Looks like a solid start!

Maybe - and bear with me because this might sound crazy - it “feels right” for people who love their country for all it faults, no matter where that may be, to label someone heroic when that person heads the democratically elected government of a nation being invaded by someone bent on destroying that right of self governance and (here’s where it gets crazy) then in the face of all odds and with free western governments offering him heli-ubers left and right stays with his people as they fight the invading force.

I’m beginning to think I’m sheepish from praising Zelensky for not running away from and capitulating to the invaded force shelling small civilian towns and taking among its victims two toddlers today. I should probably get woke and hold off my judgement until I found out if he ate the same Olive Garden as a Burisma executive.


https://twitter.com/myroslavapetsa/s...FU1jTUoltpnoSQ

Looking at this objectively. The Russians are bombing the cities, but the Ukraine fighters are hiding and fighting in the cities. So while yes civilians are getting killed, but isn't that in part Zelensky's fault being all holed up instead of out on the battlefield other then the occassional picture?

I mean I know he's a busy guy and probably has a lot on his mind. I can not even fathom the situation he is in. So I do also give him lots of credit, but...

Shouldn't it be army vs army out on the battlefield?

That probably would have eliminated A LOT of civilian deaths, not to mention the flattening of cities.

The U.S. should be the last ones criticizing civilian deaths after we dropped 2 A-Bombs on ENTIRE cities, and killed 100's of thousands of civilians.

That being said let's stay on the present day, where everyone is a little more civilized.

But I don't know the exact numbers but possibly 100 civilians dead so far.
Those A-Bombs killed well over 200,000. Let's not go nuts here. That's quite difference.

All that being said I still feel Zelensky should make a few concessions and get this over with so no more have to die on either side. Putin ain't backing down until he wins, I think that much we all can agree on. Be nice if he crumbled, but no signs of it yet. Zelensky needs to be the bigger man, take West of the river give East of the river to Putin. Putin saves face, gains land, Zelensky 1. lives, 2. Ukraine get less, but that's a lot better than the alternative 3. No more deaths 4. They both look like winners to their side. End it already, 2 stubborn leaders. Figure it out.

I think we just view the word heroic differently. Pretty much an easy binary choice he had to make. He made the right one and should be applauded for that. Not saying that I'd like to change places with him, and I'm not egotistical enough to think I'd somehow wind up in his position, but I feel fairly confident that I and everyone else on this board would've done the same. Brave? Yes. Heroic? Not quite yet.

He's basically in a George W. Bush post 9/11 situation right now. Opinions may differ but the overwhelming majority probably wouldn't declare Bush as being heroic now. Not comparing people but just the situation.

Regardless, I'm obviously wanting to see Russia pull out before things get any worse and he definitely deserves praise for doing the right thing.

NATO has yet to provide Fifers and Drummers to Ukraine. Conversely the Russian musical instruments are stuck at the back of 40 mile convoy.

I love ya Moe personally, but I can’t believe we’re laying any amount of blame higher than zero on Zelensky for not adhering to Napoleonic era military tactics. If Zelensky and his people believe concessions are acceptable I have no problem with whatever they accept. (For reference the most recent Russia list of concessions demanded included re-writing the Ukrainian constitution.)

It’s their country, it’s their sovereign right to govern themselves. It’s their homes, land, and businesses. They had so many people voluntarily sign up (not conscripted) for the Territorial Defense force they couldn’t arm them all.

When the invaders accepted a ceasefire in Mariupol to allow civilians to leave they only allowed movement on one specific route. Before the ceasefire they bombed the route making it impassable. A second ceasefire had to be agreed upon because no-one was able to leave. Russia demanded the second evacuation had to stick a different specific route. The Red Cross checked the route and discovered land mines and butterfly mines (banned by the Geneva convention) on the route. They are now trying to reach a third agreement.

I will not blame them for fighting for the God given sovereign right to govern themselves.

I hope something like that happens, but I can't imagine it at this point. I think even if both were willing to make concessions it would be laying the groundwork for an even bigger conflict in the future. Think about how NATO would view Russia at that point and would they just lift all sanctions at that point. I just think that would alleviate the problem in the short run but lead to WW3.

I think the only way to avert WW3 is for a Ukraine victory without direct NATO involvement. Maybe, just maybe, if things really turned south against Putin and he realized there was no way to victory and he would agree to some type of a deal and Ukraine would give up some territory with a lot of concessions from Russia. I just can't see that happening though. I'm really not sure how this turns out but I fear it's only a matter of time before a lot more countries get pulled into this.

I disagree it was easy. Easy would be accepting a NATO chopper to Berlin and leading a government in exile. Easy would be leaving and watching the people who freely elected you be absorbed by a nation detaining a survivor of the siege of Leningrad for standing outside the Kremlin and calling for peace. There is nothing about his choice that was “easy.” That’s just my opinion though.

"Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one"
--John Lennon

Pray to whatever gods you believe in and for the sake of all our children that this is not the start of WWIII.

Peace and Love, brothers and sisters. Out.

What kind of appeasement would you have suggested?

Yeah, sure. A bunch of guys standing against 20 miles of tanks. That would be smart.

If an inner city gang invaded my home with intent to kill me, I would take cover. I wouldn't walk into my front yard to "fight fair."

Shemp, you may acknowledge what Gorbachev said about a NATO promise, but do you believe him? Based on the rest of your reply, the answer is, "No." If you did, you wouldn't have linked to Margolis' article where he pretty much only talks about the Russians being LIED to.

As for the highlighted portion, if there is something in there about this "spirit," find it. How many times do I have to tell you that you are the one making the claim, you are the one who needs to provide evidence that your claim is valid. Do you really expect me to accept your claim because there MIGHT be something in the documents to support you? REALLY?? :eek:

Lastly, in regards to this "spirit" that was "violated," how exactly would that be documented? If NATO expansion was never brought up by any country on either side, as Gorbachev says, what "spirit" are you talking about?

Shemp, I really don't get it. For some reason, you're still fishing for that angle so you can say Putin is justified in attacking Ukraine because of US lies or phantom "spirits" about NATO expansion.

Get used to it Shemp. There are those who say, "Love it or leave it." I don't know how many times I've heard that. There is one political party in this country that seems to think they own patriotism and you're either with them or against them. If you don't wrap yourself up in the American flag or wear a flag pin, you're unpatriotic. If they are in the White House, you don't dare criticize the government because to do so is unpatriotic. In fact, you could probably storm the Capitol to prevent a fair election from being certified and you would probably be called a patriot by them ... if it is done to keep them in the White House of course.

Sorry if I misinterpreted what you intended.

As for Black Sabbath, they're one of my favorite bands (I especially love Vol. 4, but Paranoid is also a great album). Another great song on this topic is Dylan's "Masters of War" on his Freewheelin' album.

100% agree with the rest.

So Al, when are you going to enlighten us with the translation? :)

It's getting close to 50 years since I studied Russian, and what I get is:

I often obrashchaois to NET54 for sovetom, iskrenne Vladimir.

:D

OK, I just did a quick Google translation on the words I'm missing.

Hey, if he did, maybe things would have gone differently.

Спасибо

WaterCooler Talk - Off Topics
General chat and off topic stuff. Please no politics or religion.

Two things. One is that we should maybe think about why, in spite of the risks of provoking Putin that many people are highlighting, Eastern European countries wanted to join NATO anyway. I assume they knew the risks very well, but thought it was still safer than not joining. If NATO doesn't let them join, it sends a message to Putin: we don't care about these countries and won't protect them. That's what he thought was the case with Ukraine, and we can see how that's working out.

Two, the "encircled by NATO" thing is not all that's going on. Putin has a set of ideological beliefs that are driving his actions as well.

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/0...ssian-fascism/

Ted

Since the bulk of the discussion began on the question of how much value should be placed on the reporting of major journalism outlets (or in Layman’s term: “sheep blindly trust MSM”). I think it is particularly noteworthy that today the New York Times pulled all of its foreign correspondents out of Russia. It has held a continual presence there since 1921 - through the rise of bolshevism, the power grab of Stalin, through the Second World War and the sieges that ground the Nazi war machine to a halt, through the Cold War, until today. A paper with more than 130 Pulitzer Prizes and multiple Peabody awards, that defended itself in multiple Supreme Court cases that lay the basis for freedom of speech and freedom of the press, and that on at least two occasions has been publicly threatened by the sitting President of the United States of America lowered their presence in Russia to zero. They did it to protect their correspondents from Russia’s new law criminalizing any news the state disagrees with.

The point of news isn’t affirmation of your beliefs, the point is to provide facts that can help you make educated and informed decisions.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nyt...eedom.amp.html

Enough of that Lennon Communist manifesto!!!

Pick a better song, like say Twisted Sister "We're Not Gonna Take It" for the Ukraine. And maybe "Rapid Fire" by Judas Priest for the Russians.

Funny story, well not really a story, but at the grocery store yesterday, and this guy maybe 50-60's and I are perusing the salad dressings, and he points to the Russian dressing and says "don't get that one". Cracked me up.

Well, I'll tell you, if I went to Vegas I wouldn't play Russian roulette.

Serious question, should George Washington have surrendered after his defeat in New York, or Winston Churchill have surrendered after Dunkirk? Both would have saved a lot of civilian deaths, but left their respective countries much worse off.

Putin is a liar and a thug, and his domestic critics are either dead or in jail. Any peace will only last as long as it takes him to replace his losses, then he will be on the march again. Besides, the Russians are getting taken to the woodshed. Their advance has stalled out, their generals are getting picked off like fish in a barrel, and with the muddy season about to start, they won't be going anywhere any time soon.

No problem! Figured you may have just misunderstood my meaning/intention.

As for Sabbath, have loved them since they first came out. Still have their original early albums from when they all were released. I have always thought and felt their very first, self-titled album, was their absolute best. Don't get me wrong, have Vol. 4 and Paranoid from when they were first released, and both are great. But there's something about their initial album that just puts it apart for me. But only really like them with Ozzie. They were never the same with Dio or anyone else. In fact, about the only song of theirs, without Ozzie singing lead, that I really like for some reason is It's Alright, with I believe Bill Ward handling the lead vocals. Sounds nothing like a typical Sabbath song, but is one of those tunes you can't seem to get out of your head. Did you ever get the opportunity to see them perform live with Ozzie?

Dylan's song is great also. But Sabbath's War Pigs is the first truly anti-war song I remember put out by such a different band than the normal protest and anti-war ballads and standards we were used to at the time. And the song's lyrics from back then are as true today as ever. Basically, the poor, common people of the world end up paying the price for fighting wars started by all the rich, powerful, and crazy a--holes on the planet. We are supposed to learn from history so we don't keep repeating our mistakes, and yet.......

Churchill had some help coming. Not sure Zelensky does.

Washington, he had the homefield advantage, them Brits had a long boat ride across the pond, and it was a fairly even strength battle wasn't it, I don't recall numbers for each side.

This is like my little league team taking on the Yankees. Granted they are looking more like the Orioles, but still. As for taken to the Woodshed, not sure we are watching the same skirmish. Maybe they have put up more resistance then Putty expected, but I do not see the tide turning. As of now looks like they are just delaying the inevitable.

The operation to evacuate forces at Dunkirk happened in May 1940 when American isolationism was still polling at about 70%. When thousands of British civilian sailors crossed the channel into a war zone to save their boys there absolutely was not someone coming to help. They were alone on an Island, the last bastion against fascist leadership in Europe. They weathered and they won.

No matter how this all ends up, why not let the people decide? Have the people of Ukraine vote as to whether or not they want to be part of Russia. And if an overwhelming majority agrees, let them become part of Russia.

Of course Putin would never agree to and abide by this because the Russian government doesn't give common people any true choice as to how they want to be governed, do they? There is no single perfect way for all people to live and be governed. Everyone has different thoughts and ideas on what is right or wrong, and just because you're born into a certain culture or society doesn't mean you should be forced to follow a certain way of life or thinking because of the ill luck you had in being born into a culture/society you ultimately don't like, or want to be part of.

And all this crap about NATO and nukes in neighboring countries being part of the reasoning behind this "special military operation" makes no sense. With all the long range missiles and nuclear weapons in the world today, so what if you don't have missiles in Ukraine pointed at you? Chances are just a small country or two away there are other countries with missiles already pointed at Russia. Just like Russia and China and other communist countries have their missiles and nuclear weapons pointed right back at us and other non-communist and NATO countries in the world. I can only guess at how many missiles and nuclear weapons are right at this moment targeting and locked onto New York city or Washington DC, and await only someone giving the order to have them launched. And the same for those on our supposed side locked onto Moscow and Beijing. I'm guessing the real reason for the uproar is that a missile fired from the Ukraine at Moscow, versus one being fired from the continental US, wouldn't give the Russians as much time to detect the launch and shoot it down. And even if they were able to shoot it down in time, it would still be over Russian territory and likely to inflict damage to Russian people and property, as opposed to a weapons launch say from the US that gets intercepted and shot down over an ocean or some other country. And isn't that one of, if not the main reason, we had the Cuban missile crisis back in Kennedy's day? Our side thinks the same way. Maybe if ALL these countries, ON ALL SIDES of these arguments would just stop all the lies and BS they spew out to all the common ordinary people of the world, and for once were open and honest with the entire planet about what was really bothering them, maybe........just maybe, all these world leaders for once could do something for the betterment of all mankind, and not just for their stupid, greedy selves. But I ain't holding my breath, because at the end of the day we're all mostly still just stupid, selfish humans.

The problem with being humans is that there will never be 100% agreement on how we should live and interact with one another. So we are doomed to always have wars and conflicts it seems, at least till we finally succeed in killing ourselves off, or we're done in by some cataclysmic event beyond our control. One of my hopefully most realistically obtainable goals is that I don't live long enough to see either of those things happen. That along with one day completing an S74-1 white silk Ty Cobb advertising back run. :)

In addition to what Steve mentioned, the US ambassador to the UK at the time was a Nazi sympathizer. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

Washington never directly commanded more than 17,000 troops at any one time, and most of them were poorly trained militiamen. The British army, which at the time was the largest, best-trained and well-equipped force in the world, had 48,000 men in North America, plus another 30,000 German mercenaries, 13,000 Indians and 25,000 loyalists.

The Russians still have not destroyed the Ukrainian Air Force (their objective on day 1), taken Kyiv (day 3), and are nowhere near ready to install a puppet government (end of the first week). They were expecting to have this done and dusted by now, and instead are spinning their wheels and taking heavy casualties. Meanwhile, Ukraine is receiving a steady flow of equipment and volunteers from abroad, while the Russian economy is in free fall, they are staring at a default on their debt, and the Ruble-USD exchange rate is now 144-1.

Look at Putin's body language here. He doesn't look or sound like someone who is winning; he looks like his parents caught him misbehaving and now he's trying to explain why he shouldn't get sent to bed without any supper.

Churchill and the Brits would be speaking German right now if the US didn't get involved.

Don't kid yourself.

All Dunkirk was, was a successful retreat.

D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, etc were led by the US. That and the Russians encircling the Germans at Stalingrad, and stopping their advance on to Moscow, those events turned the tide.

Chruchill had BIG TIME help in the US & USSR.

Zelensky may have made the error in thinking he was getting help. Any he is currently getting is very minimal.

And did Putin ever say all this: we'll have this done by Day 1, this done by Day 3?

Provide that link. Not the media saying what his plan was. Could even be false propaganda for all we know. Could be true, that's why I'd like to see a link. They say he wanted it wrapped up in a week so he looks bad. Gives hope to the Ukrainians. Now what if they said he said he wanted it wrapped up in a month or 2. So then is he ahead of schedule?

Not sure how everyone knows what his plans were when I'm not even sure Putin knows. Yes, I'm sure he thought it would be easier. But what will he do in response: turn up the carnage. Not sure that's a much better alternative.

....and let's not forget Churchill was voted out of office in 1945.

Apparently not the hero to all.

Where did I ever say anything like that? Unless you're confusing me with someone else in this thread?

The only city the Russians have besieged so far is Mariupol, which is near the border with Russia and in the part of Ukraine that was very friendly to the Russians.

From Marco Rubio, who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Yes, they could be wrong, but so far what he's been posting has been accurate.

Hitler lost the war the minute he invaded the USSR June 22,1941. The Germans could never match the manpower or production from the unbombable Urals and further east. Stalin had no problem sacrificing millions of people in order to keep himself and communism in power. Eight out of every ten German soldiers killed in WW2 were on the Eastern Front. More German soldiers were killed in and around Stalingrad in one battle than were killed by the US the entire war.

Senate Intelligence, now that's funny.

I believe I basically said that. Stalingrad was the turning point. But if the US are not involved on the East, that's more of Hitler's army fighting the Soviet Union on the West. Not sure if that changes anything, but possibly it would have.

I pose this question to you:

"Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7vtWB4owdE

Now that's a real oxymoron!

The Russian Defense Ministry put out this video of some of their special forces in Ukraine a few days ago (this isn't 'Ukrainian propaganda'; if anything, it is supposed to make the Russians look good). Two things I noticed: their helmets do not have NVG mounts, which means the elite forces deploying in the winter (i.e., long nights) don't have NVGs. And, they do not have optical sights on their rifles. Here's another one from the 'exercises' leading up to the war. Again, elite troops who are lacking very basic equipment that would be standard in any Western military.

I believe the problem nowadays lies with the people who watch talking heads/political commentators/opinion people/etc and think that all of that is “news.”

That and they never leave their echo chamber of confirmation bias.

This is very strange and interesting. Russia has of course developed numerous optics of several types for the AK-12/15 series and several of them are known to have entered mass production (I believe some have become available for export in the US). Odd they would take them off to shoot a video, but also odd if their special forces are not even using them at all. Easier optic mounting was one of the big selling points of the new rifles.

+1

The only reason I can think of that isn’t ‘they don’t have them’ is opsec, but it shouldn’t be a secret that they use that equipment; just off the top of my head, the US, UK and Israel don’t make a secret of it.

Aren't you precious?!?

Hmm, just as political as my statement and your response ... crickets.

Just as political as my statement and your response ... crickets.

Yeah, this was kind of tongue-in-cheek, but still just as political as my statement and your response ... crickets.

Much, much more political than my statement and your response ... crickets.

While climate change should not be political, you think it is. Remember this thread from May 2020:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...+change&page=2

You claimed I believe in climate change because I want to punish, weaken, and control "the people that I hate, the ones that voted for," in YOUR words, "The Orange Meanie." Remember that? YOU brought up politics. Good times, huh?

And your response to Irv's political statement ... crickets.

Very selective of you, don't you think?

I've never seen Sabbath live. Unfortunately. But I also have all the albums I bought back in the day. From their first album to the last one I bought, Mob Rules in 1981. I guess we'll have to disagree on Dio. I liked him in Sabbath. I also liked him in Rainbow and a lot of his solo stuff. Hmm, since we disagree on what is their best album and Dio, are we supposed to start shouting at and denigrating each other? Isn't that how it works these days? :eek:

Take care.

Originally Posted by Shoeless Moe View Post
Churchill and the Brits would be speaking German right now if the US didn't get involved.

False; Churchill hasn't spoken any language for quite some time :D

LOL

No, we're not disagreeing about Sabbath. I don't totally dislike them with RJD, just always liked them more with Ozzie. And too bad you never got the chance to see them together live. Never had the time to see them when they were first together. Almost caught them on their Black and Blue Tour with Blue Oyster Cult and Riot in 1980, but something came up and couldn't make it. Always regretted missing that show, but not too much since Ozzie had already been kicked from the group the year before. So when luck would have it, in 1999 Ozzie got back with Sabbath and was headlining Ozzfest. I made sure to get there. Unbelievable show as Sabbath and Ozzy hit the main stage following Slayer, Deftones, System of a Down, Godsmack, Primus, and with Rob Zombie as Sabbath's lead-in. They sounded and played better than I ever would have hoped, and their playlist was one for the ages:

War Pigs
N.I.B.
Fairies Wear Boots
After Forever
Sweetleaf
Into the Void
Electric Funeral
Dirty Women
Black Sabbath
Paranoid

I only wish they could have included Snowblind and Iron Man on the playlist. And Ozzy even came out with buckets of water, and then a fire hose, to help cool the crowd down. For the few years it was around, Ozzfest was truly a unique experience. But if you were lucky enough to catch it one of the few times Ozzy headlined with Sabbath..........that was something else.

Take care.

This was their Ozzfest setlist in Pittsburgh in 2001:
N.I.B.
Snowblind
Scary Dreams
War Pigs
Iron Man
Into the Void
The Wizard
Black Sabbath
Paranoid
Children of the Grave

I don’t know much about Black Sabbath other than the first two albums but I do know that Ian Gillan said that he was the worst possible lead singer for them and that the album he did with them was a disaster, but he also says the other three in the group are great guys and he’s on excellent terms with them.

Brief break from retirement.

https://nypost.com/2022/03/10/russia...nside-ukraine/

Another great song list, and see that they did add Snowblind and Iron Man to that year's song list. Wish I could have seen them perform those two songs. I think Black Sabbath and N.I.B. are their two greatest and most iconic songs ever. Biggest reason I like their very first album most of all, those are the first and last songs on Side 1. And when you throw in Geezer's bass solo intro to N.I.B. (titleded "Bassically"), it really sets that finale up. At the time, they were a sound that had never been heard before. And to complete it you need Ozzy's voice. Iommi's sound was also unique. Do you know the story behind his accident and why he plays and sounds like he does? He is one of the most underrated guitarists of all time IMHO. And the bass/rhythm section of Ward and Butler are up there with the best as well, and are second to none.

I saw Ozzy/Sabbath in Columbus at the 1999 Ozzfest, with my then 13 year old oldest son, and a couple of his friends. We made a pact that none of them would ever tell their Mothers what I really took them to. LOL

Took my daughter, who's 3 years older than my elder son, to the 2000 Ozzfest, which was much closer to home, at the Blossom Music Center located between Cleveland and Akron. Unfortunately, Ozzy went solo without Sabbath that year. It was still great, but just wasn't the same. He did mostly his solo hits, but still threw in War Pigs, and ended the night with Paranoid. But it wasn't Sabbath.

Oh yeah, Butler, Ward, and Iommi are all phenomenal musicians. And Ian Gillan is definitely no slouch as a singer either. First ever concert I went to was to see him and Deep Purple in 1973. Listening to them perform Smoke On the Water live would blow your mind, along with your eardrums. LOL

Thing to me is, you need Ozzy's voice to match up with and bring out the best of Black Sabbath. They truly demonstrate how the sum can be so much greater than the parts. They just aren't the same with someone else singing their songs.

Sounds like Kyiv is about to fall.

Isn't that where Zelensky is? or is he on the move?

Infraction given - Politics

This is true. Even though I really like Dio, the old BS songs aren't the same with him instead of Ozzy.

113 BILLION to Ukraine, and counting.
To put this into perspective. If one had just 1 million dollars it would take 3 yrs to spend it if one spent a $1,000 dollars each and every day (24/7 365)
To spend the same amount, a $1,000 each and every day, with just 1 billion, (not 113) it would take one 2,740 yrs to spend it.

Just curious how many are willing to send their son's and daughters to Ukraine, (one of the most corrupt and crooked regimes on this planet) to help Zelenskyy out like he is suggesting?

Anyone else curious when WW3 is about to begin? We are getting closer and closer each and everyday.
And before anyone thinks Putin is the aggressor here, please tell me why Joe and company discouraged Zelenskyy from reaching a peace agreement with him? Why is the U.S. so heavily invested in Ukraine? Can anyone give me a reasonable explanation, an explanation that would justify supporting Zelenskyy and his band of Nazi's?
Since 2014 Russia is the only side who has been advocating for peace and negotiations, hence the Minsk agreements. Even now they have reached out to end the conflict. Deaf ears... If they wanted to destroy Ukraine they would have by now. I don't think that is what they want to do despite all of the rhetoric.
https://youtu.be/gQRrj1FZICE
Zelinsky:

Ukraine needs fresh young Americans to help fight on the ground war.

"The US will have to send their Son's & Daughter's... to WAR..."

"....and they will be DYING."

https://twitter.com/JamesPhillips00/...84722253312002

How about looking at Putins offer.

"Give us 20% of your country and we might leave you alone for a while, maybe"

Such a bargain!

Right. It frustrates me that some people didn't learn the simple lesson of WW2: When dealing with a sociopathic megalomaniac intent on starting wars and grabbing land from its sovereign neighbors, appeasement doesn't work.

Using the "James Phillips quote machine," I believe this accurately reflects Irv's position on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, as I am quoting Irv directly:

"Putin is the aggressor. . . . [T]he U.S. [is] so heavily invested in Ukraine[,] that would justify supporting Zelenskyy. . . . [M]any are willing to send their son's and daughters to Ukraine, to help Zelenskyy out."

I am shocked to read this! I disagree with Irv's position and do not believe we should be sending American troops to fight in Ukraine. Based on the quote above, it seems like Irv might be motivated by profit, not peace.

Obviously, this is all malarky, and everyone with the benefit of reading what Irv actually said knows it. But, anybody reading or reposting the quote above without his original post will have no idea how manipulated it is. It underscores how dangerous it is to premise your ideas on a completely falsified account of what the originator of information actually said.

I am confused by your post, Scott? I am not saying and/or suggesting the above bold at all, quite the opposite actually.
I think it is crazy that it, the Ukraine war, has actually escalated to this point.
Like I've asked numerous times now, why is the U.S. so invested in Ukraine?

It is nothing but a Proxy war with Russia and they've been planning this for sometime now but someone got in the way for 4 years.

NATO, the U.S. and Ukraine are the aggressors here.
China is currently doing business with Mexico.
What do you suppose would happen if China put up military bases and missle silo's along the U.S./Mexican border?
Both side of the political fence would react as expected.
This is something the U.S. and their funded media tries to keep from us.

I am no Putin sympathizer but he is not the aggressor here nor did he start this but those that are, like I said, are going to get us into WW3.

I think he is saying that someone nefarious could quote your post out of context to make it say the opposite of what you actually mean. Not that any members here would do that :rolleyes:.

Well, yes, but more precisely, I was drawing a parallel to the quote of Zelenskyy being tortured by the Twitter user Irv referenced in his original statement. Much like my tortured quote of Irv, JamesPhillips bastardized a quote from Zelenskyy to suggest he said something very different from what he actually said. Irv then uses this mis-quote as support for part of his argument. I was pointing out that relying on a bad source for factual information can be dangerous.

Putin has said the biggest tragedy of the 20th century was the disillusion of the USSR. His plans in Ukraine are clearly to conquer as many countries and grab as much land as possible. Early in the war, Lukashenko laid out the plan to invade Moldova after conquering Ukraine. Medvedev has even suggested Russia should move int east Germany.

The war is in Ukraine because Russia invaded Ukraine. They have been bombing hospitals, apartments, schools, and power plants (in winter) to kill as many civilians as possible. There are thousands of documented instances of torture, civilian executions, rape as policy, and other various war crimes.

When you say the USA, NATO, and Ukraine are the aggressors, you are dead wrong. It's like blaming Poland for being invaded by Hitler.

Yes, the twitter bit is snapshot of the full conversation and just like I posted, it was posted out of context, but at the same time if you can't see that Zelenskyy is just trying to elicit sympathy and instill fear in the American Public so the billions keep flowing, then I can't help you.

Yes, not denying that but like I wrote above, how do you think the U.S. would react if China, even without the help of NATO, placed military bases and missle silo's along the U.S. border?

Those other things you wrote, Mark, are straight out of the MSM feeds. The oldest trick in the book to make Putin and Russia look a bunch of barbarians to drum up support and dwell up sympathy for Ukraine.
Watch the vid I posted earlier/yesterday/whenever about Ukraine. It should be an eye opener. Azov Nazi's are a large part of Zelenskyy's army/support groups. They have been torturing/killing citizens in the eastern parts of Ukraine for years now.

This NBC journalist is now on a Ukrainian Nazis hit list all because he questioned some Russian citizens in Crimea about Ukraine and Ukraine govt (Zelenskyy/the Nazi's) didn't like it. Real fine caring people over there. :rolleyes:
https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/...46414926225408
https://myrotvorets-center.translate..._x_tr_pto=wapp

I 100% agree with the part about Ukraine appealing to Americans by pointing out that they are a huge underdog to a world power that is attacking them mercilessly and further pointing out that alot of NATO countries that are former USSR territories could result in USA being "forced" to be involved with troops on the ground.

I disagree with your assertion that you originally posted that the quote you used was "posted out of context." You claimed, as did the Twitter poster, that Zelinskyy was calling upon America to send fresh troops to Ukraine to fight Russia. That is just flat out false, and if you read your own post, nowhere in there do I see any effort to clarify that the quote is false. Instead, you specifically reference an equally false quote from JamesPhillips on Twitter. When called out on it, you, like JamesPhillips, basically double down by saying you know it is out of context and false, but it doesn't matter because you believe that is what he meant or that he is just trying to scare Americans. No, if you are going to quote somebody, quote them in context and correctly, not what you are trying to extrapolate from what they are saying to support a position.

Hitler wasn’t the only one to invade Poland in September 1939.

Well, I understand your point but if you watch the vid, Zelenskyy says the U.S. "will" have to send troops, not they must send them. I gathered from the tidbit he was alluding what was to come "if" not now but I can see how it can be misconstrued like that.

And LOL on Russia attacking Ukraine "Mercilessly" You should educate yourself on what Zelenskyy and Ukraine are doing to it's own citizens, especially blacks, gays and other minorities/ethnicities.

If the purpose was first strike, we wouldn't like it. If the purpose was defensive, like air defense systems, it wouldn't matter since the USA does not reserve the right to invade Mexico.

NATO is a defensive organization. Proof of that is that NATO hasn't sent troops or air forces into combat. They have only provided munitions for Ukraine to defend their own territory. If NATO was an aggressive force, they'd be flying sorties over Moscow daily.

Are you saying Russia is NOT bombing hospitals, schools, and other civilians targets like power plants? Because Putin himself is bragging about making life as miserable as possible on Ukrainian civilians.

Look, I agree with you about the mismanagement of the Covid situation, beginning with its origin. But the MSM is not ALWAYS wrong. When Putin himself brags about the devastation his army is wreaking on Ukraine, it seems like quite a stretch to say that all the many various news outlets are wrong when they report on it.


How familiar are you with Wagner and its origins? It seems a bit ridiculous to say Putin is sending Wagner into Ukraine because he is so outraged with "Nazis." To Russia, de-Nazification is just another term for killing people and stealing their land.

Russians who speak out against Putin and his regime are plummeting and splatting by the dozens, and that is fact. Actually happening. But you're more concerned with an alleged threat to one person.

So, my question to you is this: Do you believe Russia has been deliberately bombing civilian targets in Ukraine, as Putin says?

Again, Putin did not start this. It's a proxy war against Russia, nothing more.
Is Ukraine even an ally?
113 BILLION and counting. Why, and why such a vested interest? Hunter is on the board of Burisma. Ukraine has bio labs.
Why is the U.S. so against Russia invading Ukraine if you say it is unprovoked when that is all the U.S. has done for years itself?
Have they now had a change of heart, taken the moral high ground and a way of paying repentance is to now help Ukraine?
You're being played, Mark. We are going to get into WW3 because your President and his band of Merrymen love war, nothing more.
https://www.tiktok.com/@cristinabrun..._t=8aHWsM4axDy

Putin did start this. First step was in 2014 when he annexed Crimea. Now he's trying to take several more bites. It has become a proxy war against Russia that Putin started.

Suppose we did as you suggest. Let Putin take Ukraine. Do you think he would stop there, Neville Chamberlain? Or would he then move into Moldova, the Baltics, and maybe Poland? And we'd just sit back and think it was a safer world, with Putin "de-Nazifying" eastern Europe?

It's a fraction of our defense budget. Usually, our military spending doesn't accomplish much. The money we are spending now is an attempt to maintain a stable Europe. Putin needs to be stopped.



Hunter is a criminal, the USA supports various labs, including the one in Wuhan, unfortunately. I'm not aware of the USA invading and annexing land from other countries recently. I'm aware of the USA building schools and hospitals, but not intentionally blowing them up.

We are preventing WW3 by nipping it in the bud, so to speak. What about "appeasement doesn't work" don't you understand? Look, I get it. You're a contrarian. Government is always dishonest, MSM always lies, things are never as they seem. You are being played by your own bias.

You didn't answer my question. Do you believe Putin is purposely attacking civilian targets in Ukraine to cause as much pain as possible on the people there, as Putin brags?

And I have another question. If Putin is successful in capturing Ukraine, or parts of it, do you think he stops there?

I had a contrarian friend in law school who claimed the Berlin Wall was built to keep West Berliners from fleeing east. Saying Putin did not start this war reminds me of that.

Well, prior to the western sponsored coup in Ukraine, Russia got along just fine with neighbors in Ukraine.
Deals and promises were broken. NATO continued and continues to move east. But Putin is just expected to ignore those, say no big deal?
Who I believe is still your current president who is calling the shots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES4jslRzQwI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XqgNOvFMvg

Western coup in Ukraine? Please explain. According to your previous posts, Ukraine is playing the West.

Your definition of "Russia getting along just fine with its neighbors in Ukraine" means Russia first seizing Crimea, then 4 more oblasts. Maybe from your, and Putin's, point of view, that's getting along just fine. To Ukrainian citizens who have been invaded and bombed relentlessly, not so much.

Irv, usually you are forthcoming in your debates. I've asked you two specific questions above that you continue to dodge. Why?

Had my dates wrong, never mind, but I still believe Putin is clearly the aggressor here and any legitimate concerns could have been addressed diplomatically..

I think I get what you mean, but this is where language needs to be precise. Putin clearly chose to start the war. Ukraine did not attack Russia, Russia invaded. It didn't happen in a vacuum though, which I imagine is your point. The US appears to have backed the 2014 coup, which sparked Russia to take the Crimea just days later, to install a more friendly regime on Russia's border. The eastern provinces have been trying to secure independence for years and western Ukraine has been using force and violence to keep them attached. Russia, obviously, does not want a US client state on its border. The US would never allow a Russian client state on our border. It is much more complicated than a couple sentences, but the main narrative likes to skip over the entire history and paint a rather absurdist picture of simple evil incarnate, as we do every single time we are at war or proxy war with another state. We have seen this play out over and over and over and over.




If we are in favor of a people's right to rule themselves, we must be for Ukraine but also in favor of the east being able to choose for themselves as well. I find it difficult to find a sensible philosophy that means the US should bankroll or fight Ukraine's war of defense, but Ukraine is allowed to do whatever it wants to provinces that do not want to be part of Ukraine. Every time the US has a painful go of it, we all renounce the war we once supported and say that the US should stop being the world police. And then every time something happens, we say we need to fight it or fund it. And then the cycle repeats itself. This sure feels like another loop of this circle at this point, but time will tell.

I know not what to really make of this war, accurate information is difficult to find in the middle of a conflict and most of the media is simply printing Ukraine's propaganda; no nations propaganda about a war it is in has ever in world history been particularly accurate information. It does seem that Russia is still fighting with an arm tied behind its back, though I don't know why. Short of using WMD, there is little risk of further escalation, the west is already bankrolling and supplying the war at large scale. We will learn much in 10 years that isn't really known now.

Because your believes, imo, are silly. The U.S. rebuilding schools and infrastructure. LOL. The middles east is a mess due to the fake WMD narrative. Remember that one?
Again, you're being told one side of the story, not being told what Zelenskyy is doing to his own people.
Like I said earlier, if Putin wanted to destroy Ukraine, he would have done so by now.
113 BILLION is pocket change to you?
Well I would say, spending countless millions to conduct a coup in a foreign country and overthrow their govt and implement an unelected one to spend another couple billion preparing them for a war with a super power where we spend a couple hundred billion more which causes/leads to hyper inflation on energy, food and what not is a very irresponsible endeavor. Especially when America has things that could use that money and attention to HELP people instead of peddling death and despair.

And I have no idea if Putin will stop as you don't. To suggest otherwise is just speculation. Will the U.S., especially the warmongering democrats stop raiding other countries? I highly doubt it as there is far too much money to be had in the war machine.
And you somehow think, despite the no new wars anywhere for 4 yrs, you think this war will stop WW3, not start it?

No, your right, I am a contrarian and I don't believe any of this nor what our media is spinning. If they say one thing, I think the opposite. I can't help it based on what lies we have been spewed to for years now. But I'm suppose to believe this war is for a good cause, the media is now telling the truth, Putin is the bad guy and Zelenskyy is the saint?
Stand with Ukraine!!! LOL.

Exactly. Putin was provoked and he is continuing to be poked.
Peace agreements which he has tried to broker now and before the war have fallen on deaf ears.
The U.S. will not stop until they get their wish. I just hope troops and citizens around the world don't die needlessly because of these war mongering assholes.

Right, your mind is locked into being contrarian. It doesn't really matter how smart someone is, if they've surrendered their ability (or desire) to think for themselves, rather than being stuck into a knee-jerk belief system that has them believing, or in your case, disbelieving, everything.

I will ask for a third or fourth time: Do you believe Russia is purposely bombing civilian targets, to kill and make miserable as many Ukrainian citizens as possible? I really don't expect an answer, because it's become obvious my question is threatening to you and your thought process.

You keep mentioning how unfair Ukraine has been to some of its citizens, while evading the fact Putin is trying to bomb them into oblivion. The reason Putin hasn't completely destroyed Ukraine by now (with tactical nukes) is because NATO and the USA stand in the way.

By the way, Biden isn't my guy and I disagree with him on most things. I didn't vote for him. But unlike partisans, I can give credit for good policy when it's due. The concept is known as thinking for myself. One party isn't always right, or wrong, and neither is the MSM.

Defeating Putin's expansion in Europe is essential.

Exiled Thucydides knew
All that a speech can say
About Democracy,
And what dictators do,
The elderly rubbish they talk
To an apathetic grave;
Analysed all in his book,
The enlightenment driven away,
The habit-forming pain,
Mismanagement and grief:
We must suffer them all again.

There will be massive death and suffering and economic devastation and eventually the war will end and we will return to the status quo ante or something close. What a lame race we are.

Putin has been very open about his Peter the Great fantasy. And he'll be stopped inevitably, Russia just isn't that strong militarily, but at a terrible human cost.

I agree there is far more at play.....and why did Ukraine have all those secret bio-labs? I think our government is really freaking out they were exposed......and all of a sudden this past week, Congress unanimously decided to agree Covid escaped from the Wuhan lab, after 3 years of denial.

I did answer above, in a roundabout way, however, but I guess you missed that?
Of course Putin is bombing areas, that's what usually happens in wars, to starve people out, etc. but I don't believe for one second it is anything like our media is portraying.
Here, watch this vid and pay particular attention at the 50 second or so point. This person, who ever he is (NATO/U.S. general?) is shocked and dumbfounded this journalist knows so much, knows the truth.
Did you see this on the evening news?
https://youtu.be/SKUtg-4BxMY

Like I said earlier or alluded too, there is something else going on here, something else that we will likely never know?
Joe hasn't been to your border in 2 yrs and apparently can't find Ohio on a map either, but he sure has no problem finding and flying to Ukraine whenever he wants?
Regardless, all this back and forth is futile. Neither you or I will ever fully, 100% know what is truly going on but I do know one thing, which many choose to ignore, is the fact that the U.S. has started more wars than any other nation on earth, and it is not even close.

That was the Department Of Energy, there are 213 current Representatives and 51 current Senators who wouldn’t do that if you put a gun to their heads regardless of what evidence you presented to them.

Ha, probably true.

Plenty of boardmembers as well...