THought for the Day: Nuclear Deterent

[jayjacobus]

I found this on another board.
I think you might educate yourself by reading it.

One of the consequences of 98% only reading the first sentence on anything is vast miscontruals of Putin's motives. Endless reams of total garbage about his 'evil soul' are now appearing when he has done nothing worse then Bush II invading Ukraine.

First off, Putin has no intention of bombing all the reservoirs and power plants to reduce the nation to a virtual stone age for over a decade, like the USA did to the Iraqis. He has no intention of making 6 million people die of typhoid etc due to lack of water and power, like the USA did to the Iraqis. But you will find a lot of people in the USA now loudly clamoring about Putin's evil, who only 17 years ago loudly clamored for the unjustified invasion of Iraq on totally trumped up false accusations.

For that reason, amongst many others in a long history of US hypocrisys, Putin's not really that after the Ukriaine. He's after uns. I can only admire his superb timing. He could have done this at any time for the last 30 years, but he saved it for this moment. Exactly when the USA hit its lowest unemployment in 50 years, highest information in 70 years, and absolutely zero wiggle room on fed interest rates, he hit the USA with a worldwide oil shortage. Also as Ukraine is a major breadbasket, he is pushing food prices up. And as a result of sanctions, US exports are going to suffer. But most people will be too busy gawking at the TV to realize he just started a major recession in the USA.

Putin has by this superb act of timing made it virtually impossible for Biden to beat one of the Trump family from putting the whole lot back in the White House in 2024. They will withdraw from the Paris Accord again to increase immediate profit. When the Arctic Ice entirely melts away starting a mere three years after his second term, 2035-2045, we now know it will not only affect ocean currents that currently reverse back to the Caribbean by Greenland, and back to Peru from Alaska, but will instead go around the top of Canada, killing all fish and causing the death or virtually everything on every single American coast. We now know it will also change all the jetstreams, making life entirely uninhabitable anywhere in the USA. Of course that won't be until about 2050, so it wont be Trump's fault.

Russia on the other hand is only nation in the world which really benefits from global warming. It has no major cities at sea level and lots of landlocked freezing land. Nothing could please it more than another Trump, and unlike democracies, Russia can afford to wait and take the long term view on its eventual world domination.

You can be educated by opinions but I am educated by facts.

Do you mean the "facts" about the plight of Laos about which you are utterly ignorant?

Facts not in evidence. Your posts are evidence of a nasty person.

[Sculptor]

You can be educated by opinions but I am educated by facts.

Do you mean the "facts" about the plight of Laos about which you are utterly ignorant?

Facts not in evidence. Your posts are evidence of a nasty person.

I did not drop a million tonnes of ordinance on an innocent country.

[Sculptor]

AZOV NAZIs

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1 ... MlSfHUMVy4

[Gary Childress]

You haven't heard?
Since the west backed coup(2014) ethnic russians in Ukraine have been trying to separate from the country - you know that?

OK. So where is this "genocide" occurring? And does killing thousands of Ukrainians in an invasion make it any better or more righteous than the US invading Iraq on the pretense that Saddam Hussein was a monster to certain groups of people under his sovereignty?

I did not use the word genocide.
I am just indicating some of the causa bellum for the current situation.
The US invasion of Iraq had fuck all to do with any monstrous activities, as you might want to ask why the US has not also invaded so many other countries in the world who are their friends. The US was quite able and happy to fund Saddam's war with Iran for nine years and causing the deaths of over a million people when it suited them.

I'm not taking sides; I am pointing out hypocrisy.

The hypocrisy is obvious. The problem is you're missing the point of what I'm saying, which is that an armed invasion of the Ukraine is immoral on the part of Russia. The immoral behavior of other countries doesn't change that. When someone says something is immoral and someone responds, "but there's hypocisy", it's a fallacy of relevance because your not addressing the point at hand.

[Sculptor]

OK. So where is this "genocide" occurring? And does killing thousands of Ukrainians in an invasion make it any better or more righteous than the US invading Iraq on the pretense that Saddam Hussein was a monster to certain groups of people under his sovereignty?

I did not use the word genocide.
I am just indicating some of the causa bellum for the current situation.
The US invasion of Iraq had fuck all to do with any monstrous activities, as you might want to ask why the US has not also invaded so many other countries in the world who are their friends. The US was quite able and happy to fund Saddam's war with Iran for nine years and causing the deaths of over a million people when it suited them.

I'm not taking sides; I am pointing out hypocrisy.

The hypocrisy is obvious. The problem is you're missing the point of what I'm saying, which is that an armed invasion of the Ukraine is immoral on the part of Russia. The immoral behavior of other countries doesn't change that. When someone says something is immoral and someone responds, "but there's hypocisy", it's a fallacy of relevance because your not addressing the point at hand.

Laughably simplistic. Obviously you share most people's need for straightforward good guys and bad guys.

I'm sure you also think that Saddam Hussein was once qualified to admonish the Israelis for persecuting Palestinians too!

What is or is not "moral" is an opinion. Whilst I agree that invasions are thoroughly undesirable, so are sanctions, and other forms of punishments, but so is resisting.
Were I Ukrainian I would not take up arms against the invader, as my moral stance would not allow that. What I would be interested in doing is committing civil disobedience. If only more had not already been blinded by the reckless actions of their comic president in allowing the Ukraine to become the tug-of-war puppets of two superpowers whilst attacking Russians within its borders; and adopting the vanity of nationalism.

[henry quirk]

civil disobedience

Before the shootin' starts: CD is fine: I will not.

Once the shootin' starts: not so much: Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back.

[Gary Childress]

I did not use the word genocide.
I am just indicating some of the causa bellum for the current situation.
The US invasion of Iraq had fuck all to do with any monstrous activities, as you might want to ask why the US has not also invaded so many other countries in the world who are their friends. The US was quite able and happy to fund Saddam's war with Iran for nine years and causing the deaths of over a million people when it suited them.

I'm not taking sides; I am pointing out hypocrisy.

The hypocrisy is obvious. The problem is you're missing the point of what I'm saying, which is that an armed invasion of the Ukraine is immoral on the part of Russia. The immoral behavior of other countries doesn't change that. When someone says something is immoral and someone responds, "but there's hypocisy", it's a fallacy of relevance because your not addressing the point at hand.

Laughably simplistic. Obviously you share most people's need for straightforward good guys and bad guys.

I'm sure you also think that Saddam Hussein was once qualified to admonish the Israelis for persecuting Palestinians too!

What is or is not "moral" is an opinion. Whilst I agree that invasions are thoroughly undesirable, so are sanctions, and other forms of punishments, but so is resisting.
Were I Ukrainian I would not take up arms against the invader, as my moral stance would not allow that. What I would be interested in doing is committing civil disobedience. If only more had not already been blinded by the reckless actions of their comic president in allowing the Ukraine to become the tug-of-war puppets of two superpowers whilst attacking Russians within its borders; and adopting the vanity of nationalism.

Again, you completely miss my point. And you seem to be projecting your unfounded assumptions as to what you think my views are.

[Dontaskme]

civil disobedience

Before the shootin' starts: CD is fine: I will not.

Once the shootin' starts: not so much: Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back.

It takes two to tango.

The invasion of Ukraine was according to Putin meant to liberate not oppress.

I'm not for or against any thing, but why talk about defending your country, when it's your private home you should be fighting for. If you are not safe in your own home the one you have paid for with your own blood sweat and tears, then where are you safe? . A home is where you are supposed to feel safe. If you cannot feel safe in your own home then you have no home..period!

Also, what good are your pea shooters, when humanity has willing booby trapped the entire planet with radiation. All mans doing, the planet was a thriving natural living organism before we showed up, now look at the mess of it, the pollution alone is the result of a very expensive and high maintenance species called the greedy human being.

[Sculptor]

civil disobedience

Before the shootin' starts: CD is fine: I will not.

Once the shootin' starts: not so much: Someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back.

An eye for an eye means a country of blind people.
Why the fuck would I care who runs the show when it is always rigged against ordinary people?

[Sculptor]

The hypocrisy is obvious. The problem is you're missing the point of what I'm saying, which is that an armed invasion of the Ukraine is immoral on the part of Russia. The immoral behavior of other countries doesn't change that. When someone says something is immoral and someone responds, "but there's hypocisy", it's a fallacy of relevance because your not addressing the point at hand.

Laughably simplistic. Obviously you share most people's need for straightforward good guys and bad guys.

I'm sure you also think that Saddam Hussein was once qualified to admonish the Israelis for persecuting Palestinians too!

What is or is not "moral" is an opinion. Whilst I agree that invasions are thoroughly undesirable, so are sanctions, and other forms of punishments, but so is resisting.
Were I Ukrainian I would not take up arms against the invader, as my moral stance would not allow that. What I would be interested in doing is committing civil disobedience. If only more had not already been blinded by the reckless actions of their comic president in allowing the Ukraine to become the tug-of-war puppets of two superpowers whilst attacking Russians within its borders; and adopting the vanity of nationalism.

Again, you completely miss my point. And you seem to be projecting your unfounded assumptions as to what you think my views are.

Your point is too simple.
Reality is not so easily reductable

[henry quirk]

Why the fuck would I care who runs the show when it is always rigged against ordinary people?

Cuz you're a free man and you ought not be ruled.

[Walker]

It takes two to tango.

The invasion of Ukraine was according to Putin meant to liberate not oppress.

Word is out on the street that what he’s doing, is killing folks and turning others into refugees.
Liberating folks from their life, their homes, and their possessions.
If you trust the translations, he said all is proceeding according to plan.

The fork in the road is appeasement.
What does appeasement mean?

It means incremental, reactive and minimal response, if any, to proactive aggression that includes murder, in the hopes that will end the aggression.

But look at me, telling you about appeasement, when that's the crux of your solution to end the aggression of Russia towards Ukraine, and towards humanity in the form of the civilians who are innocent of geopolitical machinations.

[Sculptor]

Why the fuck would I care who runs the show when it is always rigged against ordinary people?

Cuz you're a free man and you ought not be ruled.

But I cannot do it alone, and that is why the idea of a commune is good, as there is strength in numbers. Sadly clowns like you swallow the individualist cum from your masters thus participating in your own oppression.

[Dontaskme]

Why the fuck would I care who runs the show when it is always rigged against ordinary people?

Cuz you're a free man and you ought not be ruled.

But would you flee your home?

If you did flee, wouldn’t that mean you are being ruled?

I’m trying to understand why some of the people in Ukraine talked about fighting for their country, and yet at the same time fled their home.


How can these people fight for their country if they have abandoned what is logically their safe place, their personal and private space, their home.

Doesn’t matter how tyrannical governments are, governments are not literally cohabiting or invading the peoples private properties are they?

And… the people who actually live in Russia are home owners, with modern mobile phones, and the internet, and personal forms of transport like cars, and health care, and educational institutions, and shops to buy their food, just like they do in other countries. I do not hear of any of them fleeing their homes…So what’s the problem? How is that being ruled…as long as people are behaving in a civilised manner, and not committing crimes, then what’s the problem? As long as people have protection from the weather that is having to adjust to constant temperature changes, and protection from the wild life, and plenty of food and water, and a good solid lock on their front door, and a roof over their head, then they’re ok, that’s not being ruled. No one is telling them what to do and what not to do that is only the business of the people within the privacy of their own homes are they?





.

[Gary Childress]

Laughably simplistic. Obviously you share most people's need for straightforward good guys and bad guys.

I'm sure you also think that Saddam Hussein was once qualified to admonish the Israelis for persecuting Palestinians too!

What is or is not "moral" is an opinion. Whilst I agree that invasions are thoroughly undesirable, so are sanctions, and other forms of punishments, but so is resisting.
Were I Ukrainian I would not take up arms against the invader, as my moral stance would not allow that. What I would be interested in doing is committing civil disobedience. If only more had not already been blinded by the reckless actions of their comic president in allowing the Ukraine to become the tug-of-war puppets of two superpowers whilst attacking Russians within its borders; and adopting the vanity of nationalism.

Again, you completely miss my point. And you seem to be projecting your unfounded assumptions as to what you think my views are.

Your point is too simple.
Reality is not so easily reductable

Ok. So what is the "reality" of Russia's invasion of Ukraine? Looks like an illegal invasion to me, same as the US invasion of Iraq.