Prediction Thread: When Will Ukraine Conquer Russia

[Geronimo]

whataboutrussia?

We are bad guys. Of course Russia are bad guys, even worse than us. That doesn't excuse our behavior.

Is "we are the bad guys" really the way to convey that when discussing the Russian invasion of Ukraine? I would say "we're not the good guys in Ukraine anymore. I'm no longer certain we won't be joining the bad guys". I just want to keep it grounded especially given the huge further moral declines in US statecraft that it has become all too easy to imagine this president leaping into.

[Aeson]

When I say "I simply point out that neither Trump nor the US is meaningfully "the bad guy" in Europe." that does not even imply that I think Trump's official acts are in any way defensible.​

Yes it does. YOU'RE STILL TRYING TO DEFEND OUR ACTIONS AS THOSE OF "NOT THE BAD GUYS".

[Aeson]

The Budapest memorandum wasn't a treaty. I think it should be regarded as a promise but one given almost the weakest possible strength given to any pledge in international law. I am far more bothered by Trumps violation of actual treaties like the USMCA treaty or the treaties signed in association with US membership in the WTO than I am in a political agreement like the Budapest Memorandum.

I am curious if "we are the bad guys", what are the Russians? If you want to claim both are bad guys then consider this. Would you rather your country receives everything that Russia got from the US since Trump started his second term or would you rather receive everything that Ukraine got from the US in Trump's second term?

Furthermore, is India a bad guy in Ukraine? is Turkey a bad guy in Ukraine? Is the only requisite to being a bad guy a large negative decrease in generosity from the proposed "bad guy" even if the vast majority of nations remain even less generous to ukraine and more equivocal in their relations to both Russia and Ukraine than the US is under Trump?

whataboutrussia?

We are bad guys. Of course Russia are bad guys, even worse than us. That doesn't excuse our behavior.

[Dauphin]

it might work even faster if you and others simply asked me to leave instead of this rubbish.

I would request you stay. FWIW

[EPW]

Democrats are evil Republicans are evil Trump is currently very evil. Does your sarcasm intend to convey that you *don't* think the Democrats are evil? 2 parties for everything. absolute power corrupts absolutely and I'd ay the 2 parties are plenty corrupt.

For healthcare I've advocated single payer here and elsewhere repeatedly. I also see that looking through my posts I've posted more links to BBC and DW than anywhere else.

Unlike the conservative pits I post a lot in lately when I'm here I hardly ever feel moved to defend Democrats because it's very clearly preaching to the choir. I hate that. I *do* appreciate when sound logic refutes the conservative talking points I air out here and that's what brings me here. Being detested and having conservative fantasy caricatured profiles constructed about me here seems less useful. Were any details you posted about me rooted in any actual posts I made whatsoever?

I regard poly as mostly belonging to the posters If this is your way of not so subtly saying kindly leave so we can resume our circle jerk of political hyperbole fabrications I certainly will take it under advisement, but it might work even faster if you and others simply asked me to leave instead of this rubbish.

By paragraph
1. Thanks for admitting it. And to answer your question, no, I don't think the Democrats are evil.
2. Oh, I'm sure you made an offhand remark somewhere "supporting" single payer, but not before a minimum of 10,000 words attacking it or something very similar.
3.a) Oh, so you are saying my analysis is correct, but it's okay because you get off arguing with people. This does not surprise me
B) Yes. You have expressed insane conspiratorial right wing opinions about the Democrats, but it's true because you don't get your information from Fox News. Some of these views relate to Biden, Soros, election fraud and even more!
4. People are getting rounded up in the streets and sent to camps, you getting offended doesn't concern me.

[Geronimo]

You all attacking Geronimo need to remember that the Democrats are EVIL. Nothing that Trump or the Republicans do will every match the gross behavior of Bill Clinton, the malevolent machinations of Hillary Clinton, the audacity of Obama(black), Biden's son's laptop nude selfies, and GEORGE SOROS. Also remember that Geronimo gets his news from thte Wall Street Journal Op-Eds, the Hertigage Foundation (two shining beacons of American FREEDOM), and his insane MAGA real life friends. So when Geronimo posts paragraph after paragraph of what appears to be self-contradicting, thinly veiled right-wing propaganda, often barely decipherable, seemingly guided by no underlying principles except to defend the Republican party at all costs, remember he's saving us from universal health care, defending our European allies, "election fraud", environmental protection, and most importantly GEORGE SOROS. Thank you.

Democrats are evil Republicans are evil Trump is currently very evil. Does your sarcasm intend to convey that you *don't* think the Democrats are evil? 2 parties for everything. absolute power corrupts absolutely and I'd ay the 2 parties are plenty corrupt.

For healthcare I've advocated single payer here and elsewhere repeatedly. I also see that looking through my posts I've posted more links to BBC and DW than anywhere else.

Unlike the conservative pits I post a lot in lately when I'm here I hardly ever feel moved to defend Democrats because it's very clearly preaching to the choir. I hate that. I *do* appreciate when sound logic refutes the conservative talking points I air out here and that's what brings me here. Being detested and having conservative fantasy caricatured profiles constructed about me here seems less useful. Were any details you posted about me rooted in any actual posts I made whatsoever?

I regard poly as mostly belonging to the posters If this is your way of not so subtly saying kindly leave so we can resume our circle jerk of political hyperbole fabrications I certainly will take it under advisement, but it might work even faster if you and others simply asked me to leave instead of this rubbish.

[BeBMan]

Currently it looks like those so-called peace talks in Saudi Arabia are primarily about saving Russia's Black Sea Fleet and oil infrastructure

[Jon Miller]

No. Everyone has to have nukes now. It's clear the US guarantees in various nonproliferation acts are worthless. We will just let any free democratic society (or any other) be run under by aggressive neighbors.

It won't happen all at once, because it's economically difficult, but we just decided nonproliferation is dead.

You forgot the part where the US is now becoming one of the aggressive neighbors.

JM

[EPW]

You all attacking Geronimo need to remember that the Democrats are EVIL. Nothing that Trump or the Republicans do will every match the gross behavior of Bill Clinton, the malevolent machinations of Hillary Clinton, the audacity of Obama(black), Biden's son's laptop nude selfies, and GEORGE SOROS. Also remember that Geronimo gets his news from thte Wall Street Journal Op-Eds, the Hertigage Foundation (two shining beacons of American FREEDOM), and his insane MAGA real life friends. So when Geronimo posts paragraph after paragraph of what appears to be self-contradicting, thinly veiled right-wing propaganda, often barely decipherable, seemingly guided by no underlying principles except to defend the Republican party at all costs, remember he's saving us from universal health care, defending our European allies, "election fraud", environmental protection, and most importantly GEORGE SOROS. Thank you.

[Geronimo]

The claim was misogyny was significant enough to cover the spread.

You responded by saying your daughter was excited to see a woman elected. And that such sentiment would somehow counterbalance the misogyny on the other side. You were trying to "whataboutism" misogyny.

They do not belong on the same balance. Not even in the same discussion. Misogyny is a horrible stain on human history. Any morally or ethically esteemable person would be excited to see such a glass ceiling fall. It doesn't make a person sexist, it means they understand how evil sexism is.

"somehow counterbalance" you don't get arithmetic? I simply asserted that there was no way to know how many people changed their vote based on misogyny and that even more importantly even if we did know how many and it was more than the spread we won't know that Harris' gender cost the election if we couldn't be sure that votes in favor of her for her gender didn't also exceed the spread by an even larger amount. Somehow you warp that into an assertion by me that my daughter's admitted desire to vote for Harris because she is a woman is equivalent to misogyny. The "whataboutism" is your own fantasy which is a typical pattern when someone says something you don't like and explains a great deal about your warped views.

[Geronimo]

No. It would be like if the British had convinced Poland to give up all their guns, tanks, and ammunition in return for a security guarantee. Then as the Germans invaded, killing the Polish, broken the treaty and berated Poland for starting a war with Hitler. Trying to get Poland to sell everything they had dirt cheap.

It's levels deeper evil than just appeasement.

no. Nukes aren't like conventional weapons. especially today. in any case even in your scenario the Nazis would remain the bad guys so long as the Brits were simply failing to deliver promises and trying to sell their protection assistance. The Brits would absolutely not be the bad guys in your hypothetical. You literally seem to want to give one stringent set of standards for the Brits and one far more lenient one for the nazis in your scenario. You are doing that even if you simply dismiss them both as culpable "bad guys" in the destruction of Poland.

[Geronimo]

In the following sentence:



We are the bad guys here.

Imagine a president who makes every decision by magic 8 ball. Their decisions are totally indefensible. Or if that's too exotic imagine a president with serious mental deficiencies who gives evidence that they are not truly aware of their environment and are likely being led around by defacto handlers. Their decisions would also be indefensible. That does not meaningfully make them the Bad guys.

When I say "I simply point out that neither Trump nor the US is meaningfully "the bad guy" in Europe." that does not even imply that I think Trump's official acts are in any way defensible.​

[Geronimo]

No. Everyone has to have nukes now. It's clear the US guarantees in various nonproliferation acts are worthless. We will just let any free democratic society (or any other) be run under by aggressive neighbors.

It won't happen all at once, because it's economically difficult, but we just decided nonproliferation is dead.

ok. so before when the world could take for granted that the US would use its nukes in defence of NATO and generally back up its allies in conventional fights it made less sense for syria, south africa, indonesia, vietnam or whomever to have nukes than it does now when everyone assumes that under Trump the US won't rush to anybody's defence? Which guarantees in non prliferation treaties do you think have stopped being effective owing to Trumps faithlessness to treaty compliance?

[Geronimo]

We got the Ukrainians to disarm under a treaty where we guaranteed their protection. Then we broke the treaty and are letting the Russians kill them. We are the bad guys.

The Budapest memorandum wasn't a treaty. I think it should be regarded as a promise but one given almost the weakest possible strength given to any pledge in international law. I am far more bothered by Trumps violation of actual treaties like the USMCA treaty or the treaties signed in association with US membership in the WTO than I am in a political agreement like the Budapest Memorandum.

I am curious if "we are the bad guys", what are the Russians? If you want to claim both are bad guys then consider this. Would you rather your country receives everything that Russia got from the US since Trump started his second term or would you rather receive everything that Ukraine got from the US in Trump's second term?

Furthermore, is India a bad guy in Ukraine? is Turkey a bad guy in Ukraine? Is the only requisite to being a bad guy a large negative decrease in generosity from the proposed "bad guy" even if the vast majority of nations remain even less generous to ukraine and more equivocal in their relations to both Russia and Ukraine than the US is under Trump?

[Aeson]

Mass boycotts *are* just as harmful as trade wars. Sure, I'll agree that you feel large, organized boycotts against a state are always benign or at least are good against the US currently while I feel that just like trade warfare, they inevitably do collateral damage.

You equate consumers choosing not to buy American products in response to an unprovoked attack by the American president, to the unprovoked attack by the American president.

You "will never forgive" the boycotters and Trump.

The fact that you only view this in terms of harm, and not morality, ethics, or geopolitics shows very clearly where your deficiency lies.

People ALWAYS have the right to chose who they will buy from, why they will do so. Unless you buy everything equally, you are always in some way exercising this right.

In this case the boycotters are absolutely right. Why buy the products of a nation that are making vague annexation threats while breaking treaties with you? ALL THE BLAME FOR ANY COLLATERAL DAMAGE LIES WITH TRUMP, HE FORCED IT TO HAPPEN.