Possible for Ukraine to beat back Russia?

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Homesteaded [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

George Soros coming out in support of Ukraine isn't a good sign.

Isn't it though? What's your problem with Liberal Democracy?

[Reiwa]

"History has ended! History has ended!", I continue to insist as my country abandons the world we've made to tyrants of ideology.

[Gustoo]

To anyone comparing Ukraine to us or something. The point is that they're a sovereign country trying to stay sovereign. By definition, the good guys.

Doesn't matter if they have internal struggles of their own, just like the United States does. It doesn't invalidate their right to be a sovereign nation state in the current global community we have.

Whether or not you believe the current arrangement of nation states is good or bad is not that important since it is the current state of reality.

I think it would be nice if they took Crimea back at the same time. From the looks of this it looks like russia wanted to have complete control over the Crimean sea, which is a pretty silly greedy aim. But at this point who knows what Moscow was thinking or hoping.

It would be nice if Russia could turn a new leaf. It really would. The AK is a better rifle than the AR. They have more to contribute to the planet than the best assault rifle for operating in field conditions.

[BlackBellamy]

Originally Posted by Homesteaded [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why again am I supposed to care about a corrupt country being taken over by another corrupt country?

You're not supposed to feel one way or another. The feelings you have are your own, or should be unless you're lacking direction and clarity in your life.

I understand yours is a rhetorical question. You don't care about the Ukraine or what happens there, obviously. Today Russia used cluster munitions against a shopping mall and a school. It's on video, puffs of smoke among the building, later unexploded Grad rockets still left on the street.

If you reduce a conflict like that to "a corrupt country being taken over by another corrupt country" well then you can sleep easy after seeing bloodied children being carried by their crying mothers because you labelled them all "corrupt" or at least "corruption enablers" and that's all you need because your specific local world is not being threatened and you can go back to your xbox or your twitter and be a good consumer and wage-and-credit slave and plan for your Disney vacation some time in the future if they are graceful to give you those two weeks.

I'm also making a rhetorical point, I don't know you, I'm not specifically calling you a compliant wage slave. But that's how people see Americans. And yes you're right, the rest of the world doesn't want to be like them.

[Mblake1981]

Originally Posted by Reiwa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In all the wars I've studied it is always the side with Eagles that wins in the end.

Just be careful walking through the black forest, it can get a bit dicey.

[starkind]

Isn't the forest around Chernobyl like insanely radioactive still? There's a forest part. I'm not talking about the fields reactor or town.

[New_Guy]

Bottom line if you support an autocracy with faux elections that keeps it's people in a constant state of poverty and welfare over a free country with free elections that wants to govern itself, you're a fucking commie and you should learn to shut your fucking mouth.

[starkind]

Originally Posted by BlackBellamy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're not supposed to feel one way or another. The feelings you have are your own, or should be unless you're lacking direction and clarity in your life.

I understand yours is a rhetorical question. You don't care about the Ukraine or what happens there, obviously. Today Russia used cluster munitions against a shopping mall and a school. It's on video, puffs of smoke among the building, later unexploded Grad rockets still left on the street.

If you reduce a conflict like that to "a corrupt country being taken over by another corrupt country" well then you can sleep easy after seeing bloodied children being carried by their crying mothers because you labelled them all "corrupt" or at least "corruption enablers" and that's all you need because your specific local world is not being threatened and you can go back to your xbox or your twitter and be a good consumer and wage-and-credit slave and plan for your Disney vacation some time in the future if they are graceful to give you those two weeks.

I'm also making a rhetorical point, I don't know you, I'm not specifically calling you a compliant wage slave. But that's how people see Americans. And yes you're right, the rest of the world doesn't want to be like them.

And yep. I don't think he's a wage slave. He just doesn't want this to hurt his kids or kill us all. And it's so far away....

Those kids dying in Ukraine are dying indirectly to protect western hegemony like Jibartik says.

They are also dying because Ukraine wants its independence and sovereignty. And even joining Russia could also have led to immense suffering and the death of children. Even worse the loss of their way off life and land.

I'd rather go downtown and talk about land use rights or permits or w/e then just be told, "We'll take it up with Moscow" or the state agrocorp.

Ukraine has been burned in the past. They don't want to repeat history. Again. Yet here they are. Remember folks, many things can be simultaneously true to varying degrees, even conflicting things. You ever have conflicted dreams? Needs?

Ukraine deserves better from Putin. And from the west.

/\

[Gustoo]

I think last time Ukraine was one with Moscow 3.9 million of them starved to death. That might be why they will fight to their deaths rather than watch their families die quietly.

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by BlackBellamy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Jibartik's loyalties clearly lie with King George. A significant segment of the American populations were Tories, Loyalists. They posed the same question and to them the answer was "we don't think the ability to govern ourselves on a discrete national level is important enough for us to bear arms." It's not insignificant that a great portion of supporters of the Crown were the well-off, the ones who had the most to lose from any turmoil. They thought the Continentals were dirty poor peasants, mostly drunk and definitely living in poverty. If only they accepted the munificent decisions of an autocratic monarch from across the ocean, things would surely improve.

I visited the Continental army encampment historical site near Morristown, New Jersey. I went in winter on purpose. I saw where the soldiers spent the winter, the terrible crowded lice-ridden hovels, the conditions they had to endure while unpaid and nearly unfed. It was known as "the hard winter" . It snowed in Morristown 20 times that season including a blizzard that dumped 4 feet of snow overnight. Each and every single of those men could have just walked away and went back to their homes. Some did. But enough stayed to win the war against the greatest military power on earth.

The greatest catalyst for change in human history have been people living in poverty. The French Revolution was not led by the bankers. It wasn't the merchants who overthrew the Tzar. Mao's army didn't have a single hedge fund manager in it when he unified China.

The most powerful person on earth is someone who has nothing to lose.

You must be out of your got damn mind.

Do you think that the guy who is anti-war and is calling you out and everyone else who is pro war is the guy who wants a king?

All you motherfuckers are fucking crazy dude all y’all motherfuckers!

Ain’t no way we’re not in the tribulation now all these motherfuckers is going crazy.