Russia Russia Russia

[Nouseforaname]

 

[Billsandhorns]

26 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Government pensions?

 

 

I saw it in a report that I cannot find now. So I was most-likely mistaken 

[Robs House]

37 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

 

 

Reminds me of one of my favorite Dennis Miller bits.

 

(@0:37)

 

 

[Hedge]

23 minutes ago, Billsandhorns said:

I saw it in a report that I cannot find now. So I was most-likely mistaken 

 

It's been reported that this occurred. Whether the reporting is accurate or not, who knows?

 

From a few days ago:

 

 

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

9 hours ago, Nouseforaname said:

Once putin is gone, the lizards have free reign.

 

What's sad is you can't do anything but give a jokey response to the question.

 

A Unipolar world vs Monopolar world are the stakes. As has been made clear repeatedly by Biden and Putin's own statements. 

 

Again - is it worth 100,000s+ dead, a crippled European and American economy, and pushing the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation just to get involved in an ancient, eastern European blood feud that has no strategic, historic, or tactical value to the US or the west? Of course not. There's no purpose to our involvement other than to serve a regime change agenda in Moscow. 

 

And considering we have 20+ years of first hand evidence and facts which show the west is unable to successfully wage regime change operations without massive blowback, the fact that anyone other than mindless partisans or cheerleaders for the IC/MiC complexes thinks it's worth is bananas. 

 

Whether Ukraine breaks up or remains united changes NOTHING for the US or its western allies on any level. It does not make us stronger, it does not make us better protected, it does not "save democracy". However it shakes out, it's irrelevant to anyone other than those who profit from these situations. 

 

We have an administration in power right now that's waging war on its own people abusing the powers of the state more and more each day, an administration that is provably corrupt on the very issue of Ukraine - and they've taken a blowtorch to every diplomatic offramp possible. 

 

Sooner or later you have to stop and ask why. But you won't, because as you continue to demonstrate you lack the will and the IQ to think beyond your conditioning.  

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, Nouseforaname said:

 

Either way after that barrage that took out 30% of its infrastructure they will need a loan.  

 

"No one profits from endless war."

 

Signed,

 

The galactically stupid

[Nouseforaname]

7 minutes ago, Hedge said:

 

It's been reported that this occurred. Whether the reporting is accurate or not, who knows?

 

From a few days ago:

 

 

 

 

 

Pensions and social payments. I don't think we're talking about big cushy government pensions to be honest.

[Nouseforaname]

5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

What's sad is you can't do anything but give a jokey response to the question.

 

A Unipolar world vs Monopolar world are the stakes. As has been made clear repeatedly by Biden and Putin's own statements. 

 

Again - is it worth 100,000s+ dead, a crippled European and American economy, and pushing the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation just to get involved in an ancient, eastern European blood feud that has no strategic, historic, or tactical value to the US or the west? Of course not. There's no purpose to our involvement other than to serve a regime change agenda in Moscow. 

 

And considering we have 20+ years of first hand evidence and facts which show the west is unable to successfully wage regime change operations without massive blowback, the fact that anyone other than mindless partisans or cheerleaders for the IC/MiC complexes thinks it's worth is bananas. 

 

Whether Ukraine breaks up or remains united changes NOTHING for the US or its western allies on any level. It does not make us stronger, it does not make us better protected, it does not "save democracy". However it shakes out, it's irrelevant to anyone other than those who profit from these situations. 

 

We have an administration in power right now that's waging war on its own people abusing the powers of the state more and more each day, an administration that is provably corrupt on the very issue of Ukraine - and they've taken a blowtorch to every diplomatic offramp possible. 

 

Sooner or later you have to stop and ask why. But you won't, because as you continue to demonstrate you lack the will and the IQ to think beyond your conditioning.  

 

Glad to have you back.  I don't buy in the NWO bullshit and I've been following it for over twenty years.  Just as @Foxx once said, there would be no evidence that would ever make him change his worldview, why should I change mine?  Have you changed yours?

 

We're all stuck in the mud with our own confirmation bias but what bothers you is that I don't see it your way despite the thousands and thousands of posts trying to pin the dots through multiple threads.  

[Foxx]

16 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

@Foxx once said, there would be no evidence that would ever make him change his worldview

I don't believe those were my exact words but rather something to that effect, yes. 

 

To clarify, I am not opposed to changing my worldview but it would be a glacially slow change because there would have to be considerable indisputable mounting evidence that pointed it at a different belief. And to be honest, I have seen nothing but more support for my position than I have for the contrary.

[Nouseforaname]

7 minutes ago, Foxx said:

I don't believe those were my exact words but rather something to that effect, yes. 

 

To clarify, I am not opposed to changing my worldview but it would be a glacially slow change because there would have to be considerable indisputable mounting evidence that pointed it at a different belief. And to be honest, I have seen nothing but more support for my position than I have for the contrary.

Exactly, you only see evidence pointing to the contrary.  There’s a reason for that.

 

When I was 20, I shared your worldview and that of @Deranged Rhino.  

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, Nouseforaname said:

 

Glad to have you back.  I don't buy in the NWO bullshit and I've been following it for over twenty years. 

 

What? 

 

The debate between unipolarists and monopolarists has nothing to do with the "NWO". It's a governing concept of our world, and has been well before either of us were here. 

 

Putin wants a world where Russia does not have to bow to the will of the west. The US wants a world where they don't have to bow to anyone. Seems like they both want the same thing - but both can't exist simultaneously. Hence the conflict. 

 

1 hour ago, Nouseforaname said:

Just as @Foxx once said, there would be no evidence that would ever make him change his worldview, why should I change mine?  Have you changed yours?

 

My position and opinions change constantly when presented with new information. But that's completely irrelevant to the post referenced. 

 

Try it this way: Do you, Meazza, think it's worth 100,000+ dead Ukrainians, an imploded economy in Europe and the west, and the rising risk of nuclear annihilation to preserve the state of Ukraine? A country that has no strategic, historical, or tactical value to your country or mine. A country that's a cesspit of corruption where leaders from all over the west (and Russia) have gotten their beaks wet at the expense of the Ukrainian people. A country that's been Russian longer than it's been independent and who is home to millions of people who consider themselves Russian. Is it worth all the bodies, destruction, and economic cost? 

 

And if it is worth it, please explain why without resorting to "Putin will only take more land". 

 

And if it's not worth it in your mind, then why are you continually giving the benefit of the doubt to people who have proven themselves to not only be corrupt but actively nefarious on issues just like this (see: Iraq 2, Libya, and Syria)? 

[Foxx]

44 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Exactly, you only see evidence pointing to the contrary.  There’s a reason for that.

 

When I was 20, I shared your worldview and that of @Deranged Rhino.  

My core perspective was formed at a very young age. I was wronged by people in positions of power and there was not a damned thing I could do to change it, even though it was corrupt as hell. The line of those events severely altered the course of my life.

 

As such, I have an inbuilt sympathy for wrongs committed against humanity by those in positions of power. I know exactly what I am, who I am and how I got where I am today.

[Deranged Rhino]

Worth it? 

 

[Robs House]

Speaking of changing world views, I can look back over the last decade and see that my world view has changed dramatically. I've seen similar changes in several of you over that time, as well as a lot of public figures.  Hell, I paid money to see Jimmy Dore last night.  Who'd have ever seen that one coming?

 

I do agree that for thoughtful people it should be a slow process. It's actually concerning if your world view changes too quickly - I mean, are you recalibrating due to new information, or just getting swayed from one end to another? 

 

I was talking to a friend's wife who was recently red pilled. Several years earlier she unfriended me on FB for offending her progressive sensibilities. Now she sounds like Steve Bannon. She told me that one day she realized that she was in a cult, and now she gets it.  I didn't have the heart to tell her that she had just traded one cult for another. (I like her better now that she's in my cult).

 

That got me thinking. I've been mulling over this theory that we're all in a cult.  We call it by a lot of names: tribalism, nationalism, religion, etc.  But they all operate according to the same basic concept: a shared understanding of the factual world, transposed over a shared set of value judgments, combined to create a sense of belonging to a community.  One part that's interesting to me is the extent to which the community influences one's understanding of fact and values. 

 

It's not just a coincidence that a cohesive block supports the war in Ukraine despite being diametrically opposed to a very similar situation 20 years ago in the desert.

 

It seems bizarre to me that pro war people justify this, but then I think back to that conflict in the desert,  and some of those same arguments made sense to me back then. The logical conclusion that it's irresponsible to advocate for a war you're not willing to die in seems unassailable to me. But I remember thinking that was a cheap cop out argument back then.

 

I think the most important take away from this is that we should all be a little less certain in our convictions. We far overestimate our capacity for logic and reason. I'm not suggesting we all walk around like a bunch of &#%$ing nihilists, but it seems to me that we should be a lot more willing to embrace doubt, and when in doubt to err on the side of not killing people and blowing shit up. 

[Nouseforaname]

58 minutes ago, Foxx said:

My core perspective was formed at a very young age. I was wronged by people in positions of power and there was not a damned thing I could do to change it, even though it was corrupt as hell. The line of those events severely altered the course of my life.

 

As such, I have an inbuilt sympathy for wrongs committed against humanity by those in positions of power. I know exactly what I am, who I am and how I got where I am today.

And my worldview was from the working in large corporations where from the outside, you had the impression that it was this giant machine but when you walked in, you realize that it takes 3 weeks just to get access to a computer because no one could find the ticket.

 

Most of what we think is nefarious is just flat out incompetence. 

[Nouseforaname]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

What? 

 

The debate between unipolarists and monopolarists has nothing to do with the "NWO". It's a governing concept of our world, and has been well before either of us were here. 

 

Putin wants a world where Russia does not have to bow to the will of the west. The US wants a world where they don't have to bow to anyone. Seems like they both want the same thing - but both can't exist simultaneously. Hence the conflict. 

 

 

My position and opinions change constantly when presented with new information. But that's completely irrelevant to the post referenced. 

 

Try it this way: Do you, Meazza, think it's worth 100,000+ dead Ukrainians, an imploded economy in Europe and the west, and the rising risk of nuclear annihilation to preserve the state of Ukraine? A country that has no strategic, historical, or tactical value to your country or mine. A country that's a cesspit of corruption where leaders from all over the west (and Russia) have gotten their beaks wet at the expense of the Ukrainian people. A country that's been Russian longer than it's been independent and who is home to millions of people who consider themselves Russian. Is it worth all the bodies, destruction, and economic cost? 

 

And if it is worth it, please explain why without resorting to "Putin will only take more land". 

 

And if it's not worth it in your mind, then why are you continually giving the benefit of the doubt to people who have proven themselves to not only be corrupt but actively nefarious on issues just like this (see: Iraq 2, Libya, and Syria)? 

The NWO was related to a post where I believe the tweet mentioned the one or new world order and I tagged foxx. Whatever you want to call it, it’s the same to me.

 

Why is 100,000+ dead Ukrainians a number that keeps popping up? The most that has been referenced was 20,000, it’s still way too much but it’s not 100k. 
 

Why would I not put that Russia will use that as a predecessor for more expansion since it’s been my argument and the way I see things since the beginning ? It’s my argument.  I believe as Kasparov and some other writers have said over the years that you don’t let dictators and despots think that they can have an inch or they will take a mile.  I believe the same thing about China and Iran as well. 
 

This is how I see it, does that mean that I think Biden is the guy I want leading the fight? No.  I also think that going for regime change is a mistake, the change has to come from the inside, not the out.  
 

 

[Nouseforaname]

38 minutes ago, Robs House said:

Speaking of changing world views, I can look back over the last decade and see that my world view has changed dramatically. I've seen similar changes in several of you over that time, as well as a lot of public figures.  Hell, I paid money to see Jimmy Dore last night.  Who'd have ever seen that one coming?

 

I do agree that for thoughtful people it should be a slow process. It's actually concerning if your world view changes too quickly - I mean, are you recalibrating due to new information, or just getting swayed from one end to another? 

 

I was talking to a friend's wife who was recently red pilled. Several years earlier she unfriended me on FB for offending her progressive sensibilities. Now she sounds like Steve Bannon. She told me that one day she realized that she was in a cult, and now she gets it.  I didn't have the heart to tell her that she had just traded one cult for another. (I like her better now that she's in my cult).

 

That got me thinking. I've been mulling over this theory that we're all in a cult.  We call it by a lot of names: tribalism, nationalism, religion, etc.  But they all operate according to the same basic concept: a shared understanding of the factual world, transposed over a shared set of value judgments, combined to create a sense of belonging to a community.  One part that's interesting to me is the extent to which the community influences one's understanding of fact and values. 

 

It's not just a coincidence that a cohesive block supports the war in Ukraine despite being diametrically opposed to a very similar situation 20 years ago in the desert.

 

It seems bizarre to me that pro war people justify this, but then I think back to that conflict in the desert,  and some of those same arguments made sense to me back then. The logical conclusion that it's irresponsible to advocate for a war you're not willing to die in seems unassailable to me. But I remember thinking that was a cheap cop out argument back then.

 

I think the most important take away from this is that we should all be a little less certain in our convictions. We far overestimate our capacity for logic and reason. I'm not suggesting we all walk around like a bunch of &#%$ing nihilists, but it seems to me that we should be a lot more willing to embrace doubt, and when in doubt to err on the side of not killing people and blowing shit up. 

Since I live in Quebec, you could say that most here are to the left on most issues that would make your heads spin.

 

A cousin of mine once called « billy bob » as an insult based on my positions during the Romney / Obama election now telling me that they’re panicking about what is happening in their kids schools and that Putin needs to be assassinated.

 

😂😂 Yes people are changing.

[Robs House]

11 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Since I live in Quebec, you could say that most here are to the left on most issues that would make your heads spin.

 

A cousin of mine once called « billy bob » as an insult based on my positions during the Romney / Obama election now telling me that they’re panicking about what is happening in their kids schools and that Putin needs to be assassinated.

 

😂😂 Yes people are changing.

 

What's going on in the schools up there? You mean the trans stuff?

[Nouseforaname]

8 minutes ago, Robs House said:

 

What's going on in the schools up there? You mean the trans stuff?

Yes.  

[Robs House]

54 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Yes.  

Like they say, war makes for strange bedfellows. Appears that's true of culture wars too.