Ag with kids said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Show me where the referendum vote to remain in the union did not occur in Ukraine with 70% support in March.

Show me where the coup did not occur.

Show me where two days after the failed coup, the blocs all voted for independence.

Those are facts which are in the article. If they are false, show me please.

Is this negative statement from the article also propaganda:

"In Ukraine's western parts, around Lvov, Ivano-Frankovsk and Ternopol, however, the majority of the population voted against the preservation of the USSR."

---

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

That's what you're going with?

---

Lol, from the guy that used an ad hom. Irony.

If those facts are not true, I'd like an education on what happened. I want to learn from you.

---

Ad hom? (my inner Inigo Montoya is chuckling)

Ok...

Oh, and Rossticus actually explained it to you.

---

Attacking the source is an ad hom, Einstein.

fka ftc said:

---

Teslag said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Russia recognized their independence and pledged to guarantee their territorial integrity. Your "no one is sovereign" argument is and always has been ludicrous.

---

People who can defend their own territory and control their people is what determines if someone is sovereign.

Not votes and pledges and promises. Read the manual.

---

So basically the only sovereign nations are China and the US, because those two could run over the defenses of every other nation?

---

Iran and Afghanistan retained their independence from the US so you could add them in.

British have a legit navy, global reach and nukes, so I think they are ok. French are not as they long ago ran out of dishtowels to wave anytime someone gets angry at them.

India and Pakistan both have substantial armies and nukes, so I think they are good on the sovereign grounds. Israel is in a tough spot but they will go down fighting if it ever comes to it.

Let me know in your magical spell book who gets to have never ending sovereignty that can never be questioned and who has to fight for it or who simply never get it.

Your apologists ways are why we have millions of drunk, methed out native americans who cannot build enough casinos to satisfy their habits because bureaucrats felt guilty and decided to give them pretend sovereign status within our borders.

This game is way more complex than you seem to understand.

---

They couldn't defend their own territory or control their people. They fail both of your litmus tests.

Logos Stick said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Show me where the referendum vote to remain in the union did not occur in Ukraine with 70% support in March.

Show me where the coup did not occur.

Show me where two days after the failed coup, the blocs all voted for independence.

Those are facts which are in the article. If they are false, show me please.

Is this negative statement from the article also propaganda:

"In Ukraine's western parts, around Lvov, Ivano-Frankovsk and Ternopol, however, the majority of the population voted against the preservation of the USSR."

---

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

That's what you're going with?

---

Lol, from the guy that used an ad hom. Irony.

If those facts are not true, I'd like an education on what happened. I want to learn from you.

---

Ad hom? (my inner Inigo Montoya is chuckling)

Ok...

Oh, and Rossticus actually explained it to you.

---

Attacking the source is an ad hom, Einstein.

---

No it's not, Norman...(let's see who get's THAT reference)

But, thank you for giving us an ACTUAL example of an ad hom...

My favorite part is the posters who are okay with hammering our Poor and Middle Class with even more debt/inflation. Wait until the war is over, will they be okay with the Trillion it will take to rebuild The Ukraine?

Ag with kids said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Teslag said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Russia recognized their independence and pledged to guarantee their territorial integrity. Your "no one is sovereign" argument is and always has been ludicrous.

---

People who can defend their own territory and control their people is what determines if someone is sovereign.

Not votes and pledges and promises. Read the manual.

---

So basically the only sovereign nations are China and the US, because those two could run over the defenses of every other nation?

---

Iran and Afghanistan retained their independence from the US so you could add them in.

British have a legit navy, global reach and nukes, so I think they are ok. French are not as they long ago ran out of dishtowels to wave anytime someone gets angry at them.

India and Pakistan both have substantial armies and nukes, so I think they are good on the sovereign grounds. Israel is in a tough spot but they will go down fighting if it ever comes to it.

Let me know in your magical spell book who gets to have never ending sovereignty that can never be questioned and who has to fight for it or who simply never get it.

Your apologists ways are why we have millions of drunk, methed out native americans who cannot build enough casinos to satisfy their habits because bureaucrats felt guilty and decided to give them pretend sovereign status within our borders.

This game is way more complex than you seem to understand.

---

They couldn't defend their own territory or control their people. They fail both of your litmus tests.

---

Maybe you missed this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_United_States_troops_from_Afghanistan_(2020%E2%80%932021)

Ag with kids said:

---

They couldn't defend their own territory or control their people. They fail both of your litmus tests.

---

One of the biggest supporters of Ukraine lives off the government teat and have set themselves to permanently live on said government teat and openly brag about it.

Then lecture us on need to spend more of our privately earned income in taxes to support their lifestyle and that of their Ukraine friends.

Ag with kids said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Show me where the referendum vote to remain in the union did not occur in Ukraine with 70% support in March.

Show me where the coup did not occur.

Show me where two days after the failed coup, the blocs all voted for independence.

Those are facts which are in the article. If they are false, show me please.

Is this negative statement from the article also propaganda:

"In Ukraine's western parts, around Lvov, Ivano-Frankovsk and Ternopol, however, the majority of the population voted against the preservation of the USSR."

---

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

That's what you're going with?

---

Lol, from the guy that used an ad hom. Irony.

If those facts are not true, I'd like an education on what happened. I want to learn from you.

---

Ad hom? (my inner Inigo Montoya is chuckling)

Ok...

Oh, and Rossticus actually explained it to you.

---

Attacking the source is an ad hom, Einstein.

---

No it's not, Norman...(let's see who get's THAT reference)

But, thank you for giving us an ACTUAL example of an ad hom...

---

Lol, you dismissed the info in the referenced article by attacking the publisher. That's an ad hom.

How is referring to you as Einstein an ad hom? Its a compliment.

Let's get back to the facts of Ukraine breaking off from the USSR though. Can you show me where the article got the facts wrong.

A neutered but stable Russia is the safest option for the world. The former has already been the case. Going so far to make the latter happen is dangerous AF. We've already learned this lesson many times across the world as far as unintended consequences of purposely destabilizing a country/regime, but this one has factors in play that don't allow for an "oops"

Urban Ag said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

Count me on the side that gives zero ****s about either Ukraine, or Russia.

---

If you don't signal outwardly to others that your heart bleeds for Ukraine, you are a die hard Putin fanboy and love Russia.

---

And this is why I just gave up on these threads completely. Anything short of offering your own kids to die for Ukraine and somehow, magically, you become a Russian sympathizer with a shirtless Putin fetish. It got exhausting quickly. And for those reasons, I'm out.

---

I haven't seen anyone being called a putin fanboy/comrade etc who is solely against the aid going to Ukraine, and in my opinion there's nothing wrong with thinking that we shouldn't be involved and that our money should be spent elsewhere. Personally, I think we've spent money and resources on a lot dumber things than helping out a country who is being invaded by a much larger neighbor (who is prone to bombing civilians and destroying cities for no reason) try and fight them off.

However, there are certainly people that are actively rooting for Russia, repeating obvious Russian propaganda, implying Ukraine is not a real country, etc., I guess because they think it's some kind of internet points against Biden and the dems. Besides just generally being a bad person with what seems like incredibly sad lives, they are also, objectively and sometimes self-admitted, Russian sympathizers. Not sure why anyone would have a problem with labeling them as such.

So really the thread needs 4 categories:

1. People that are gung ho for aid for Ukraine forever, flying Ukraine flags in the profile etc. (seems like a small percentage of the posters here)
2. People that don't want us to be there forever but think it's fine for us to provide aid to help Ukraine fight off an invasion.
3. People who don't think it's our business and don't support the aid.
4. People actively rooting for Russia because they view it as anti-Biden.

I would guess groups 2 and 3 are the vast majority on here yet both sides spend their time labeling everyone as 1 and 4.

fka ftc said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

They couldn't defend their own territory or control their people. They fail both of your litmus tests.

---

One of the biggest supporters of Ukraine lives off the government teat and have set themselves to permanently live on said government teat and openly brag about it.

Then lecture us on need to spend more of our privately earned income in taxes to support their lifestyle and that of their Ukraine friends.

---

"government teat"

Ive been and even lived abroad in western europe, asia, latam. Ive studied history. I seek information from many sources, including at one point paid geopolitical news. I feel like i have a better background than most on world politics and events.

I have no ****ing clue what to think, and was surprised by this war and how it has unfolded. It makes very little sense to me. Ziehan's schtick on it doesnt sound comprehensively accurate, but it makes as much or more sense than anything else. But It is hard for me to put myself in putin's shoes and see how this was a good idea.

Disinformation has become nearly universal over the last few years, there is really no way to vet information properly.

What i do know is Ukraine and russia are both corrupt as hell, which has to happen as a universal outcome of socialism. The US is now that way as well. US leadership has never acted solely for personal/corrupt/international elite's interest before, there was always at least some thought of US national interest before. Not anymore. Same for western europe. So motives are hard to discern.

Ukraine was certainly the US establishments' top 3 corruption vehicle. How that drives events is unclear. The motives of the real decision makers, the financial elite, are not clear.

I havent seen anyone from either 'side' on this board give me any enlightening information either, which is unusual.

Bottom line, unless you own villas in london, switzerland, bali, dubai and shanghai and fly a gulfstream around, you probably dont really know what is going on, who the chessmasters really are, or what the real moves are.

I think those labels are fair and I'd fall in 2. I think we should see Ukraine through their offensive. If it's successful we continue as is. If not then we should broker peace and then push for NATO admittance and provide them with a permanent nato presence to maintain that peace. Whatever borders exist at the time of that brokered peace will in effect be permanent.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

BigRobSA said:

---

Count me on the side that gives zero ****s about either Ukraine, or Russia.

---

If you don't signal outwardly to others that your heart bleeds for Ukraine, you are a die hard Putin fanboy and love Russia.

---

And this is why I just gave up on these threads completely. Anything short of offering your own kids to die for Ukraine and somehow, magically, you become a Russian sympathizer with a shirtless Putin fetish. It got exhausting quickly. And for those reasons, I'm out.

---

I haven't seen anyone being called a putin fanboy/comrade etc who is solely against the aid going to Ukraine, and in my opinion there's nothing wrong with thinking that we shouldn't be involved and that our money should be spent elsewhere. Personally, I think we've spent money and resources on a lot dumber things than helping out a country who is being invaded by a much larger neighbor (who is prone to bombing civilians and destroying cities for no reason) try and fight them off.

However, there are certainly people that are actively rooting for Russia, repeating obvious Russian propaganda, implying Ukraine is not a real country, etc., I guess because they think it's some kind of internet points against Biden and the dems. Besides just generally being a bad person with what seems like incredibly sad lives, they are also, objectively and sometimes self-admitted, Russian sympathizers. Not sure why anyone would have a problem with labeling them as such.

So really the thread needs 4 categories:

1. People that are gung ho for aid for Ukraine forever, flying Ukraine flags in the profile etc. (seems like a small percentage of the posters here)
2. People that don't want us to be there forever but think it's fine for us to provide aid to help Ukraine fight off an invasion.
3. People who don't think it's our business and don't support the aid.
4. People actively rooting for Russia because they view it as anti-Biden.

I would guess groups 2 and 3 are the vast majority on here yet both sides spend their time labeling everyone as 1 and 4.

---

Add 5 for me- people who know alot about history, the world, and war, but dont trust any information and dont know what in the hell to think.

If you really want me to take a guess as to the best strategy, i would attempt to manage aid to bleed russia and prevent a general european war. Which, oddly, seems to be our strategy. Which really makes me wonder.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

So really the thread needs 4 categories:

1. People that are gung ho for aid for Ukraine forever, flying Ukraine flags in the profile etc. (seems like a small percentage of the posters here)
2. People that don't want us to be there forever but think it's fine for us to provide aid to help Ukraine fight off an invasion.
3. People who don't think it's our business and don't support the aid.
4. People actively rooting for Russia because they view it as anti-Biden.

I would guess groups 2 and 3 are the vast majority on here yet both sides spend their time labeling everyone as 1 and 4.

---

I have yet to see anyone who falls into category 4, I see lots of people in category 1 who lecture others who may be in category 2 and 3 that they are nothing but category 4.

People get tired of being called Ivan and so they embrace it. You can call be a bad person because of my views, I am fine with that. You can call me Ivan, its dumb but it doesn't affect my happiness in life.

I happen to think a stable, strong but contained Russia is overall good for the world. Lots of history and culture there, tons of resources, a strong competitor there overall strengthens the US as it did in the 1970s and 1980s.

I happen to also think destroying Putin at any and all costs likely leads to much much worse things for the US and the world in general.

But having those sorts of positions gets you labeled as some sort of anti-american who wants to serve Putins and see all Ukrainians raped and killed. So if you want to have discussions on peoples positions, then maybe quit pushing any dissenter automatically into Cat 4.

That's a refreshing, reasoned new take. Haven't thought of it that way. Board needs more posts like that.

Excellent post and good points. I appreciate information that considers history and first hand experience.

fka ftc said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

So really the thread needs 4 categories:

1. People that are gung ho for aid for Ukraine forever, flying Ukraine flags in the profile etc. (seems like a small percentage of the posters here)
2. People that don't want us to be there forever but think it's fine for us to provide aid to help Ukraine fight off an invasion.
3. People who don't think it's our business and don't support the aid.
4. People actively rooting for Russia because they view it as anti-Biden.

I would guess groups 2 and 3 are the vast majority on here yet both sides spend their time labeling everyone as 1 and 4.

---

I have yet to see anyone who falls into category 4, I see lots of people in category 1 who lecture others who may be in category 2 and 3 that they are nothing but category 4.

People get tired of being called Ivan and so they embrace it. You can call be a bad person because of my views, I am fine with that. You can call me Ivan, its dumb but it doesn't affect my happiness in life.

I happen to think a stable, strong but contained Russia is overall good for the world. Lots of history and culture there, tons of resources, a strong competitor there overall strengthens the US as it did in the 1970s and 1980s.

I happen to also think destroying Putin at any and all costs likely leads to much much worse things for the US and the world in general.

But having those sorts of positions gets you labeled as some sort of anti-american who wants to serve Putins and see all Ukrainians raped and killed. So if you want to have discussions on peoples positions, then maybe quit pushing any dissenter automatically into Cat 4.

---

I mean there's literally a post on this board rooting for Russia with 100+ stars and multiple people agreeing with it, so I'm not really sure the rest of your post makes any sense.

Do you and Teslag share a hive mind?

Pointing to the OP as evidence of Putin fanboi-ism is Example A in failing to understand snark and sarcasm.

Let me help with definitions:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snark

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

fka ftc said:

---

Do you and Teslag share a hive mind?

Pointing to the OP as evidence of Putin fanboi-ism is Example A in failing to understand snark and sarcasm.

Let me help with definitions:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snark

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

---

Ah, he was just kidding and doesn't actually support Russia despite 5 paragraphs outlining why he's rooting for Russia. What a hilarious joke.

The height of comedy folks

Jsimonds58 said:

---

The height of comedy folks

---

You seem lost. Let me help you find a way home.

https://texags.com/forums/64

"When told that the aid given was just three percent of the Defense Department's budget, that Ukraine remained in control of much of its territory, and that the war had severely degraded Russian combat capabilities, the number of respondents who approved of the aid jumped to 64 percent.

Gains were largest with Republicans, with 59 percent thinking money on military aid was well spent after being given additional information."

POLL

"Democrats were somewhat more pro-Ukraine, with 86 percent in favor of Ukrainian victory versus 71 percent of Republicans."

Weird, according to some on here supporting Ukraine makes you a damn liberal

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Do you and Teslag share a hive mind?

Pointing to the OP as evidence of Putin fanboi-ism is Example A in failing to understand snark and sarcasm.

Let me help with definitions:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snark

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

---

Ah, he was just kidding and doesn't actually support Russia despite 5 paragraphs outlining why he's rooting for Russia. What a hilarious joke.

---

Okay, let's discuss density of thought and separating a snarky subject line vs the 5 points / parapgraphs they posted in that OP.

Which one of the points actually is pro Russian.

1. Seems a rather unbiased take and should cause people to think what we would do / did do / used to to do when people parked assets at our doorstep. Since being against this is now pro-Russian propaganda, we can see where you agree with Biden on Chinese spy balloons and China-Cuban listening stations.

2. Seems spot on particularly as more of the Biden crime family information is revealed. But yet that is Putin propaganda?

3. Seems more Americans feel this way when the numbers and alternatives are presented openly, fairly and in the proper context and not in the "but guys we destroyed Russia for pennies on the dollar so all worth it!! finally got those pesky Rooskies! Viva 1980's foreign policy!".

4. Seems to be proving out month by month.

5. Another reason to be wary about sending endless cash and weapons to people who may not ultimately turn out to be the good guys. See supporting resistance against Russians in Afghanistan.

Let me know where the huge pro-Russian propaganda was in their actual post.

Quote:

---

1. We provoked Russia by putting NATO on their doorstep. Imagine If Russia had bases in the Bahamas or Mexico.

2. Our corrupt politicians in congress and the Biden's use Ukraine as a money laundering factory stealing our tax dollars.

3. I'm tired of seeing tens of billions of our taxpayer dollars go to Ukraine only for the money to be skimmed by their corrupt bureaucrats and the weapons we purchase sold on the black market. Imagine what $100B could do for our infrastructure and military. How many state of the art roads, schools, and battleships could that build? An aircraft carrier costs $13B for reference.

4. Ukraine has no shot to win. Better for Russia to end it and end the human suffering going on.

5. There are actual Nazis in Ukrainian military. Didn't those guys lead to 60M deaths in WW2? Why are we giving them guns and money. No thanks .

---

I'm right where I want to be thanks.

I'm sure the nurse should be around soon with your tapioca pudding though, that should improve your mood I'm sure.

Jsimonds58 said:

---

I'm right where I want to be thanks.

I'm sure the nurse should be around soon with your tapioca pudding though, that should improve your mood I'm sure.

---

Thanks. Can you wipe my arse when you stop by? I usually give my personal attendants Sunday mornings off but glad to know you are still working.

You seem uniquely qualified to perform the task.

fka ftc said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Franklin Comes Alive! said:

---

2 types of posters on this board...

1. Idiots that regurgitate propaganda fed to them by the msm ad nauseam

2. Critical thinkers that dgaf about Ukraine or Russia, and simply want American money to be spent in America


& yes type 1 like to call people Ivan bc their iq is too low to have worthwhile debate

---

Which group do the OP and the 108 people that started his post belong to?

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3375863/1#discussion


It's also telling that the "critical thinkers" need to often outright cite Russian propaganda accounts. You will eschew any American sources of info yet isntantly cling to Russian propaganda as long as it fits your narrati… I mean "critical thinking".

---

I just noticed I never starred that post. Its up to 111 now and counting. Soon it will have enough stars to where we have to recognize the post as its own sovereign country because evidently simple voting is all it takes according to some.

---

Excellent post. I spit out my mimosa.

TheEternalPessimist said:

---

10thYrSr said:

---

I'm amazed at the level of discord that the war in Ukraine has caused on this board. Users have divided themselves Into camps on either side. The amount of vitriol on each side is fascinating!

I can easily imagine that this was how it was in the American Civil War and the American Revolution as well if they had the internet then.

---

As a routinely accused 'Putin fanboy' - I must indeed concur with your statement.

The frustrating thing for me is that some don't want to hear nor care to understand the reality that a western backed coup that our CIA, German, British, and French intelligence helped coordinate created the spark of destabilization in Ukraine. A democratically elected president was removed in a coup that was NOT supported by the large but minority ethnic Russian population in Crimea and the Donbas. When those areas rose up and said "NO - WE DO NOT RECOGNIZE THIS ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT", Azov Nazis and other Ukrainian Ethnic purists began attacking and waging immediate war and persecution on the Russian minority. So many on here seem to think that the war started in 2022. But simply stating this true story while simultaneously opposing both regimes actions is often times not welcome by the neo-con end on the conservatives in F16.

---

There is no evidence that the Maidan was influenced by anything but internal corruption and a desire to move away from that toward the west in Ukraine. Please find a non-Russian propoganda source for this conspiracy if you want to state it as fact. Of course Russia wanted it to be "America's fault" because it allowed them to take over land and hide that their corrupt puppet government collapsed. The people of Ukraine made it abundantly clear they wanted to look west not east in 2013 and 2014. The former government tried to suppress that. The idea that Ukranian people can't or don't have agency over their own ideas is both not true and frankly patronizing.

The both sides crowd and Russia is actually good crowd are both part of the populist brain rot in the Republican party, that until about a decade ago only seemed to be affecting the far left. Now we have a bunch of overconfident, hyperpolitical people chugging straight Kremlin propoganda on both extremes who think they are critical thinkers simply because they are contrarian. For "Christians" many of you struggle to find a sense of morality that makes sense when a dictator aggresively invades another country, murders it's people, steals it's children. What. The. ****. Notice nowhere did I claim that Ukraine is a perfect country, or doesn't have corruption. But Ukraine had the balls to want to begin to fix their problems and the dream of a life where they could be better than simply the vassal state of Russia. That is why this war happened. That's why Ukraine is a flawed country that is righteous and just in the framework of this conflict.

I'm still waiting for the sanctions imposed on Russia by the Western leaders -- the sanctions they were so proud of -- to drive the Russian army from the battlefield

fka ftc said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Do you and Teslag share a hive mind?

Pointing to the OP as evidence of Putin fanboi-ism is Example A in failing to understand snark and sarcasm.

Let me help with definitions:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/snark

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

---

Ah, he was just kidding and doesn't actually support Russia despite 5 paragraphs outlining why he's rooting for Russia. What a hilarious joke.

---

Okay, let's discuss density of thought and separating a snarky subject line vs the 5 points / parapgraphs they posted in that OP.

Which one of the points actually is pro Russian.

1. Seems a rather unbiased take and should cause people to think what we would do / did do / used to to do when people parked assets at our doorstep. Since being against this is now pro-Russian propaganda, we can see where you agree with Biden on Chinese spy balloons and China-Cuban listening stations.

2. Seems spot on particularly as more of the Biden crime family information is revealed. But yet that is Putin propaganda?

3. Seems more Americans feel this way when the numbers and alternatives are presented openly, fairly and in the proper context and not in the "but guys we destroyed Russia for pennies on the dollar so all worth it!! finally got those pesky Rooskies! Viva 1980's foreign policy!".

4. Seems to be proving out month by month.

5. Another reason to be wary about sending endless cash and weapons to people who may not ultimately turn out to be the good guys. See supporting resistance against Russians in Afghanistan.

Let me know where the huge pro-Russian propaganda was in their actual post.

Quote:

---

1. We provoked Russia by putting NATO on their doorstep. Imagine If Russia had bases in the Bahamas or Mexico.

2. Our corrupt politicians in congress and the Biden's use Ukraine as a money laundering factory stealing our tax dollars.

3. I'm tired of seeing tens of billions of our taxpayer dollars go to Ukraine only for the money to be skimmed by their corrupt bureaucrats and the weapons we purchase sold on the black market. Imagine what $100B could do for our infrastructure and military. How many state of the art roads, schools, and battleships could that build? An aircraft carrier costs $13B for reference.

4. Ukraine has no shot to win. Better for Russia to end it and end the human suffering going on.

5. There are actual Nazis in Ukrainian military. Didn't those guys lead to 60M deaths in WW2? Why are we giving them guns and money. No thanks .

---

---

Wait so he wasn't just joking? To answer the bolded question, I think it's the part where he says "I'm pulling for Russia."

You seemed to have missed this part of the post...

Quote:

---

Okay, let's discuss density of thought and separating a snarky subject line vs the 5 points / paragraphs they posted in that OP.

---

10thYrSr said:

---

I'm amazed at the level of discord that the war in Ukraine has caused on this board. Users have divided themselves Into camps on either side. The amount of vitriol on each side is fascinating!

I can easily imagine that this was how it was in the American Civil War and the American Revolution as well if they had the internet then.

---

People seem to fall into two camps. One side firmly believes the U.S. should do anything necessary to bring the war to Russia through unlimited financial aid and even to the point of committing direct military assistance.

The other side thinks we should only pursue U.S. national interests if the rewards clearly outweigh the cost to the United States.

Or more simply, in the language of those who think we should do anything necessary - one side wants to defeat evil and the other side want to sexually pleasure Putin.

This is why there is so much heat surrounding the topic. The anti-Trump forces see this as an extension of their phony "Russian collusion" and anti-Trump fight thus the "Putin stooge" pejorative for those who simply don't believe the fight or the cost of the fight are in our national interest. Almost every hard core anti-Trumper I know thinks we should do everything up to and including committing troops.

fka ftc said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

They couldn't defend their own territory or control their people. They fail both of your litmus tests.

---

One of the biggest supporters of Ukraine lives off the government teat and have set themselves to permanently live on said government teat and openly brag about it.

Then lecture us on need to spend more of our privately earned income in taxes to support their lifestyle and that of their Ukraine friends.

---

And...WTF does that have to do with what I said?

fka ftc said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Teslag said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Russia recognized their independence and pledged to guarantee their territorial integrity. Your "no one is sovereign" argument is and always has been ludicrous.

---

People who can defend their own territory and control their people is what determines if someone is sovereign.

Not votes and pledges and promises. Read the manual.

---

So basically the only sovereign nations are China and the US, because those two could run over the defenses of every other nation?

---

Iran and Afghanistan retained their independence the US so you could add them in.

British have a legit navy, global reach and nukes, so I think they are ok. French are not as they long ago ran out of dishtowels to wave anytime someone gets angry at them.

India and Pakistan both have substantial armies and nukes, so I think they are good on the sovereign grounds. Israel is in a tough spot but they will go down fighting if it ever comes to it.

Let me know in your magical spell book who gets to have never ending sovereignty that can never be questioned and who has to fight for it or who simply never get it.

Your apologists ways are why we have millions of drunk, methed out native americans who cannot build enough casinos to satisfy their habits because bureaucrats felt guilty and decided to give them pretend sovereign status within our borders.

This game is way more complex than you seem to understand.

---

They couldn't defend their own territory or control their people. They fail both of your litmus tests.

---

Maybe you missed this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_United_States_troops_from_Afghanistan_(2020%E2%80%932021)

---

Did you miss where the US/NATO spent 20 years INSIDE their borders?

They couldn't defend their borders - therefore they are not sovereign. I'm just applying the fka doctrine...

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Franklin Comes Alive! said:

---

2 types of posters on this board...

1. Idiots that regurgitate propaganda fed to them by the msm ad nauseam

2. Critical thinkers that dgaf about Ukraine or Russia, and simply want American money to be spent in America


& yes type 1 like to call people Ivan bc their iq is too low to have worthwhile debate

---

Which group do the OP and the 108 people that started his post belong to?

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3375863/1#discussion


It's also telling that the "critical thinkers" need to often outright cite Russian propaganda accounts. You will eschew any American sources of info yet isntantly cling to Russian propaganda as long as it fits your narrati… I mean "critical thinking".

---

I just noticed I never starred that post. Its up to 111 now and counting. Soon it will have enough stars to where we have to recognize the post as its own sovereign country because evidently simple voting is all it takes according to some.

---

Excellent post. I spit out my mimosa.

---

Looks like he IS in Category 4...