATO and has undertaken a series of reforms to meet the alliance's standards. However, progress towards NATO membership has been slow due to a range of factors, including opposition from Russia, domestic political challenges, and concerns about Ukraine's readiness to meet NATO's membership criteria.

In recent years, the issue of Ukraine's NATO membership has become more prominent, particularly following Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine. Many in Ukraine see NATO membership as a way to deter further Russian aggression and ensure the country's security and stability. However, the issue remains contentious, with some Ukrainians opposed to NATO membership and concerns about potential consequences for Ukraine's relationship with Russia.

Another Q & A:

Quote

Hw many trips did Joe Biden to Ukraine as VP between March 2009 and March 2014

 

 

 

According to public records, Joe Biden made at least five trips to Ukraine as Vice President between March 2009 and March 2014. These trips were in March 2009, July 2009, October 2011, April 2013, and November 2013.

During these visits, Biden met with Ukrainian officials, including President Viktor Yushchenko, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, and President Viktor Yanukovych, as well as representatives of civil society organizations and opposition groups. Biden discussed a range of issues with Ukrainian leaders, including anti-corruption efforts, energy security, economic reforms, and Ukraine's relationship with Russia.

Biden's visits to Ukraine during this period were part of a broader effort by the United States to support Ukraine's democratic and economic reforms, and to strengthen US-Ukraine relations. However, these visits also occurred against the backdrop of increasing tensions between Ukraine and Russia, which ultimately led to Russia's annexation of Crimea in March 2014.

ie - entry requirement for NATO

Edited March 1, 2023 by WestCanMan

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Poland was the straw that broke the camel's back, but the point stands.  Sadly they've all heard this before and don't care.  They're both ignorant of history and too willing to rationalize the contradictions their viewpoints represent for any of this type of reasoning to matter. 

Nonono the nazi-jew leader Zelensky started it by committing genooocide in the Donbaaaass!

I'm sure the russians provoked him   (two can play at that game )

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Thousands of tanks? Hundreds of aircraft? 70-80,000 dead? 

Get a life ffs. 

Missed this.   

If you really don't think he's lost thousands of tanks and hundreds of aircraft or had dead soldiers -  i'm afraid it's not me that's delusional

The tanks and planes and gear is easy to verify and many independant sources agree with that. A dead tank tends to stick out, easy to count. There's little doubt. Same with planes, they tend to leave decent sized holes in the ground when they crash. 

I didn't even MENTION the warships that got sunk. I suppose you think that's western propaganda as well

So there's just no debating that. It's childish to pretend otherwise.

The casualty rates are another matter. They are almost certainly over estimated, bodies are easily removed and harder to count, and they tend to estimate on the high side. So they're estimating what like 130 thousand?  Cut that in half and you're probably pretty darn close to the truth. Even the russians have noted their losses have been very heavy.

So if you think that the russians have been getting pounded for a year with little to no losses or casualties .. LOL - give me a break

[WestCanMan]

You can google your way to that if you're unfortunate enough to be able to get through the paywall.

[Dougie93]

25 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The tanks and planes and gear is easy to verify

the problem for the Russians is that they are still using the same basic Soviet tank design from the 1960's

these tanks were not designed to be survivable

they were designed to fight World War Three, which was actually going to be a short war

the Soviet plan was to take the Fulda Gap in a week, then on to the French border 

so all their tanks were designed to be expended downrange in a massive violent shock, for only for a brief period

these tanks are not made to fight a prolonged war of attrition

the Soviets assuming that things would have gone nuclear before that came to pass when they designed them

the problem for the Russian air force

is that air defence systems have simply become so much more lethal now

if you're not stealth, you get shot down

so they are holding their air force back to avoid heavy losses which can't be replaced

Edited March 1, 2023 by Dougie93

[WestCanMan]

21 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Missed this.   

If you really don't think he's lost thousands of tanks and hundreds of aircraft or had dead soldiers -  i'm afraid it's not me that's delusional

The tanks and planes and gear is easy to verify and many independant sources agree with that. A dead tank tends to stick out, easy to count. There's little doubt. Same with planes, they tend to leave decent sized holes in the ground when they crash. 

I didn't even MENTION the warships that got sunk. I suppose you think that's western propaganda as well

So there's just no debating that. It's childish to pretend otherwise.

The casualty rates are another matter. They are almost certainly over estimated, bodies are easily removed and harder to count, and they tend to estimate on the high side. So they're estimating what like 130 thousand?  Cut that in half and you're probably pretty darn close to the truth. Even the russians have noted their losses have been very heavy.

So if you think that the russians have been getting pounded for a year with little to no losses or casualties .. LOL - give me a break

Cite required, and not just CNN talking points.

This is still the war where we were told "It's a genocide!" by the exact same people who also said "There are 15,000 dead Russian soldiers, 1,000 Ukrainian soldiers and 500 (or some such) dead civilians". Somehow that constitutes a 'genocide' lol. 

Just out of curiosity, do they still say "Its a genocide", and if so do you still believe them? No wrong answers ?

FYI the people who tell you these things rely on your stupidity in order for you to believe them. 

[OftenWrong]

On 2/28/2023 at 10:42 AM, Moonbox said:

The grammar police are out!  That's when you know you're dealing with an articulate thinker.  ?

It's funny how you keep going back to this, as if you're scoring points or wounding me.  With no coherent argument to make, Oftenwrong falls back on "Your grammar is bad and you're a bad writer."

 

I just love riding you

like the fat prize hog you are...

soooeeyyy

[WestCanMan]

1 minute ago, OftenWrong said:

I just love riding you

like the fat prize hog you are...

soooeeyyy

You gotta give him credit for being unique: no other forum-poster on the internet attaches their self-portraits to their posts afaik. 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Oh my God, you're so sucked in by propaganda that you don't even realize when you're saying something entirely stupid.

LOL - tell me you know i'm right without telling me    That's the typical reaction one sees in the fanatic when their beliefs are challenged and they have no logical argument

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

FYI that analogy only makes sense from Russia's POV: Do we want to deal with this issue now, or wait 'til NATO's already here with their shiny Article 5, komrades? 

Your lack of understanding of history is abysmal.  Although come to think of it the russians attacked poland in the end too didn't they.

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Russia wasn't on an empire expansion tour, regardless of what CNN and the power behind the US throne would have you believe.

Of course it is. Period.  You might as well be a flat earther if you're going to pretend otherwise.

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Russia just can't have NATO on their doorstep, period. 

If that were true then they would have accepted "ukraine won't join nato' as a term for ending the war - but vlad didn't want to negotiate then.  AND he's not pushing for that now, he wants to keep his territory gains. Or whats left of them.

ANd nato was in no danger of allowing full membership to the ukraine. Now however that's a real possibility.

The facts demonstrate your theory is just plain wrong.

He wanted to expand the empire and control important resources  in the ukraine. Period.

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

All it would have taken to avoid this war was for Ukraine to sign away their NATO intentions. That's it.

Nope. The moment they signed - invade. Period. There has NEVER been a time in history where appeasing a predator like Putin has EVER resulted in peace. Remember that russia promised to never ever ever invade or threaten ukraine for any reason when they gave up their nukes. That wasn't long ago.

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

FYI when Germany was still split in two, German kids got more NBCD training before they were done elementary school than members of the Canadian Forces did in their entire careers. That's the cost of having a military fault line of that magnitude on your doorstep. Kids shouldn't live like that in Germany or Russia and I don't give a f about your stupid "Russian collusion" BS. This isn't politics anymore, it's people's lives. Get your head out of your ass.

You are literally going to kill people with that attitude. You don't give a shit about the kids, they can die for all you care. You have NO problem with putin slaughtering them by the schoolbus load as long as you can blame it on the west. So spare me the crocodile tears.

You want to save childrens lives - you send a clear message to violent warmongers like putin that if they invade another country there is a horrific price to pay. Any other course leads to MORE war -  which is FINE with  you as long as it's not blamed on poor putin who's done nothing wrong. You're disgusting.  Trying to put the deaths of the children on someone OTHER than the guys who literally pulled the triggers.

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

They did not start this war.

They drove tanks across the border, they slaughtered innocent children and civilians, the bombed and missiled cities and attempted to overthrow the lawful gov't.

They absolutely 100 percent entirely started this war and they did so to steal land and expand their empire. Period. Trying to pretend otherwise is disgusting. You might as well claim hitler didn't start ww2.

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Did Kennedy start the Cuban Missile Crisis when he invaded Cuba in '61? Did he start it when he discovered the missile silos in '62? Or did Russia start that confrontation just by providing missile silos to a country that wanted them? 

You can't even figure out what chamberlain did - i think this is a little over your head.  But the american aggression in cuba lead to a response from cuba and their allies and rightfully so. And in the end they got what they wanted.

Same thing here - russian aggression has lead to a response from ukraine and their allies and rightly so. And in the end ukraine will get most of what it wanted. 

Sorry - you lost all credibility when you tried to excuse the killing of children as perfectly justified as a response because an independent nation wanted to defend itself.

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Nuclear war humour is too dark for me.

Unless it's the US's fault right? Then you're fine with it. If Poor Mr Putin launches nukes then the important thing is he's not to blame.

Edited March 1, 2023 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

the problem for the Russians is that they are still using the same basic Soviet tank design from the 1960's

these tanks were not designed to be survivable

they were designed to fight World War Three, which was actually going to be a short war

the Soviet plan was to take the Fulda Gap in a week, then on to the French border 

so all their tanks were designed to be expended downrange in a massive violent shock, for only for a brief period

these tanks are not made to fight a prolonged war of attrition

the Soviets assuming that things would have gone nuclear before that came to pass when they designed them

the problem for the Russian air force

is that air defence systems have simply become so much more lethal now

if you're not stealth, you get shot down

so they are holding their air force back to avoid heavy losses which can't be replaced

Well - the results make it hard to dispute any of that.

I do remember the old story about an american general noting their tanks were superior to the russians in quality, and the soviet leader of the day saying "quantity has a quality all it's own".  I guess turns out he was wrong

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Cite required, and not just CNN talking points.s

Sure -

https://news.yahoo.com/one-russias-war-ukraine-numbers-191051196.html

pretty detailed from the uk gov't.

https://uawar.net/stats  - they cite their sources

https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/ukraine-conflict/1677675998-russia-s-death-toll-in-ukraine-highest-of-any-post-wwii-conflict-report

Another source arriving at similar numbers.

You need more? or are you done pretending at this point.

The tanks and such are easy to count.

 

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

This is still the war where we were told "It's a genocide!" by the exact same people who also said "There are 15,000 dead Russian soldiers, 1,000 Ukrainian soldiers and 500 (or some such) dead civilians". Somehow that constitutes a 'genocide' lol. 

Riiight - i forgot you've got no problem with civvies getting killed as long as it's russians doing it.  "LOL".

And as you can see those numbers are way out of date.

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Just out of curiosity, do they still say "Its a genocide", and if so do you still believe them? No wrong answers ?

I've barely heard  anyone call it a genocide period. Some have said the russians stealing the kids would be, and arguably thats true by the definition but other than a tiny bit of hyperbole here and there i see nobody referring to it that way in general.  I think that's something you latched on to and isn't really a thing at any point. Always fun to create fake talking points if you can't win with facts i suppose.

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

FYI the people who tell you these things rely on your stupidity in order for you to believe them. 

Ahhh -that's where you learned it

The problem with relying on stupidity is that often you meet people who aren't.  And then you look like an absolute child.  But - you do you. Little fella.