Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[temporal1]

Nett and Soloist added good news and sage advice. ^^^

Negotiations between Ukrainian and Russian delegations are happening now. It would be a good time to pray. Our Father in heaven, please bring peace.

i’m prayerful and hopeful.
both sides have intense motivation to negotiate. let resolution come quickly, let billions in arms promised go unused.

nett:
Why is that so hard to believe?

Most Americans were unaware of the shelling, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but maybe you should avoid minimizing things you don't know about.
https://popularresistance.org/ukraine-i ... re-silent/

Russia hasn't moved to occupy, and the majority of reports about Russia going inhumane things in the Ukraine have turned out to be false.

“Most Americans” (and Canadians) are happy to accept whatever mainstream media dishes out to them, which is precious little beyond repetition of chosen narratives, that specifically support lib PC politics. i noticed the gasp-worthy stinginess in about 1970, when, as a teen, i visited Montreal, and learned first-hand just what French Canadians thought of English-speakers!
It was an abrupt awakening.

Nothing’s changed, even via the internet, but, at least we can hope to recognize the pattern of our sorry situation.

Soloist:
I think its about NATO and a desire for more control of the port.
Supposedly the Ukraine government cut a fair bit of the water to Crimea...

Being a self-acknowledged stupid American, i wouldn’t have guessed .. i have a virtual friend in NW Europe who cited NATO from the start.

When a person doesn’t know, it’s best to try to look at what’s really going on, and presume the mainstream is doing what it does, FAITHFULLY supporting partisan politics, their big lobbies, special interests, blocs, etc.

If war were such a wonderful UNITER, Trump really screwed up, didn’t he??
Of course, he was accused BY THESE SAME PEOPLE of being a “sure thing” to start WWIII. However, if HE had, he would have been THE WORST EVER, not a beautiful timely saviour of Ukraine and all that’s bright+beautiful. Guaranteed.

Found in NYT Analysis, following 2022 SOTU:

“It is striking to see the bipartisan applause for the Ukraine section,” says The Washington Post’s Megan McArdle.
“War brings people together and makes them forget their lesser squabbles.”

THAT’S IT.
Trump should have known, WARS UNITE! Nothing like an old-fashioned good versus evil war.

i couldn’t view the SOTU. no stomach for it.
i read somewhere it was the “second least viewed.” i don’t know the first/worst.

“Rallying and united” against evil is Congress’ euphemism for: OPEN THE PUBLIC TREASURY FLOODGATES TO THE U.S. MIC. $$$$
AND, don’t overlook, exporting lib politics agenda oversees. Count on it. [Europe+Canada are worse.] Globalists are “into it.”

Ukraine: Beware. Read the fine print. There’s more than 1 wolf at your door.

[Soloist]

Soloist:
I think its about NATO and a desire for more control of the port.
Supposedly the Ukraine government cut a fair bit of the water to Crimea...

Being a self-acknowledged stupid American, i wouldn’t have guessed .. i have a virtual friend in NW Europe who cited NATO from the start.

When a person doesn’t know, it’s best to try to look at what’s really going on, and presume the mainstream is doing what it does, FAITHFULLY supporting partisan politics, their big lobbies, special interests, blocs, etc.

If war were such a wonderful UNITER, Trump really screwed up, didn’t he??
Of course, he was accused BY THESE SAME PEOPLE of being a “sure thing” to start WWIII. However, if HE had, he would have been THE WORST EVER, not a beautiful timely saviour of Ukraine and all that’s bright+beautiful. Guaranteed.

“Rallying and united” against evil is Congress’ euphemism for: OPEN THE PUBLIC TREASURY FLOODGATES TO THE U.S. MIC. $$$$
And, exporting lib politics agenda oversees. Count on it. [Europe+Canada are worse.] Globalists are “into it.”

Ukraine: Beware. Read the fine print. There’s more than 1 wolf at your door.

I'm not making any judgement on NATO, just theorizing a possibility for Russia's actions.

[temporal1]

Soloist:
I think its about NATO and a desire for more control of the port.
Supposedly the Ukraine government cut a fair bit of the water to Crimea...

Being a self-acknowledged stupid American, i wouldn’t have guessed .. i have a virtual friend in NW Europe who cited NATO from the start.

When a person doesn’t know, it’s best to try to look at what’s really going on, and presume the mainstream is doing what it does, FAITHFULLY supporting partisan politics, their big lobbies, special interests, blocs, etc.

If war were such a wonderful UNITER, Trump really screwed up, didn’t he??
Of course, he was accused BY THESE SAME PEOPLE of being a “sure thing” to start WWIII. However, if HE had, he would have been THE WORST EVER, not a beautiful timely saviour of Ukraine and all that’s bright+beautiful. Guaranteed.

“Rallying and united” against evil is Congress’ euphemism for: OPEN THE PUBLIC TREASURY FLOODGATES TO THE U.S. MIC. $$$$
And, exporting lib politics agenda oversees. Count on it. [Europe+Canada are worse.] Globalists are “into it.”

Ukraine: Beware. Read the fine print. There’s more than 1 wolf at your door.

I'm not making any judgement on NATO, just theorizing a possibility for Russia's actions.

Understood. Me, too. 100%. It’s important to ask questions. Esp when war bandwagons are rolled out.
It’s unfortunate there is a need to clarify. But, there is. Over+over. So, thank you.

[temporal1]

Ken:
What is your point ..

Because obama articulated it IN the White House, and all IRL evidence reflects it, in the U.S. and oversees.
Just as he and hillary did in full support of for-profit abortion corporations. No one forced them, they voluntarily drew lines in the sand, and U.S. taxpayers have paid since.

Attempting to dismiss these mega-special interests as innocuous and “nothing to see here,” is destructive, and BIG LIES.

Just because the NYT doesn’t spell it out in so many words for ya, doesn’t make it false.

[Josh]

If they want to be in control, they are going to have to occupy. Many Ukrainians (including Russian speaking) are not going to accept whatever puppet government Moscow installs. There's a very good chance that the Russians are looking at an indefinite insurrection against them. There seems to have been a false assumption that the Ukrainians were going to welcome the Russians as liberators.

According to reporting, the Russian bombardment of civilian areas has increased as they encounter Ukrainian resistance.

Is there a reason why you think Ukrainians on the other hand accepted the puppet government the U.S. installed in 2014?

[Ken]

Ken:
What is your point ..

Because obama articulated it IN the White House, and all IRL evidence reflects it, in the U.S. and oversees.
Just as he and hillary did in full support of for-profit abortion corporations. No one forced them, they voluntarily drew lines in the sand, and U.S. taxpayers have paid since.

Attempting to dismiss these mega-special interests as innocuous and “nothing to see here,” is destructive, and BIG LIES.

Just because the NYT doesn’t spell it out in so many words for ya, doesn’t make it false.

It is the same exact policy of every other major western nation in the EU and NATO. Namely that countries should respect the human and civil rights of ALL of their citizens irrespective of race, religion or sexual orientation. This isn't some strange thing invented by the Obama Administration. Germany, Canada, the UK, Sweden, France, etc. all have the same exact approach to human rights.

But I still don't know what this (or abortion) has to do with Ukraine.

[Bootstrap]

I'm not making any judgement on NATO, just theorizing a possibility for Russia's actions.

Do you think that invading countries sometimes have really terrible motives? I don't hear you mentioning these as possibilities for Russia's actions. Money, fame, glory, power ... those kinds of motives seem to play a role in military dictatorships. What do you think the motives are for attacking the civilian population so viciously?

Have you read Putin's war speech? And fact checked it? Have you read about what Putin is allowing his news media to say about the "military action", and journalists being jailed for merely telling them their country is at war?

[temporal1]

Ken:
What is your point ..

Because obama articulated it IN the White House, and all IRL evidence reflects it, in the U.S. and oversees.
Just as he and hillary did in full support of for-profit abortion corporations. No one forced them, they voluntarily drew lines in the sand, and U.S. taxpayers have paid since.

Attempting to dismiss these mega-special interests as innocuous and “nothing to see here,” is destructive, and BIG LIES.

Just because the NYT doesn’t spell it out in so many words for ya, doesn’t make it false.

It is the same exact policy of every other major western nation in the EU and NATO. Namely that countries should respect the human and civil rights of ALL of their citizens irrespective of race, religion or sexual orientation. This isn't some strange thing invented by the Obama Administration. Germany, Canada, the UK, Sweden, France, etc. all have the same exact approach to human rights.

But I still don't know what this (or abortion) has to do with Ukraine.

it would be hard to improve on your description.

[Soloist]

I'm not making any judgement on NATO, just theorizing a possibility for Russia's actions.

I'm trying to understand why you keep mentioning this as though it were the only possible motive.

While looking for motives for a military invasion, do you think that invading countries sometimes have really terrible motives? I don't hear you mentioning these as possibilities. Money, fame, glory, power ... those kinds of motives seem to play a role in military dictatorships.

Have you read Putin's war speech? And fact checked it? Have you read about what Putin is allowing his news media to say about the "military action", and journalists being jailed for merely telling them their country is at war?

I'm trying to understand why fact checking Putin's nonsense is so important to you. I offered an explanation for military tactics. You offer whatever explanation you want and we can accept that we both have different ideas. Does it really matter that we have different idea's?

[Bootstrap]

You offer whatever explanation you want and we can accept that we both have different ideas. Does it really matter that we have different idea's?

I used to live in Berlin, a city surrounded by Soviet troops and tanks, going through checkpoints when I came or left. Without NATO, it would not have continued to exist. If you had speculated about all the possibly good reasons the USSR had for wanting to take over Berlin, that would not have come across well to me and my neighbors. I don't think that NATO and the USSR were equally bad in that situation. NATO only exists because the USSR was a very significant military threat to the existence of Western Europe and had taken over quite a few countries.

I don't think you mean it this way, but I think it has the effect of minimizing a military invasion rife with war crimes. Ukraine was no threat to Russia. NATO was no threat to Russia - except to its ability to threaten its neighbors and gain control over their governments.