Prediction Thread: When Will Ukraine Conquer Russia

[Berzerker]

snip snip

[Berzerker]

How are we forcing them to do anything?

What ar ewe doing other than supporting Ukraine to not be taken over and ruled by Russia.

What right has Russia to rule or topple the government of Ukraine?

You claim that Ukraine doesn't have the right to rule Crimea, which is historically and by international acknowledgement part of Ukraine. But why should that mean that Russia gets to take over the rest of Ukraine? Ukraine was getting minimal support before last year, especially considering it had been invaded by a large power and other nations (the US for example) had promised to support it when it gave up it's nuclear weapons.

JM

We toppled their govt and armed Nazis to kill protesters, a victory for Ukraine means the victims will be ruled by Azov. I thought Crimea was Russian up until recently.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_C...tus_referendum

Plenty of polling in Crimea shows virtually no one wants Kiev to win

[Jon Miller]

BTW, from Ukraine's experience from 2014-2021, my interpretation was that every nation that wanted to keep its sovereignty and had aggressive neighbors, needed to acquire nuclear weapons ASAP.

Possibly the wests support of Ukraine over the last 18 months might convince some nations that they can forgo nuclear weapons and just use alliances to keep themselves safe from a stronger neighbor.

JM

[Jon Miller]

How are we forcing them to do anything?

What ar ewe doing other than supporting Ukraine to not be taken over and ruled by Russia.

What right has Russia to rule or topple the government of Ukraine?

You claim that Ukraine doesn't have the right to rule Crimea, which is historically and by international acknowledgement part of Ukraine. But why should that mean that Russia gets to take over the rest of Ukraine? Ukraine was getting minimal support before last year, especially considering it had been invaded by a large power and other nations (the US for example) had promised to support it when it gave up it's nuclear weapons.

JM

[Berzerker]

https://youtu.be/SRsDGsCCFnc

16-22m in they discuss a 2013 USAID poll done in Crimea before the coup. Less than 5% wanted to be a common Ukrainian Oblast, a small majority wanted autonomy within Ukraine and a 1/4th wanted to join Russia. Then the right wing overthrew the compromise leader of Ukraine and Crimea asked Russia for help. Virtually all Crimeans opposed rule by Kiev in 2013 before the right wing coup and 8 years of war, how can we force them to live under the Nazis we armed if Ukraine "wins"?

[PLATO]

It needs to be accessible too. Which I think means federal ID and a federal effort to get the ID to everyone who wants it over a course of 4-10 years.

JM

I agree with the first part in total. I am not sure how a federal ID would be a better form of identification than a state ID however. Elections are state controlled...not federally controlled. It would seem that the controlling entity would be a better source of identification if for no other reason than it would be a more internal verification process. I would support a federal law that required states to make ID's available to all residents at no cost however.

[Jon Miller]

It needs to be accessible too. Which I think means federal ID and a federal effort to get the ID to everyone who wants it over a course of 4-10 years.

JM

[PLATO]

A universal easy-to-get ID would fix a few problems, here in Canada i just use my health card or my photo ID card.
Of course the Republicans would denounce it as the "Mark of the Beast" or something....

Every state will issue a free or nearly free identification to any of its residents.

[PLATO]

And many of these so called "restrictive" laws are designed to do just that, restrict eligible people from voting.

How is that? By requiring them to prove who they are? Shouldn't that be a basic tenant of any voting system?

What prevents me from walking into precinct A and saying, "I am john Smith. I don't have ID and I want to vote." and then walking into precinct B and saying "I am Tom Smith. I don't have ID and I want to vote."??

ID's are free or nearly free in every state in the union. To say that requiring one is restrictive, while technically correct, is ludicrous when looked at in the light of voting integrity. How do you enforce "One person, one vote" if you don't even really know who is voting?

I am dumfounded by the effect propaganda has on our own people. This should be a simple matter. Get an ID and go vote. A non-ID voter took the time to register...they can take the time to get ID.

[Broken_Erika]

A universal easy-to-get ID would fix a few problems, here in Canada i just use my health card or my photo ID card.
Of course the Republicans would denounce it as the "Mark of the Beast" or something....

[Ming]

And many of these so called "restrictive" laws are designed to do just that, restrict eligible people from voting.

[PLATO]

Isn't it Chicago where the phrase "Vote Early...Vote Often!" originated?

[PLATO]

If the system is set up even half-competently, there isn't really more opportunity for fraud than the traditional in-person method.

And there is the problem. The system is not set up even half-competently for either drop box ballots or in person "no ID" voting. Many of these so called "restrictive" laws are designed to do just that...add some competence to the system. I think it is something that everyone can agree on is that every eligible voter should have a reasonable opportunity to vote. I would hope we could all agree that we also only want eligible voters to vote.

[BeBMan]

I read now he may join per video, but of course it's not the same.

[N35t0r]

When absentee ballots can be dropped off at an unmonitored box (as was the case in the last Presidential election) there can be zero doubt that at least the opportunity for fraud exists. That is the FACT.

If the system is set up even half-competently, there isn't really more opportunity for fraud than the traditional in-person method.