Ukraine discussion thread - Use this thread

[TDinTheSnow]

Yes, you are entitled to think however you want about anything. That's one of the merits of our Constitutional Republic, at least for now. And you are entitled to your own thoughts about the Electoral College, even if they're wrong and based on shortsightedness and a lack of understanding of the Constitution. That is your right.

Carry on. You won't be canceled unless what you're saying is in disagreement with what progressives believe. Then we may never hear from you again.

How can my personal "feeliWell many Founding Fathers also had many contrary different thoughts and ideas.. The Virginia plan was a much different than the New Jersey Plan.. I feel different ideas are healthy and should be encouraged.. these days those with different ideas are demonized.. it's sad

The problem is that bills written don't include any suppression so there no possibility exists.

I totally understand that many are convinced that's the case.. others might not be so sure.. should their opinions and thoughts be canceled ?.. I'll let them have their day in court... why not ?..
I also think claims of fraud should be audited and investigated and should have their day in court... why not ?.. Arizona had their audit... many claims of fraud went to court.. let people look into fraud claims... and let people be wary of voters rights... I don't get the resistance... Texas passed their laws.. the heritage foundation is backing other state efforts with dark money... what's the problems here ?.. dissenting voices ?.. really ?

 

[pittiswhereiamfrom2]

Why don’t Dems like her?

Racism.

 

[pittiswhereiamfrom2]

Just wanted to recalibrate away from the typical talking points.

View embedded media

The world’s powerful and elite watch this happen and their most powerful response are press conferences.

 

[NCPitt]

I totally understand that many are convinced that's the case.. others might not be so sure.. should their opinions and thoughts be canceled ?.. I'll let them have their day in court... why not ?..

I'm not into canceling. What I'm into is discussions based on facts. If someone/you think a law is suppression, point to the part of the law that you believe is doing that. The problem is that much of the criticism is purely political and ignores the real law.

For example, I had a long discussion on Twitter about the GA law. I had the law in front of me and could point to each section that he believed was a problem to show him it didn't really say what he thought it said.

 

[TDinTheSnow]

I'm not into canceling. What I'm into is discussions based on facts. If someone/you think a law is suppression, point to the part of the law that you believe is doing that. The problem is that much of the criticism is purely political and ignores the real law.

For example, I had a long discussion on Twitter about the GA law. I had the law in front of me and could point to each section that he believed was a problem to show him it didn't really say what he thought it said.

Ok.. I get that... I'm down with that.. .and can we agree that there is a history of voter suppression in this country and it is "reasonable" for people to be wary, but discourse should be kept to "facts" .. that's what our system is based on I suppose.. let the judicial branch look at the laws and consider the " facts"... same with claims of election fraud.. Arizona did their audits.. MI did their audits.. the "facts" seem to say no fraud... so YES, I agree, these conversations should be based on "facts" and allowing claims to have their day in court.. seems simple to me...

 

[HailToPitt1985]

Well many Founding Fathers also had many contrary different thoughts and ideas.. The Virginia plan was a much different than the New Jersey Plan.. I feel different ideas are healthy and should be encouraged.. these days those with different ideas are demonized.. it's sad..

I agree....different ideas should be encouraged and voiced. What we're talking about here, however, is a document that is the law of the land and has been tested repeatedly and weathered the storm of accuracy and validity. Trying to change something or question something that is the foundation of our Constitutional Republic is counterproductive.

Sure, question it to the end of understanding it better and knowing it is timeless.

 

[pittiswhereiamfrom2]

Yes, the film only covers the street protests in Kyiv and doesn't pretend to be anything else, particularly not things that went on in eastern Ukraine. afterwords...which in reality were largely fomented by Russia as a way to weaken the new government. It isn't a film that seeks to answer a question about subsequent Dombass war or Crimea. What it does is show why EU and NATO are so important to Ukraine now, why they won't turn from those goals, and why Russia's pressure and invasion have not had the effects that it thought it would. Whatever support Russia has had in Eastern Ukraine is gone.

Vanukovych was seemingly legitimately elected the second time, but it was his broken promises in turning to Russia and away from the EU that caused the initial demonstrations in the streets; but it was his violent, Putin-like suppression of those demonstrations that ultimately galvanized and popularized the movement led to his fleeting to Russia. He didn't have the people nor the military with him, that is why he fled because the people were going to violently revolt and the military wasn't going to stop them.

NATO NEVER made an agreement not to expand east. That is Russian retconning of history. The idea was floated during diplomatic talks following the fall of the Berlin wall in the context of German reunification. It was never privately or publicly agreed to and no such promises were ever made, and frankly, Russia was too weak at the time to even force such a position. There have been multiple people around the table that have attested to that, unless you somehow give more credibility to the Russian narrative of, well, anything...which hopefully everyone knows better by now. The rest is Russian BS they hope if they keep repeating so people, primarily their own, will buy into their "persecuted Russia" narrative that runs historically deep.

Note that there are two words for true and three words for lie in Russian language. "Pravda," which you probably are aware of because it is the title of the state newspaper, actually means a something more like a malleable truth. They is a very different concept of truth and lies in Russia. It is not binary as it is in the West. Culturally and historically, there is a big difference with Russian statements and Western statements because of this and the West doesn't typically understand it. A lot of Orwellian double-speak in Russia and acceptability of bending or changing the truth as acceptable truth as long as it results in desired outcomes.

You are missing much of the story. You watch a movie and read a few articles and now you are an expert on a situation? Such arrogance that is prevalent among those who are so called “intellectuals.” You are no different than the ladies on The View.

Getting bits and pieces of the story correct doesn’t mean much when the whole of your understanding is quite naive. You might want to start by analyzing what biases could be in the stories you digest and try to temper your supposed intelligence before you have all of the information.

Then maybe you won’t be so eager to prove yourself smart before you are truly informed on a topic.

 

[HailToPitt1985]

The problem is that bills written don't include any suppression so there no possibility exists.

There might be voter suppression in very isolated and rare cases in specific localities for whatever reasons, but there is none that is endemic to this country, its population or any segment of its population. Any mention of voter suppression is a fabrication for political purposes only.

 

[pittguy81]

You and your fellow Dems are ridiculous.
You really shifted and deflected your "not a peep" comment,huh ?
I guess it didn't take long to realize that was a hilarious take.
After being emboldened by Dems in Congress doing nothing and seeing the Dems rooting for the illegals, the caravans started.
That is the fact.
Republicans didn't fight every move Obama tried to make re the southern border.
They had the same goal. Then they didn't because Trump. And their entire goal was to stop him from having any success on any given topic,no matter the ramifications to the US or how much they agreed on it previously.

"According to former officials in the Obama administration, the standard for a border crisis was 1,000 attempted crossings a day. Who was on the team that set that standard? President Joe Biden—then vice president—and Alejandro Mayorkas, then deputy secretary, and now secretary, of homeland security.

When the Trump administration ended, the U.S. was deporting more people than were illegally coming into the country. In less than a month under Biden, the number of people illegally coming into the country is more than 6,000 per day—that’s six times the crisis level as set by the Obama team."

My god you folks practically anointed Trump as the savior of the border....and compared to Obama's tenure, the US was being overrun at the Southern border.

The Republican controlled Congress refused to fund Trump's vanity wall, not just the Democrats....and Obama deported more illegals than Trump did...although he employed more illegals than Obama so he had that going for him.

 

[pittguy81]

You are missing much of the story. You watch a movie and read a few articles and now you are an expert on a situation? Such arrogance that is prevalent among those who are so called “intellectuals.” You are no different than the ladies on The View.

Getting bits and pieces of the story correct doesn’t mean much when the whole of your understanding is quite naive. You might want to start by analyzing what biases could be in the stories you digest and try to temper your supposed intelligence before you have all of the information.

Then maybe you won’t be so eager to prove yourself smart before you are truly informed on a topic.

Your "smartest guy in the room" schtick is played out.

 

[TDinTheSnow]

I'm not into canceling. What I'm into is discussions based on facts. If someone/you think a law is suppression, point to the part of the law that you believe is doing that. The problem is that much of the criticism is purely political and ignores the real law.

For example, I had a long discussion on Twitter about the GA law. I had the law in front of me and could point to each section that he believed was a problem to show him it didn't really say what he thought it said.

Ok.. I get that... I'm down with that.. .and can we agree that there is a history of voter suppression in this country and it is "reasonable" for people to be wary, but discourse should be kept to "facts" .. that's what our system is based on I suppose.. let the judicial branch look at the laws and consider the " facts"... same with claims of election fraud

I agree....different ideas should be encouraged and voiced. What we're talking about here, however, is a document that is the law of the land and has been tested repeatedly and weathered the storm of accuracy and validity. Trying to change something or question something that is the foundation of our Constitutional Republic is counterproductive.

Sure, question it to the end of understanding it better and knowing it is timeless.

I specifically said I did NOT want to change the Electoral college or the way the Senate follows the New Jersey Plan on represetstion by state rather than population.. I don't.. I expressed a "feeling".. people have those too... we're people.. we have feelings ( or at least I do), that need to be balanced with our morals and critical thinking... I also "feel" counting slaves as 3/5 person for state representation was a wicked stain on our foundation ... wonder what the founders would have said about representation for migrant workers ?.. similar to slaves ? Is that still on the books ?.. could a state claim greater representation by saying they had x number of sex slaves in their state ?

 

[ONGB]

My god you folks practically anointed Trump as the savior of the border....and compared to Obama's tenure, the US was being overrun at the Southern border.

The Republican controlled Congress refused to fund Trump's vanity wall, not just the Democrats....and Obama deported more illegals than Trump did...although he employed more illegals than Obama so he had that going for him.

Lol.
Stop with the nonsense.
Republican controlled Congress means nothing as long as the filibuster exists. You're smarter than that.

Seems you Dems didn't think it was the Obama/Biden vanity wall when they built 100 miles.
But because Trump,suddenly wall bad idea.
No one ever annnointed him any such thing at the border. It's hard to be succesful with no co-operation,because,you know,Trump.
And you think a corporation as large as his the CEO knows who HR is hiring to be landscapers and waiters and other lower level jobs ? Umm k.

 

[pittiswhereiamfrom2]

Your "smartest guy in the room" schtick is played out.

How am I claiming to be the smartest one? By saying I don’t have all the answers? By saying those who clearly don’t know should not speak as if they know?

While I demonstrably have more insight than most people in this room on this topic, I have never claimed to have the answers with the confidence that many of you do. Maybe that offends you, but I cannot save you from your ignorance.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Are you suggesting we stand by and watch Putin take over the Ukraine?

I'm suggesting we stop meddling, where the end result is a war and/or everyone in the country hating the US.

 

[pittiswhereiamfrom2]

I'm suggesting we stop meddling, where the end result is a war and/or everyone in the country hating the US.

The meddling should have stopped before Ukraine was walked into a war. Sure, Ukraine was too corrupt to see where the US was leading them, but it is now the people who will suffer most.

The elites escaped long ago to their luxury homes in other countries.

 

[HailtoPitt]

The meddling should have stopped before Ukraine was walked into a war. Sure, Ukraine was too corrupt to see where the US was leading them, but it is now the people who will suffer most.

The elites escaped long ago to their luxury homes in other countries.

Pretty much how it seems to work!

 

[BPKY]

How am I claiming to be the smartest one? By saying I don’t have all the answers? By saying those who clearly don’t know should not speak as if they know?

While I demonstrably have more insight than most people in this room on this topic, I have never claimed to have the answers with the confidence that many of you do. Maybe that offends you, but I cannot save you from your ignorance.

Trust me. Many have tried.

 

[BPKY]

I'm surprised to read that it's still in question that the US meddles in the internal affairs of other countries. It's seems to be our unofficial foreign policy.

1. Meddle with them until enough people start catching on.

2. Influence a war with/in said country. Reference communism or terrorism as the culprit.

3. Pick a side and arm them.

4. Find out those weapons being used against the US at a later date.

5. Go back to step 1, 2 or 3.

No. 3. The US exports over a third of the arms in the world. Is it that far a reach to consider our MID might not want an end to hostilities? Just sayin'.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Deal or no deal?

View embedded media

Is this for real? I'd take this deal in a heartbeat. Heck, I said before the invasion, just give Putin the Eastern half and be done. Better than people dying. They're Russian anyway

 

[joeydavid]

What is the US guilty of? What have you seen plenty of?

Seriously, the documentary is not about who is responsible, it is on-the-ground firs-person insight into the mentality of Ukrainians during the 2014 Maidan Revolution. If you want to know why there have been mass protests in Kherson even while Russian soldiers are firing at them, and how badly Putin has miscalculated and put himself into an impossible situation because of severely wrong understanding of Ukrainians, and why Ukraine is not likely going to settle for neutrality, this will help you understand.

If you want to understand the Russian perspective, than there is a great lecture by a former Finnish intellegence officer online (all in Finnish with subtitles and from prior to the war) that will give perspective on how Russia thinks about the world (rightly or wrongly).

FYI, NC only talks about his feelings not facts.

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

This is not true, but if it makes you feel better to buy this lie, who can change your mind.

Strom Thurmond, Herman Talmadge, Richard Russell, Orval Faubus, Lester Maddox, Jesse Helms, Trent Lott, and that ilk. Come again?

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

That doesn’t answer the question. But again, you are not interested in truth, just having your way is all that matters to you.

You answered the question yourself. I merely repeated your explanation.

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

Did he state that as a qualification his choice?

Not only did he state it, he emphasized it.

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

Racism.

Speak for yourself.

 

[Chris Peak]

Okay. We tried, but this thread inevitably became about something other than its stated - and restated - purpose.

Maybe I'll try again another day.