OK, so it's not about Russia actually building military bases in Mexico anymore?
Doesn't the fact that Mexico has apparently never felt the need to have such discussions with Russia, while Ukraine has at least considered the possibility of joining NATO, say a lot about both Russia and NATO/US?
You talking about it as if there would be a huge difference. Alone such speculations would cause the US to sponsor the opposition, call the acting president a terrorist and overthrow him, since this seems to be a working pattern for the Middle East.
Mexico doesn't have the need, but Cuba sure did.
Ukrainian government was put in power through a Western sponsored coup, So they naturally have to pay their dues and do what Uncle Sam says. If you ever heard a term "s*ithole country", that's about Ukraine. Insane levels of corruption.
Yup, second most corrupt nation in Europe. The most corrupt? Russia. So, if you really want to talk about a sh*thole country, pick the biggest sh*thole -- Russia.
Russia sits in Sevastopol because it invaded a sovereign neighbor. If the U.S./NATO ever "sits" there, it will be because a sovereign country was OK with it.
COMPLETELY different, whether you want to admit it, or not.
Or maybe because they built it and it belonged to them for 250 years. Before having Yanks there, just take it away from Ukraine.
You're under impression that Ukraine always wanted the US there. Until 2014 Russia and Ukraine were friends, until somebody in the opposition got paid massively and put in charge through a violent coup. Simply speaking, the US bought itself a nice shiny Ukrainian government, which invited them in and Putin decided not to have it.
It fascinates me how much strategically smarter the US is and that Russia is always at least one step behind. Their only hope now is to bond stronger with China and let Xi do the thinking for them.
If Russia was smart, they would start playing in the US manner and sponsor some coups in Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela and similar to give the US something else to worry about than Ukraine. Learn from the best, "how to win a country over": strike a deal with the opposition, finance their rise to power through a coup and have them invite you in as they fulfill their part of the deal.
Russia occupied Crimea. Not the U.S.
The USSR broke up. None of the newly-created countries signed any documents saying, "It's OK if you come back later, against our desires, to reclaim us."
CURRENT sovereignty and lines on maps matter. Otherwise, a hell of a lot of unprovoked wars can be justified based on prior situations.
It's funny how the Russian attempt at spin reflects worse on them - is it really better to tell the world your Black sea flagship just accidentally exploded for no good reason
Yeah, whoops we blew her own ship up. it doesn’t get any worse than that for their navy.
I do believe that accidental sinkings of warships are pretty damn rare. Submarines, a little more common. But not surface ships. At the moment, I'm cautiously optimistic about the cooler option - the Ukrainians sunk her! We'll see.
You have absolutely no idea about Ukraine and yet here you are, talking. Point here being not what and how was bombed, but, that the US is very comfortable with dead civilians in big numbers unless they're killed by Russia.
The US looted Germany, took gold and tech, to "unlock the manufacturing potential", you're speaking of.
Also, I have never seen a terrible parent make their child shoot someone with a finger. There are a lot of terrible parents in Europe, yet no school shootings. Proves my point - you trully do not care about children.
I know more about Ukraine than most people here. The average LR poster didn't know Ukraine existed 2 months ago.
I've never disputed your take on US wars in the 21st century. You're wrong about Japan.
You have to be a moron to think kids just wake up one day find a gun and decide to shoot up the school. It takes YEARS of neglect and terrible parenting to turn a kid into a murderer. School shootings are VERY VERY rare despite what the media tells you. More kids are killed in Chicago, Detroit, and St; Louis every single year than have been killed in school shootings in all of US history.
I'd like to see the data on that, if you can provide it. The proof is in the pudding.
Yeah, whoops we blew her own ship up. it doesn’t get any worse than that for their navy.
I do believe that accidental sinkings of warships are pretty damn rare. Submarines, a little more common. But not surface ships. At the moment, I'm cautiously optimistic about the cooler option - the Ukrainians sunk her! We'll see.
Yeah, I’m positive they were hit by Ukraine forces. Russia’s “go to” is always a lie.
I think it is far worse if they accidentally sunk there own ship. Let’s go with that.
I know more about Ukraine than most people here. The average LR poster didn't know Ukraine existed 2 months ago.
I've never disputed your take on US wars in the 21st century. You're wrong about Japan.
You have to be a moron to think kids just wake up one day find a gun and decide to shoot up the school. It takes YEARS of neglect and terrible parenting to turn a kid into a murderer. School shootings are VERY VERY rare despite what the media tells you. More kids are killed in Chicago, Detroit, and St; Louis every single year than have been killed in school shootings in all of US history.
I'd like to see the data on that, if you can provide it. The proof is in the pudding.
You've never even heard of half the top 10. In reverse order of deadliness:
10. Northern Illinois 2008 - 5 killed
9. West Nickel Mines 2006 - 5 killed
8. Oikos University 2012 - 7 killed
7. Cal State Fullerton 1976 - 7 killed
6. Red Lake 2005 - 9 killed
5. Umpqua Community College Shooting 2015 - 9 killed
4. Columbine 1999 - 13 killed
3. U of Texas Tower shooting 1966 - 14 killed
2. Sandy Hook 2012 - 26 killed
1. Virginia Tech 2007 - 32 killed
1 is too many but the 10 deadliest in US history totaled 127 people killed many of them teachers.
The CDC reported that 214 children 17-years old or younger have died of COVID nationwide so far this year — compared to 261 Chicago kids who have been victims of gunfire in Chicago.
I do believe that accidental sinkings of warships are pretty damn rare. Submarines, a little more common. But not surface ships. At the moment, I'm cautiously optimistic about the cooler option - the Ukrainians sunk her! We'll see.
Yeah, I’m positive they were hit by Ukraine forces. Russia’s “go to” is always a lie.
I think it is far worse if they accidentally sunk there own ship. Let’s go with that.
Nah, one is a really embarrassing accident. The other is getting your a** kicked - and in a particularly surprising way - by the much smaller country that you thought you were going to walk over.
I do believe that accidental sinkings of warships are pretty damn rare. Submarines, a little more common. But not surface ships. At the moment, I'm cautiously optimistic about the cooler option - the Ukrainians sunk her! We'll see.
Yeah, I’m positive they were hit by Ukraine forces. Russia’s “go to” is always a lie.
I think it is far worse if they accidentally sunk there own ship. Let’s go with that.
One thing we know is the Russians lost a marquis ship.
And Russian incompetence seems involved.
We can't trust the Russians to present an unbiased account, but it is still doubtful the Ukrainians managed to get their Neptune anti-ship rocket system operational.
Given the sinking occurred barely a day after the UK announced supplying the Ukraine with anti-ship weapons, my guess this is it was sunk using a British-supplied missile. And possibly with direct assistance from British secret forces as the UDF would not be trained in its use.
You guys should find another argument for killing people other than the whataboutism movement.
Russophobic warmongers in this thread seem to be presenting all the arguments for killing people.
Goes something like this. Ukrainians got killed. So we have to kill Russians. Lots. More the better. Rip up the rules of war and rip'em a new one.
Anyone who disagrees, we'll smear endlessly with pious, angry, accusatory posts.
If you call out hypocrisy, we'll just call it 'whataboutism' and continue to look the other way.
You claim moral high ground, while defending execution and torture of prisoners.
One poster, word for word, stated "The only good Russian is dead Russian".
You bragged about how, in Boston, problems are handled with violence.
"All" the arguments? That isn't very even-handed. There have been many posts justifying the 'special military operation' because of NATO provocation, Ukrainian corruption, and the presence of Nazis. The special military operation is an armed invasion, and armed invasions involve killing. And such is the case here with targets including non-military structures and civilians. So those posters are presenting arguments for killing Ukrainians.
You talking about it as if there would be a huge difference. Alone such speculations would cause the US to sponsor the opposition, call the acting president a terrorist and overthrow him, since this seems to be a working pattern for the Middle East.
Mexico doesn't have the need, but Cuba sure did.
Ukrainian government was put in power through a Western sponsored coup, So they naturally have to pay their dues and do what Uncle Sam says. If you ever heard a term "s*ithole country", that's about Ukraine. Insane levels of corruption.
Yup, second most corrupt nation in Europe. The most corrupt? Russia. So, if you really want to talk about a sh*thole country, pick the biggest sh*thole -- Russia.
Anyway you slice it, Ukraine is a corrupt Kleptocracy and has been for a long time.
Depending on who and when you ask, it's somewhat worse or better than Russia - but the rule of law is there is that there is none... it's alien to most of us.
Corruption is widespread in Ukrainian society. In 2012 Ernst & Young put Ukraine among the three most-corrupt nations from 43 surveyed, alongside Colombia and Brazil. In 2015 The Guardian called Ukraine "the most corrupt nati...
Yeah, I’m positive they were hit by Ukraine forces. Russia’s “go to” is always a lie.
I think it is far worse if they accidentally sunk there own ship. Let’s go with that.
One thing we know is the Russians lost a marquis ship.
And Russian incompetence seems involved.
We can't trust the Russians to present an unbiased account, but it is still doubtful the Ukrainians managed to get their Neptune anti-ship rocket system operational.
Given the sinking occurred barely a day after the UK announced supplying the Ukraine with anti-ship weapons, my guess this is it was sunk using a British-supplied missile. And possibly with direct assistance from British secret forces as the UDF would not be trained in its use.
If so, this could be a dangerous escalation.
But is there an escalation left other than nuclear? I don’t think so (admittedly being of the apparently minority view that dying from an artillery shell ain’t THAT much better than a chem attack). As naive as it might sound, I’m cautiously optimistic that Putin’s threshold for unleashing a nuke is quite a bit higher than a successful Western-assisted ASCM attack.
"All" the arguments? That isn't very even-handed. There have been many posts justifying the 'special military operation' because of NATO provocation, Ukrainian corruption, and the presence of Nazis. The special military operation is an armed invasion, and armed invasions involve killing. And such is the case here with targets including non-military structures and civilians. So those posters are presenting arguments for killing Ukrainians.
You're one of the saner posters in this thread, so this mostly doesn't apply.
Guilty with an excuse.
"All" is an unfair generalization - which is why I modified the phrase with "seem"
But is there an escalation left other than nuclear? I don’t think so (admittedly being of the apparently minority view that dying from an artillery shell ain’t THAT much better than a chem attack). As naive as it might sound, I’m cautiously optimistic that Putin’s threshold for unleashing a nuke is quite a bit higher than a successful Western-assisted ASCM attack.
Putin may be a mad man, but he's not crazy. We're a long way from having to re-stock the fallout shelters.
But is there an escalation left other than nuclear? I don’t think so (admittedly being of the apparently minority view that dying from an artillery shell ain’t THAT much better than a chem attack). As naive as it might sound, I’m cautiously optimistic that Putin’s threshold for unleashing a nuke is quite a bit higher than a successful Western-assisted ASCM attack.
Putin may be a mad man, but he's not crazy. We're a long way from having to re-stock the fallout shelters.
41 kids under 18 were killed in the first 9 months of 2021 in Chicago alone...
School shootings are terrible. They are completely blown out of proportion by the media.
Same old argument... People are being killed randomly by sick individuals...therefore it is ok for an "organized" national army to invade another country and kill innocent people.
Thousands of posts saying the same thing. Do you think you guys are going to change anyone's opinion or reinforce the one they already have? See you in another couple of pages of you and your knucklehead comrades posts.
You guys should find another argument for killing people other than the whataboutism movement.
Russophobic warmongers in this thread seem to be presenting all the arguments for killing people.
Goes something like this. Ukrainians got killed. So we have to kill Russians. Lots. More the better. Rip up the rules of war and rip'em a new one.
Anyone who disagrees, we'll smear endlessly with pious, angry, accusatory posts.
If you call out hypocrisy, we'll just call it 'whataboutism' and continue to look the other way.
You claim moral high ground, while defending execution and torture of prisoners.
One poster, word for word, stated "The only good Russian is dead Russian".
You bragged about how, in Boston, problems are handled with violence.
Pretty good, but a little innacurate about my point of view. Also, erasing a portion my post points to your weakness.
- I don't agree with marching into Russia and killing civilians. Someone else said that. Not me. Yes, I am absolutely in favor of wiping out invading soldiers.
- You are calling out hypocrisy. Not me.
- Yes, I value a child over an invading soldier. Just like I value a puppy over a mosquito.
- That wasn't me, keep digging.
- Yes, if your Russian boys ever invaded Boston looking to kill innocent citizens they would be met with nothing but fire. I'm glad that made an impression on you.
41 kids under 18 were killed in the first 9 months of 2021 in Chicago alone...
School shootings are terrible. They are completely blown out of proportion by the media.
Same old argument... People are being killed randomly by sick individuals...therefore it is ok for an "organized" national army to invade another country and kill innocent people.
Thousands of posts saying the same thing. Do you think you guys are going to change anyone's opinion or reinforce the one they already have? See you in another couple of pages of you and your knucklehead comrades posts.
No one said it's "ok"... It just happens to be absolutely idiotic and naive to think it's ever going to quit happening.
Russia screwed up. Their invasion is not going at all like they thought. They are doing horrible things... because it's a war and that's how they have ALWAYS behaved in war. That can all be true and it can STILL be true that the west provoked Russia's actions.
Anyway you slice it, Ukraine is a corrupt Kleptocracy and has been for a long time.
Depending on who and when you ask, it's somewhat worse or better than Russia - but the rule of law is there is that there is none... it's alien to most of us.
So based on your logic here, Mexico should be expecting a US invasion due to their extreme levels of corruption. Should Argentina, with a CPI of 39 be worried about an anti-corruption special military operation? Most of the southern hemisphere would meet your description of "corrupt Kleptocracy."
