Unrest in Ukraine

[IndigoErth]

Originally Posted by Sumac

Also, justifying weak response of the US and allies towards Russian aggression by "but that's a multicountry effort" is ********. We don't live in an age of pigeons. We live in the age of a ****ing Internet, where all possible questions can be resolved in a manner of hours and something tells me, one country attacking another in a very center of Europe, warrants a quick, extremely ****ing quick answer.

But let me guess, you answer will be something-something Trump is bad doo-doo-doo.
Damn, zealots. But at least they are fascinating examples of how dumb humans can be.

While the people of your nation are either too weak or too afraid to do anything or "just can't," so they either try and risk arrest or sit there doing nothing, so you really have no room to talk about what other nations should be doing about this when they're the ones actually trying to strategize that out in a way that doesn't just set YOUR leader off to trying to start World War 3 with everyone else.

Blah blah blah screaming about "leftists"... But hey, a conservative nation with little freedom of speech because they support authoritarianism and as a result exist stuck under the thumb of a crazy autocrat that they are too weak to do anything about and now he's launching attacks on a neighboring country. So how is that working out for you??

It's not a coincidence that this happens with a conservative, authoritarian minded country or that, even if you reject Putin, you still found Trump, a like minded wannabe autocrat himself, appealing.

Yeah, as someone who is left of center, the lure of authoritarianism that some conservatives, largely the Far Right type, find so appealing is certainly one of the rather concerning things about their ideology and choices in political leaders because the rest of us DON'T WANT TO BECOME RUSSIA.


And the record:

Biden approves $350 million in military aid for Ukraine

https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-...ne-2022-02-26/

On Saturday, Blinken said in a statement that this third authorization for weapons shipments to Ukraine was "unprecedented."

The Pentagon said the weapons included anti-armor, small arms, body armor and various munitions in support of Ukraine's front-line defenders. In addition, a State Department spokesperson said the materiel included anti-aircraft systems.

The United States drew from U.S. weapons stocks to supply Ukraine in the fall of 2021 and then again in December. Over the past year the United States has committed more than $1 billion in security assistance to Ukraine, Blinken said.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/whi...is-2022-02-25/

White House asks Congress for $6.4 billion for Ukraine crisis

You wanna pitch in on some of that, because that's our tax dollars being sent to fight your nation's absurd war on Ukraine while our own people are hurting under the same rising inflation as many other nations and this unnecessary war is only going to make it worse, but maybe that's one of Putin's goals.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

I'm thinking that the huge influx of Ukrainian refugees could badly destabilise the European Union, more than it already was after letting in a large number of refugees from the Middle East and North Africa.

Also, while sanctions on Russia and sending aid to Ukraine seems to be the primary strategy of the United States to deter the Russian invasion, the aid might just backfire in the long run. The last time the U.S. supplied local resistance to fight off invaders in Afghanistan, the resistance ultimately ended up turning on the very people who armed them.

I definetly think that there is a ultra-nationalistic presence in Ukraine that can explode in popularity after a combination of Russian destruction, and Western intervention, a presence that can ultimately become just another enemy to the very people who helped them fight the Reds.

Of course, supplying arms is much better than to directly attack Russia and risk Nuclear retaliation, but is it wise for the West to get involved and risk making a future enemy? Should the United States get involved or pursue isolationism?

[MikeandRaph87]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/what-the-...100046012.html

Putin lost his fake news narrative.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/russia-ukr...195800395.html

Someone finally stepped up militarily for Ukraine. Germany is sending in in tanks and weapons

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

https://www.yahoo.com/news/what-the-...100046012.html

Putin lost his fake news narrative.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/russia-ukr...195800395.html

Someone finally stepped up militarily for Ukraine. Germany is sending in in tanks and weapons

Good. Maybe now America can stay the **** out of it.

[Vicky82]

Chelsea Football Club Owner Roman Abramovich to relinquish stewardship of club.

https://news.sky.com/story/chelsea-o...-club-12552700

Roman Abramovich has been the owner of Chelsea Football Club since 2003. His decision to relinquish his stewardship comes in light of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which has faced international condemnation. Mr Abramovich is a Russian oligarch who's had close ties to Vladimir Putin.

The Russian billionaire will no longer be involved in club matters on a day-to-day basis - and long term strategic decision-making powers will instead be handed over to the Chelsea Foundation. The move comes in light of Russia's widely condemned invasion of Ukraine, ordered by President Vladimir Putin, with whom 55-year-old Mr Abramovich has had close ties with in the past. His announcement also comes the day before Chelsea play Liverpool in the League Cup final at Wembley.

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Sumac

Last time, when Russians attempted to do so something funny in Syria, Trump gave an order and those funny Russian mercenaries turned into 200 dead mercenaries. Which is enough of an answer, why Putin hadn't try anything like it, during Trump's rule.

Of course, you conveniently ignore this, because, that's the only thing weaklings like you can do, to no ruin your precious fake ****ing picture of your imbecilic world.

It's got to be confusing for the political right in particularly in the US. For decades a major part of their political identity was being prepped for war and justifying it as bringing 'freedom' to oppressive countries. Then losing two wars at the same time opinions on the right started to shift, Trump came along and tapped into a then growing sentiment that America should not get involved in foreign conflicts and was not the world's police. With the exception the incident you cited he didn't get involved in any major foreign conflict and was happy to turn a blind eye to some enemies of the West doing some very clear prepping for war in exchange for lavish state visits. Putin has been planning this for at least four years and Trump being in the White House didn't deter him at all. Perhaps the question to ask isn't whether Trump would have stopped this but rather would Trump even want to stop this? His statements on this issue so far show that he admires Putin's invasion of Ukraine. If people want to criticise Biden's handling of this that's fine but to pretend this wouldn't have happened under Trump is the same kind of delusion that people had that he had some plan to reclaim the presidency after he lost.

Also it would be nice to keep debates on this civil. I've not insulted you or anyone else on threads debating political issues so maybe don't call people "weaklings" or "imbeciles".

Its not like Left constantly make mountains out of molehills, with "what is your identity today - boy, girl or a deer" or "how to chop off your dick, so everyone would think you are a woman" or "why creators should not have right to write Black characters without being Black" or "when its healthy to buy little kids their first dildo"....yeah, very IMPORTANT issues, which concern everyone in the world!!

The side that makes these into big issues is the political right. For the sake of discussion let's examine the examples you cited:

1. Even if you don't believe in the science behind transgender people why is it a big deal if someone lives and identifies as a gender they weren't born as? They are not harming anyone by doing that so why does the right have such a problem with it? Surely countries that are founded on the principal that people are free to live their lives as they want should be okay with it.

2. Are we talking about comic book related characters? Is it a bad thing that people think that people of colour should occasionally profit on writing characters of colour? Even from a creative standpoint it's a fair point that they may help bring a more authentic voice to that character.

3. I don't think there has been a conversation about the appropriate time to give a child a sex toy (age of consent debates are more of alt right thing) or whether someone can identify as an animal. I know this was your attempt at humour but I just thought I'd point it out.

I wonder why White Nationalism is rising...could it be, because, Left politics make White people felt like citizens of the second class, who should forget their own culture and achievements, just to feel permanently guilty, because, of some **** that had happened few generations ago?

White people are literally not second class citizens anywhere in the western world and if things like teaching about slavery or Jim Crow and how the effects of these things still linger in society today make some white people feel like second class citizens...well maybe they should think how a lot black people feel who still have to live with the negative affects of living in these systems.

Your statement here come dangerously close to saying that it's black peoples fault that white supremacy on the rise. It's strange to me that you ask us to consider the feelings and fears of Putin's supporters and homophobes and white nationalists but make light of the feelings of the people they try to oppress.

Could it be, because, whenever, someone insists that immigrants should learn local languages and customs and live by the laws of the country they are trying to settle in, Left trash screams that it is "Nazism!!!!1111!".

Could it be, that Left doesn't spend enough on acclimatizing of immigrants and when they become criminals, they blame "nazzzzzzzisms!!!" as the reason why people dare to don't like those poor poor people?

I lived in Spain until the age of 8 and there were tons of immigrants from England that came to live and work there that couldn't speak a word of Spanish. The retirees would found large enclaves of British ex pats that didn't assimilate to Spanish culture at all. While this was annoyance to Spanish people that had to deal with them it was never treated as the end of Spanish culture as they knew it.

In my experience most economic migrants that come to the UK do speak a basic standard of English. Refugees on the other hand it's more mixed but since emigrating wasn't part of their life plan but something they had to do to so they wouldn't die in their home country I feel I can cut them some slack in not learning English before they came. As for them assimilating to British culture I feel your mileage may vary on what that means. Is it a problem if immigrants talk to each other in their native tongue? That they worship how they want to? In a free country that shouldn't be a problem. The only assimilating they I feel they should do is following the law and if they break it they either go to prison or they are deported. Where I have a problem is when immigrants are scapegoated when people that are born and raised here commit more crimes.

Yes, it is worthy to be mad at "gender pronounce", because, it is insanity, which directly affects kids and weak minded people. And, yes, kneeling in front of anyone, except the queen, is a humiliation. **** that ****.

Why? It's a free country. If a cis gendered person has a nick name they prefer to be called or changed their name for whatever reason we don't call them their birth name to deliberately antagonise them...not unless you're a huge jerk. The same principal applies with transgender people, you may not believe in transgenderism but you can at least do someone the basic courtesy of referring to them how they prefer. Also the right to protest is a fundamental part of a free society and taking a knee is very respectful way to do it that harms no one and funnily enough Colin Kaepernick was doing it for months and no one cared until they found out what exactly what he was protesting.

Except it won't change the fact that most queer people are just attention whores and most trans are rapey mentally ill deviants and abusers, who belong to mental asylum. Also, men can't become women. And never will be, so trans won't ever be normal. Good day, sir!

Nothing to say to this other than I'm leaving it here to show people who may agree with some of your points just how deep your bigotry goes and just what kind of person they'd be siding with.

[IndigoErth]

So if sanctions are way too soft peddling on Putin, because he just doesn't care about that in the long term, and possibly because he's getting old and is more concerned about his name in the history books... Do you think he'd mind too greatly if nations standing against him were to, say, destroy any and all important satellites he and his military need? Add that in with cyber attacks to lock up communications, etc.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Galactus

1. Even if you don't believe in the science behind transgender people why is it a big deal if someone lives and identifies as a gender they weren't born as? They are not harming anyone by doing that so why does the right have such a problem with it? Surely countries that are founded on the principal that people are free to live their lives as they want should be okay with it.

2. Are we talking about comic book related characters? Is it a bad thing that people think that people of colour should occasionally profit on writing characters of colour? Even from a creative standpoint it's a fair point that they may help bring a more authentic voice to that character.

3. I don't think there has been a conversation about the appropriate time to give a child a sex toy (age of consent debates are more of alt right thing) or whether someone can identify as an animal. I know this was your attempt at humour but I just thought I'd point it out.

1- IMO I got no problem with transgender people unless they take things too far with it. Like the ones that say if you wouldn't sleep with one, then you're transphobic. Or the ones that had a meltdown when Adele said she was proud to be a woman at an awards show, as if somehow that was a knock against transpeople?

It's basically a principle of you can be and believe whatever you want, just don't expect the rest of the world to indulge you. The most people I've met with pronouns have been chill, but there are a few crazies out there that expect you to, upon your first meeting, to somehow be a mind-reader and expect for to know they want to referred to as zir or whatever.

2. It's not occasionally, they're trying to make it the new rule. And also how limited is that, imagine being Asian and you are only allowed to create Asian characters? Plus we have this new trend of white experiences writers being let go or passed up cause 'too many honkies in here' so they give a job to a totally inexperienced person because hey, they're gay, trans and black. Then you end up with current Marvel and DC woke trash.

3. How bout just don't give sex toys to kids, of any kind, gay or straight. That shouldn't even be a topic of discussion.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

Someone finally stepped up militarily for Ukraine. Germany is sending in in tanks and weapons

YES! -fist pump-
YES! Stop this $#!( fast and hard and use overwhelming force per the Powell Doctrine.

Also, one of the thread fools is babbling her pervasive, uninformed nonsense and the other one is going on about transgender people in a thread about a globallly problematic invasion. Why are you guys giving them the time of day. One of those people is so stuck on her nonsense that she blocked the only guy that routinely kept her poignant and in check (me). So basically she thinks she can steamroll you guys with her BS>

The other guy is a provacatouer fool. Why banter with them at all at this point?

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Galactus

I'm sure your gay friend genuinely believes that having anything LGBTQ in children's programming is indoctrination but there are gay people who also don't believe in equal marriage neither is a popular view in the gay community. There are many reasons why a few gay people gravitate to these views (which they are perfectly entitled to have) but they shouldn't be held up as an example of why it's wrong to have any pro gay message in children's entertainment.

There is a difference between pro-Gay message and indoctrination.

Originally Posted by Galactus

There is no school anywhere that teaches the "the entire history of the gay struggle" and no one teaches them to hate white people. In most US schools lessons about race tend to stop at the voting rights act. The mere suggestion that it should go beyond that (or to go into greater depth about the civil rights movement) has had right wingers protesting in the streets about critical race theory. None of the above is going to teach kids that being straight and white is bad and those who think otherwise are the ones who really struggle with nuance.

What is "critical race theory"? What are various educational less, where kids being explained that there are "more than 2 sexes and kids can choose which sex they want to be"?

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Coola Yagami

1- IMO I got no problem with transgender people unless they take things too far with it. Like the ones that say if you wouldn't sleep with one, then you're transphobic. Or the ones that had a meltdown when Adele said she was proud to be a woman at an awards show, as if somehow that was a knock against transpeople?

About the Adele thing that's mostly made up.

The New York Post that originally ran the story based on three tweets that criticised what Adele said at the Brit Awards. Well at least we have to take their word that there were three tweets criticising because no one can any evidence of one of them...maybe they deleted it very quickly. The tweets themselves politely expressed the sentiment that given the theme of that years event it probably wasn't the best idea to say what she said. These three were enough to send The New York Post, Fox News and several right wing youtubers in a mad frenzy about the Left was piling on Adele and trying to make out she was a transphobe for days. It was entirely manufactured controversy that got tons of Conservatives angry when there were bigger things to mad at that three very mild tweets criticising a popstar.

2. It's not occasionally, they're trying to make it the new rule. And also how limited is that, imagine being Asian and you are only allowed to create Asian characters? Plus we have this new trend of white experiences writers being let go or passed up cause 'too many honkies in here' so they give a job to a totally inexperienced person because hey, they're gay, trans and black. Then you end up with current Marvel and DC woke trash

It's not a new rule. Like the Adele drama it's barely a thing.

No one has ever been fired by Marvel or DC for being white. If anything the big two comic companies are very supportive of their white male creators they have to hugely mess up to be fired. Joe Bennett's extreme political views were well known but he kept being employed by supposedly 'woke' Marvel even after he snuck anti Semitic symbols into his art. After one controversy too many they finally dropped him but conveniently after he'd completed his run on the high selling Immortal Hulk series.

As for people working on books starring characters that are the same gender/race/ethnicity/sexuality as them that's always been something widely debated. Even black writers like Christopher Priest have complained that for years he was constantly offered to write black characters that he had little interest in. Others however actually want to write them because they feel it gives them a more authentic voice. There is also the very valid point that if comics still turn profit and the movies and the associated merch will make billions for their parent companies all featuring poc characters maybe it might be a good idea to hire more poc.

As for their hiring practices. Back in the day you could be just be fan that hung out at conventions and talked your way in like Roy Thomas. Many artists would just bombard the big two with samples of their work until they gave them a shot. Marvel used to do an actual try out book for non professional artists that wanted a shot. Largely that doesn't happen anymore and the big two recruit from people who have made a name for themselves in independent comics. Whenever this happens to be a non-straight white guy there's usually a bunch of alt-right websites and youtubers to try and make out these people only got the job because they weren't a straight white male. Frankly if this was some big affirmative action plot on behalf of the big two then they are pretty poor at it since the majority of their creative are still straight white males.

3. How bout just don't give sex toys to kids, of any kind, gay or straight. That shouldn't even be a topic of discussion.

That's not a thing that happens ever. It's something Sumac made up as a joke.

Originally Posted by Sumac

There is a difference between pro-Gay message and indoctrination.

I don't watch a whole lot of childrens programming. Very occasionally I put kids shows on if I'm up early on weekends and interestingly I've never seen anything remotely gay so it's certainly not something widespread. From what I've read there's cartoons which have gay supporting characters and some occasional rainbow imagery. I wouldn't say that's indoctrination.

What is "critical race theory"? What are various educational less, where kids being explained that there are "more than 2 sexes and kids can choose which sex they want to be"?

Critical race theory is something taught at the collegiate level. It basically a course on the history of changing laws around African Americans and how even now laws are applied differently to Black and Caucasian people in the United States and examining the societal reasons why this is. It's become a catch-all term for any kind of lesson (in any level of education) addressing the history of racism in the US beyond the very basic slavery and Jim Crow was bad, MLK gave a speech and racism was over bar a few bad eggs.

I'm not sure there are any lessons teaching kids there are more than 2 sexes however teachers are encouraged to tell their pupils not to pick on the a kid that identifies as trans or seems like they could be and to accept them for how they are.

Originally Posted by IMJ

Also, one of the thread fools is babbling her pervasive, uninformed nonsense and the other one is going on about transgender people in a thread about a globallly problematic invasion. Why are you guys giving them the time of day. One of those people is so stuck on her nonsense that she blocked the only guy that routinely kept her poignant and in check (me). So basically she thinks she can steamroll you guys with her BS>

The other guy is a provacatouer fool. Why banter with them at all at this point?

I didn't want to derail the thread by getting too off topic which is why I didn't initially respond to Leo's post last night but it seems other people wanted to jump in too. Bare in mind I didn't bring any of these topics it was mostly you. I don't know why you have a problem with people expressing a difference of opinion. Isn't the whole idea that everything is up for debate one of the big things in modern conservatism.

While many of these topics could best be discussed in other threads it is somewhat tangentially connected. While the mainstream discourse on both sides of the political divide save for one notable Fox News pundit and one former president to condemn Putin's invasion some figures on the alt right are are excusing or even supporting it. The two main reasons seem to be that NATO simply existing forced poor ol' Putin to invade Ukraine. The other is that because Putin is anti-woke he should be supported. ******** of course but I wouldn't be suprised to see this crop in mainstream discourse.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

I definetly think that there is a ultra-nationalistic presence in Ukraine that can explode in popularity after a combination of Russian destruction, and Western intervention, a presence that can ultimately become just another enemy to the very people who helped them fight the Reds.

Of course, supplying arms is much better than to directly attack Russia and risk Nuclear retaliation, but is it wise for the West to get involved and risk making a future enemy? Should the United States get involved or pursue isolationism?

Nationalists would be on a rise anyway, thanks to Russia.
But, I doubt you'd get another Fascist state in Ukraine after this shitshow is over.
No need to fall into a commie trap and automatically consider every patriot of their nation "a Fascist".

[Leo656]

In my own defense, I'm guilty of derailing many a thread BUT at the same time I don't expect to live a lot longer and so I kinda feel like lighting a few fires on my way out the door.

So, yeah, that's a thing that has and will likely continue to happen. Tough sh*t, deal with it.

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by Leo656

In my own defense, I'm guilty of derailing many a thread BUT at the same time I don't expect to live a lot longer and so I kinda feel like lighting a few fires on my way out the door.

Hope you're OK dude

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Hope you're OK dude

You know me best of everyone here brother. You know the answer to that.

No worries though. "Okay" soon enough. Finally. Just gotta keep watching the mailbox.

Should be fun. I'm excited. I'm SUPER excited.

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by Leo656

You know me best of everyone here brother. You know the answer to that.

No worries though. "Okay" soon enough. Finally. Just gotta keep watching the mailbox.

Should be fun. I'm excited. I'm SUPER excited.

Mailbox or death!

[Leo656]

ORRRRR one begets the other.

[ChosenOne]

Peace talks in Pripyat? Now I've seen it all.

[MikeandRaph87]

As sides are taken, is it Russia, Belarus, China, and Iran all on the bad guy team?

[Sumac]

Right now situation is bleak for Russia.
Putin's plan was to take over Ukraine in 48 hours, it seems.
And his plan has ended up in a complete failure, which means sanctions are growing, Ukraine still fights back, his people are dying, his military looks like idiots, Putin looks like a mad man he is.

And there is no saving face from this blunder. Until Putin dies or resigns, Russia will forever be state of "non-grata" on the world scene. So, his "messianic" dreams ended up in ashes, like that of a last guy who attempted to conquer Europe.

I wonder what goes through the head of the dwarf? Does he think its all result of the conspiracy or maybe finally realizes that the world is quite different from what he thought it is?
No matter. His days and the days of a current Russia are numbered.

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

As sides are taken, is it Russia, Belarus, China, and Iran all on the bad guy team?

China and Iran are playing on their own. Might as well add Turkey to the list.
Of course, China and other bad boys will benefit from Russia bullying West, but they won't lift a muscle to help it, since they don't want sanctions and the like. They basically use Russia as a blunt weapon for their own interests, which is twice as funny, if you assume that Putin considers himself "a messiah and gatherer of the territories", while, in reality he is being played like an idiot, by more intelligent world leaders to do their bidding.