Ukraine Can't Win the War

[Moonbox]

17 minutes ago, User said:

This is all a subjective "harm" in that someones feelings are hurt. There are actual laws regarding harassment. 

Yes, and that's why protestors aren't allowed to do so within 100m of abortion clinics, because the whole purpose of their being there is to harass vulnerable women who are seeking medical services.  There's no reasonable argument to make for why they need to be within 100m to "silently pray", which is why anyone exercising common sense recognizes it as a transparent facade for protest.  That's why the communities around them are generally (heavily) in favor of the laws as well.  

1 hour ago, User said:

For all the same reasons you just argued above. If someone stands in their own home, in the window, and can be seen silently praying in opposition to abortion... they can be arrested and prosecuted.

No, that's just your goofy rationalization.  You can pray anywhere you like in your house, including in front of an open window.  What you can't do is make a show of it, which nobody would do anyway unless it was a deliberate protest.   😆

[User]

58 minutes ago, Videospirit said:

There is a difference between silently praying, and using silent prayer as a tool of harm. 

And either way, it was still the silent prayer here that was the issue. Adding context as to why the silent prayer was criminalized doesn't change that it was the silent prayer that was criminalized. 

1 hour ago, Videospirit said:

And of course people will try and lie to make people afraid of this law.

There is no lie, as was pointed out, people will be and can be arrested. 

1 hour ago, Videospirit said:

The possibility that private prayer could be prosecuted under the law was brought up in the legislature when the law was being written even. But the concern was laughed out of the discussion. After all, if someone is privately praying, how is anyone even going to know they were doing that to report them for violating the law?

Show me that discussion and the laughter you cite happened. The law clearly says otherwise. 

If they can see you praying... just like they could see this man praying, it is against the law. 

1 hour ago, Videospirit said:

As for your refusal to accept that there is harm. I'll appeal to authority.

No need to, we are having this discussion because Vance rightly pointed out the absurdity of what European nations are doing and used this as an example. I am not arguing that the lawmakers there are punishing this. 

Again, this whole discussion started with you saying it was a lie and misinformation and now you are defending it. 

 

 

[User]

2 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Yes, and that's why protestors aren't allowed to do so within 100m of abortion clinics, because the whole purpose of their being there is to harass vulnerable women who are seeking medical services.  There's no reasonable argument to make for why they need to be within 100m to "silently pray", which is why anyone exercising common sense recognizes it as a transparent facade for protest.  That's why the communities around them are generally (heavily) in favor of the laws as well.  

And this is why Vance is pointing out how European nations are punishing free speech like this. 

I have already addressed your "need" argument. 

4 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

No, that's just your goofy rationalization.  You can pray anywhere you like in your house, including in front of an open window.  What you can't do is make a show of it, which nobody would do anyway unless it was a deliberate protest.

No, it is literally the law and you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth here saying they can pray anywhere... but can't make a show of it. 

So, no, they can't pray anywhere. As you have already demonstrated your willingness to use such subjective feelings, anything is deemed making a show of it, if they can see you doing it.

And you continue to use language like deliberate protest. So, if someone stands in their window praying in protest, yes, you want them arrested. 

That is madness. That is exactly what Vance is calling out. 

 

[Videospirit]

1 hour ago, User said:

And either way, it was still the silent prayer here that was the issue. Adding context as to why the silent prayer was criminalized doesn't change that it was the silent prayer that was criminalized. 

There is no lie, as was pointed out, people will be and can be arrested. 

Show me that discussion and the laughter you cite happened. The law clearly says otherwise. 

If they can see you praying... just like they could see this man praying, it is against the law. 

No need to, we are having this discussion because Vance rightly pointed out the absurdity of what European nations are doing and used this as an example. I am not arguing that the lawmakers there are punishing this. 

Again, this whole discussion started with you saying it was a lie and misinformation and now you are defending it. 

 

 

First off, the reference to the concern being laughed out of the legislature comes from the very article you yourself posted on the topic when you started your deranged rant that you evidently don't remember reading.

https://verfassungsblog.de/silent-prayer-safe-access-zones/

Quote

 Research undertaken by Lowe and Hayes indicates that silent prayer is a form of reproductive coercion because it intimidates and shames those seeking access to abortion services

Quote

 what is prohibited in all three UK jurisdictions is any act that is done with the intent of or recklessness as to whether it has the effect of influencing a person or their decision, obstructing or impeding access to the premises, or causing harassment, alarm, or distress.

If you want an actual source from me. That's the legal basis for these extremely rational legal decisions.

The context, as you so callously disregard it, matters. There is no law criminalizing silent prayer. The "context" as you call it is what is criminalized. 

And your fool of a vice president is reacting with insanity and spreading lies about these extremely sane decisions.

[Videospirit]

Of course, you could say Vance is just paraphrasing, not lying. But if that's your argument let me translate what you're claiming.

JD Vance is proud that Americans are legally allowed to harass shame and intimidate women, and calls it madness to criminalize reproduction coercion.

So if that's the hill you want to die on, commit to it.

[Videospirit]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-says-ukraine-should-never-have-started-it-remarks-war-russia-rcna192710

Now the Orange clown is claiming Ukraine started the war in official statements. 

What a disgrace the united States has become.

[eyeball]

On 2/15/2025 at 9:45 AM, User said:

Another lie. Trump did not do any of these things. 

Hegseth did it for him - America capitulated to Putin on behalf of Ukraine. It's disgraceful.

[User]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

Hegseth did it for him - America capitulated to Putin on behalf of Ukraine. It's disgraceful.

Nope. 

[Videospirit]

Just now, User said:

Nope. 

Trump is negotiating with Putin over Ukraine without Ukraine or the EU's presence. Trump claims Ukraine invaded Russia first.

Is the meaning of choosing User as your nickname that you're proud of being a Tool?

[User]

21 minutes ago, Videospirit said:

Of course, you could say Vance is just paraphrasing, not lying. But if that's your argument let me translate what you're claiming.

JD Vance is proud that Americans are legally allowed to harass shame and intimidate women, and calls it madness to criminalize reproduction coercion.

So if that's the hill you want to die on, commit to it.

No, not paraphrasing. He was accurate in what he said. 

Instead of dealing with that, you are making up crap I did not say. 

We have already gone over how you are using these terms as subjective feelings to others regarding "harass" and "intimidate"
 

This was the hill you wanted to die on, to criminalize some dude standing and praying silently too close to an abortion clinic. All Vance did was call out the madness of that and you tried to call him a liar. 

 

 

[User]

2 minutes ago, Videospirit said:

Trump is negotiating with Putin over Ukraine without Ukraine or the EU's presence. Trump claims Ukraine invaded Russia first.

Is that what I said did not happen? No. 

I think Trump misspoke in a comment he was making explaining that Zelenski had 3 years to talk about peace, but still not a fan of the way he said that either. 

3 minutes ago, Videospirit said:

Is the meaning of choosing User as your nickname that you're proud of being a Tool?

Once again, irrelevant personal attacks. If you think your arguments are so sound, why do you continually feel the need to resort to such childish antics?

[User]

31 minutes ago, Videospirit said:

First off, the reference to the concern being laughed out of the legislature comes from the very article you yourself posted on the topic when you started your deranged rant that you evidently don't remember reading.

I could be mistaken, but that is not the link I shared. Nor does that link mention laugh, laughing, or that word. 

The only derangement going on here is your insistence that a man silently praying too close to an abortion clinic should be criminalized, and your attempts to at first say it was a lie, and your further bad arguments about access... 

33 minutes ago, Videospirit said:

The context, as you so callously disregard it, matters. There is no law criminalizing silent prayer. The "context" as you call it is what is criminalized. 

I never said the law generally criminalized silent prayer. You are arguing against a strawman. I said this man being too close to an abortion clinic and silently praying was criminalized. The only context here is distance, which to the point, is just silly restrictions on freedom of speech.

But to the larger point, it is the threat to people in their own homes that is even far worse. 

35 minutes ago, Videospirit said:

And your fool of a vice president is reacting with insanity and spreading lies about these extremely sane decisions.

What was the lie? We already went through this. There was no lie. 

[athos]

Zelensky is sacrificing the entire Ukrainian population. He is now recruiting the population with mental and physical disabilities.

 

 

Edited February 19 by athos

[Videospirit]

6 minutes ago, User said:

I could be mistaken, but that is not the link I shared. Nor does that link mention laugh, laughing, or that word. 

The only derangement going on here is your insistence that a man silently praying too close to an abortion clinic should be criminalized, and your attempts to at first say it was a lie, and your further bad arguments about access... 

I never said the law generally criminalized silent prayer. You are arguing against a strawman. I said this man being too close to an abortion clinic and silently praying was criminalized. The only context here is distance, which to the point, is just silly restrictions on freedom of speech.

But to the larger point, it is the threat to people in their own homes that is even far worse. 

What was the lie? We already went through this. There was no lie. 

Yes, that is not the link you shared, that was my own source explaining your misinformation. You can find your own link a few pages back in this topic, you may act like a child but I'm not your parent. There is no law on the books criminalizing "silent prayer near abortion clinics." JD Vance claimed a man was arrested for silently praying "near an abortion clinic", but no law criminalizing silently praying near abortion clinics exists, so he could not possibly have been arrested for doing so. There is no law that criminalizes silently praying inside your own homes. The letter sent out to the people in the PSPO zones did not mention silently praying. Since no one is claiming the man was arrested for violating a law that doesn't exist, clearly there needs to be some context that makes simplistic statements like "He was arrested for silently praying" false by omission and thus, a lie.

I attack you personally because you constantly fail to do your due diligence and discuss in good faith. You're a worthless piece of human trash who has no trace of dignity and the entire human race is made worse because you were born. And yet, I'm forced to interact with you if I want to access this website. I've tried to enlighten you over and over again and I'm sick of your continued incomprehension of basic concepts. If you aren't going to treat me with respect by actually understanding my words I'm going to treat you like the child who doesn't understand complicated ideas you are and talk down to you. If you want to be treated with respect you need to respect others. You don't respect anyone.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, User said:

Nope. 

And now Trump's made it official...it's always been Ukraine's fault.

He's beyond disgraceful now.

 

[User]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

And now Trump's made it official...it's always been Ukraine's fault.

He's beyond disgraceful now.

 

That isn't what he said... 

[User]

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

Yes, that is not the link you shared, that was my own source explaining your misinformation.

Except, you didn't explain any misinformation. You falsely said I posted the link while mocking me for not remembering reading what I shared. (When I didn't share it). The point you made was that it also said it supported your claim about laughing, which it didn't. 

The simple thing, the right thing, would be for you to just admit you were wrong and apologize for all that. 

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

You can find your own link a few pages back in this topic, you may act like a child but I'm not your parent.

Gee thanks. 

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

JD Vance claimed a man was arrested for silently praying "near an abortion clinic"

Yes, this is what happened. 

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

There is no law that criminalizes silently praying inside your own homes. The letter sent out to the people in the PSPO zones did not mention silently praying.

It doesn't have to specifically mention silently praying, but as we see here with this example, that is certainly something to be rightfully concerned about, just as Vance said, since that is something that is criminalized. 

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

"He was arrested for silently praying" false by omission and thus, a lie.

No, Vance clearly stated he was doing it too close to an abortion clinic. You are the one lying. 

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

I attack you personally because you constantly fail to do your due diligence and discuss in good faith.

You don't need to attack me personally to simply point out any problems with my arguments, if you can. 

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

You're a worthless piece of human trash who has no trace of dignity and the entire human race is made worse because you were born.

Did you say something here?

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

And yet, I'm forced to interact with you if I want to access this website.

LOL, this explains your irrational arguments here. You tried to argue the absurd that some guy standing near an abortion clinic silently praying was preventing access... and now you are here claiming you are forced to interact with me. 

Um, no, you don't have to interact with me at all. You can just let me point out the stupid, false, and dishonest things you are saying and choose not to respond. 

4 hours ago, Videospirit said:

If you aren't going to treat me with respect by actually understanding my words I'm going to treat you like the child who doesn't understand complicated ideas you are and talk down to you. If you want to be treated with respect you need to respect others. You don't respect anyone.

I treat you with far more respect than you deserve. I focus on your bad arguments and don't resort to petty childish insults like you. 

I don't respect your stupid comments and arguments. It is not my fault you are conflating the things you say with you as a person. 

 

[Videospirit]

5 hours ago, User said:

Except, you didn't explain any misinformation. 

I literally quoted the parts of the article I linked that explain your misinformation.

5 hours ago, User said:

The point you made was that it also said it supported your claim about laughing, which it didn't. 

This is a false statement. You might honestly believe it's true, but if you do it's only because you're incompetent at reading comprehension. You certainly make enough false claims about what other people are arguing to back up an assertion that you're barely literate. The mention of the article you linked was before I linked my article and than after I directly quoted my article and explained what claims it was backing up.

The article talking about the concerns being dismissed by all the parties involved as absurd was your own article. This one

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c87d9j17pjqo Which you apparently don't remember reading.

Quote

There was debate about private prayer when the buffer zones bill was passing through Holyrood, and again when the letters went out last year.

At every turn, both the Green MSP behind the law and the government implementing it have been clear that claims of outlawing private prayer at home are baseless.

The law specifically targets behaviour, intentional or reckless, which aims to obstruct or discourage women from attending these clinics, or causes them fear or alarm.

The letters sent out never mentioned private prayer, but rather activities like those listed above which could be "seen or heard from within the zone".

The intention was to prevent people putting up posters in their windows, or hosting protests or vigils in front gardens overlooking clinics.

There is an inescapable practical point too. If you're praying unobtrusively in your house, how is anyone going to even know, far less call in the cops?

That's the relevant section. I've bolded the line you need to pay attention to, but I'm uncertain even that is enough to let you comprehend it. Your ability to fail to comprehend the written word is frankly impressive if you're not outright trolling. But of the reason I wanted you to look it up yourself is because you build life skills that you clearly lack by doing such things yourself, but since you've failed to do so before responding to my post I'll have to be unhelpful to your development and do your duty for you.

5 hours ago, User said:

No, Vance clearly stated he was doing it too close to an abortion clinic. You are the one lying. 

"Silently praying too close to an abortion clinic." is ALSO a lie by omission. It still lacks the context necessary to make the statement true. "He was arrested for causing harassment, alarm, and distress among women in an effort to influence their decision whether or not to get an abortion by silently praying too close to an abortion clinic." Is a true statement if you really need to bring the silently praying into it. "He was arrested for praying too close to an abortion clinic." is a false statement by omission. 

 

5 hours ago, User said:

now you are here claiming you are forced to interact with me. 

I'm not forced to interact with you. I'm forced to interact with you if I want to engage with this website fully. Nothing is forcing me to engage with this website, and I could block you and only partially engage with this website, but you're going to stand here spewing your lies and misinformation and continuing to make your worthless posts full of your own incomprehension whether I block you or not, so the discussions on this site are going to be tainted by your stupidity and force me to interact with your stupidity indirectly even if I block you so it's better to get right in your face about it than to dance around the issue

5 hours ago, User said:

I don't respect your stupid comments and arguments. It is not my fault you are conflating the things you say with you as a person. 

.The fact you think of them as "stupid comments and arguments." is the problem. The arguments and comments you are calling stupid are ones you don't understand in the first place, don't try to understand, and dismiss without understanding with the label of stupid. You try to mask it behind a mask of politeness, but you aren't giving me any respect at all. I'm not going to let you treat me that way. I'm going to keep calling you out for your pathetic refusal to understand my statements until you either block me or do your duty to the conversation, and there's only so many times I'll repeat myself before I'll just call you pathetic and tell you to stop being pathetic and go reread the posts you don't understand.

Edited February 19 by Videospirit

[User]

2 hours ago, Videospirit said:

I literally quoted the parts of the article I linked that explain your misinformation.

Sure, you quoted some of the article... but that is not an argument explaining any misinformation on my part. 

You also skipped this part of my comment:

You falsely said I posted the link while mocking me for not remembering reading what I shared. (When I didn't share it). The point you made was that it also said it supported your claim about laughing, which it didn't. 

The simple thing, the right thing, would be for you to just admit you were wrong and apologize for all that. 

3 hours ago, Videospirit said:

This is a false statement.

Nope, it is accurate. You said:

"First off, the reference to the concern being laughed out of the legislature comes from the very article you yourself posted"

3 hours ago, Videospirit said:

Which you apparently don't remember reading.

I remember fine, its the laughing part you keep failing on here. 

Either way, this is a dishonest game being played, as we already have an example of someone praying being criminalized. And as you cheer it on and justify it, are you now saying that if someone is in their own home praying in protest to the abortion clinic or out in own yard, you wouldn't want that criminalized?

That is what the law says. 

3 hours ago, Videospirit said:

But of the reason I wanted you to look it up yourself is because you build life skills that you clearly lack by doing such things yourself, but since you've failed to do so before responding to my post I'll have to be unhelpful to your development and do your duty for you.

It is not my job to go out and prove your arguments for you, especially when I think your claims are either lies or baseless. 

3 hours ago, Videospirit said:

"Silently praying too close to an abortion clinic." is ALSO a lie by omission. It still lacks the context necessary to make the statement true. "He was arrested for causing harassment, alarm, and distress among women in an effort to influence their decision whether or not to get an abortion by silently praying too close to an abortion clinic." Is a true statement if you really need to bring the silently praying into it. "He was arrested for praying too close to an abortion clinic." is a false statement by omission. 

No, what you are doing is lying. First you falsely claimed Vance didn't provide any context, when he did, and now you are changing the argument and moving the goalposts to your same bad argument I have already addressed before. 

It was the silently praying that was deemed to be illegal here. That is simply a fact. 

3 hours ago, Videospirit said:

I'm not forced to interact with you. I'm forced to interact with you if I want to engage with this website fully.

Again, since you missed it the first time:

Um, no, you don't have to interact with me at all. You can just let me point out the stupid, false, and dishonest things you are saying and choose not to respond. 

3 hours ago, Videospirit said:

The fact you think of them as "stupid comments and arguments." is the problem.

Once again, you move the goal posts. You were saying I did not respect you before. If you are so worked up about your comments being through of as stupid, then make better arguments and comments. 

 

[Videospirit]

1 hour ago, User said:

Once again, you move the goal posts. You were saying I did not respect you before. If you are so worked up about your comments being through of as stupid, then make better arguments and comments. 

If translated into intelligent speech is you essentially saying.

Quote

You were saying I did not respect you before. Now you're saying one of the ways I don't respect you is by thinking your arguments are stupid, ah hah, I got you this time, that's totally moving the goal posts.

If you don't want to be treated as intellectually deficient, actually refute people's arguments. Your reading comprehension is cringe.

It's completely irrational to say "moving the goal posts" in this situation. The content of the argument has not been changed. It's moved from the general to the specific, but that's not moving the goal posts. The end destination is the same, I'm still claiming you aren't treating me with respect. These two things are related concepts, normal rational human beings are able to understand "He is engaging in disrespectful behaviour towards me." and "He is disrespecting me." are the same argument, but you? You are not capable of doing that for some reason, and it's sooooo absurdly cringe.

So rational individuals just see you championing your own righteousness by blowing your own horn for false achievements and get uncomfortable for being in close proximity to your aberrant behavior. Every argument you ever make is like this. You don't understand something, you assume you understand that thing, than you declare your own success based on your flawed understanding. Until you fix this problem, I have no choice but to target you personally if I want to make progress in discussing any issue with you, because you are incapable of consenting to debate if this is your real mental capabilities. The problem with your arguments is you. What I need to refute is your mental capabilities, because you are not engaging with my arguments themselves, you are engaging with the illusion of my arguments your inferior brain has conjured up in it's failed attempt to read them.

[Boges]

The Russian assets are on overdrive today. I wonder why. 

The fact that 45/47 said, in his own words, that Ukraine is to blame for this war is evidence for the entire world to see that he's a compromised Russian asset. 

God help us all. 

[Videospirit]

1 hour ago, Boges said:

The Russian assets are on overdrive today. I wonder why. 

The fact that 45/47 said, in his own words, that Ukraine is to blame for this war is evidence for the entire world to see that he's a compromised Russian asset. 

God help us all. 

I'm still not convinced he's loyal to Russia. He's just extremely and openly corrupt.

Which... well it's actually worse than if he was a Russian asset. Seriously why have Americans put this man in charge of their country. There are points in history where we look back now and are like "How could the public possibly allow this."

Well, now we're asking that question in the present. His supporters may say they regret some of the things he's doing, but they fundamentally aren't bothered by him doing those things. They feel no compulsion to stop him.

It's certainly grim. The U.S. used to be a role model, but now it's a nightmare. We're going to be suffering the consequences of the American electorate's choices for a long time to come. So many Heroes being dismissed from their posts for trying to abide their oaths of office and defend the American constitution. The integrity of the executive branch is being shattered in real time. The criminals are running the justice system and anyone who can resist them is being eliminated. Even if by some miracle some degree of fair elections allow Republicans to be replaced in the future, the federal government is going to be so poisoned by corruption that it may be impossible to restore the rule of law to the united states.

[User]

2 hours ago, Boges said:

The Russian assets are on overdrive today. I wonder why. 

The fact that 45/47 said, in his own words, that Ukraine is to blame for this war is evidence for the entire world to see that he's a compromised Russian asset. 

God help us all. 

Amazing. You criticize Trump for one bad comment and make an even more outrageous one yourself. 

 

[Videospirit]

11 minutes ago, User said:

Amazing. You criticize Trump for one bad comment and make an even more outrageous one yourself. 

 

There is no way to rationally interpret Trumps comment other than he's favouring Russia in the discourse. Calling trump a "Russian asset" is at best an exaggeration, and at worst a partially true statement. It's not outrageous at all.

 

There is no scenario where blaming Ukraine for this war is in the best interest of the united states National Security if it intends to remain a member of NATO. Going forward the American Military Industrial Complex is going to suffer massive losses as the rest of NATO seeks to secure supply chains as this communicates that the US is unwilling to be a faithful ally going forward, and the rest of NATO needs to be prepared for the scenario of a NATO without the US.

[Boges]

22 minutes ago, User said:

Amazing. You criticize Trump for one bad comment and make an even more outrageous one yourself. 

I can criticize plenty more comments if you'd like. 

Where did this 4% approval figure come from? 
How does he expect a country that's in the middle of a war to hold free and fair elections? 
He knows that his buddy Putin arrests his political opponents right?