Play Nice Random Chat Thread VII

[Chadwiko]

This can't be true. I was told by Val Keating that America and Israel were actively supporting ISIS???

 

[Chadwiko]

 

[LuvtheKangas]

A deal that Ukraine was going to agree to.

Why would they? As I said, it would validate a hostile invasion. What next, Russia invades Estonia and everyone agrees that they should be allowed to keep the territory invaded. Finland next? Georgia?

Why should an invasion be accepted by the international community?

 

[Val Keating]

This can't be true. I was told by Val Keating that America and Israel were actively supporting ISIS???

There’s different factions. They don’t all get along, just like how bikies get patched over. They can change their names, but they’re still the same. Still do the same shit.

Bloke collects terrorist groups like my father in law collects post stamps, and yes ISIS is one of them.

Military career
Allegiance	Current: Syrian Salvation Government(2017–present) Tahrir al-Sham (2017–present) Former: Al-Qaeda(2003–2016)[1] Al-Qaeda in Iraq (2004–2006) Mujahideen Shura Council (January 2006 – October 2006) Islamic State of Iraq (October 2006 - 23 January 2012) Al-Nusra Front (2012–2016) Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (2016–2017)

 

[Chadwiko]

There’s different factions. They don’t all get along.

Yes.

You're so close to getting it.

This is good progress!

 

[Chadwiko]

Why would they? As I said, it would validate a hostile invasion. What next, Russia invades Estonia and everyone agrees that they should be allowed to keep the territory invaded. Finland next? Georgia?

Why should an invasion be accepted by the international community?

Yup, this is spot on.

The 'Boris Johnson cancelled peace talks' story is a really good litmus test for determining someone's ability to think critically about a complicated situation. (It's also a good litmus test to tell if people support Russia and are just regurgitating Kremlin propaganda...)

A few key critical facts about these so-called "peace talks" that Boris Johnson supposedly torpedoed;

1. They never progressed far
2. Russia demanded that they keep Crimea, Donbass, and the other territory they'd taken
3. Russia demanded that Ukraine never join NATO
4. Russia alluded to demands that would have resulted in a pro-Russian puppet government being installed in Kyiv
5. Ukraine obviously was never going to agree to any of these demands as it was essentially a full surrender

The 'peace talks' ended not because Boris Johnson or anyone in the "west" told Ukraine to pull out. They ended because Ukraine was re-assured that support would continue and they didn't have to surrender.

That's a massive, massive difference.

 

[Chadwiko]

Just replying to this with a more updated and reliable source than a Tweet;

 

[Chadwiko]

Credit where it's due; Biden very good on this topic.

 

[Dan]

The ability of the Rogan pilled to believe the dumbest shit is worsening. It’s not just harmless world is flat nonsense. It’s misinformation pumped out by the Russian state. Often by people who exhaust themselves in accusing others of relying on MSM.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

He mocks flat earth conspiracies.

 

[Val Keating]

Why would they? As I said, it would validate a hostile invasion. What next, Russia invades Estonia and everyone agrees that they should be allowed to keep the territory invaded. Finland next? Georgia?

Why should an invasion be accepted by the international community?

Estonia is a member of NATO. That’s what will stop Russia from invading.

 

[Chadwiko]

Estonia is a member of NATO. That’s what will stop Russia from invading.

Oh man, you are so close to getting it.

 

[Val Keating]

Just one of the orchestrators admitted what anyone with common sense knows admitted it, yet some folks will probably still deny it.

 

[Chadwiko]

Just one of the orchestrators admitted what anyone with common sense knows admitted it, yet some folks will probably still deny it.

Anyone with actual "common sense" wouldn't ignore the first and most important part of that paragraph you posted;




Honestly? Yes, it is somewhat of a "proxy war". As that article says, this war provided an opportunity to support a country (Ukraine), and in doing so also has the added benefit of "debilitating" an adversary.

It's yet another reason why Putin was stupid to invade Ukraine. His invasion opened the gates for that. Nothing else.

 

[Val Keating]

Yup, this is spot on.

The 'Boris Johnson cancelled peace talks' story is a really good litmus test for determining someone's ability to think critically about a complicated situation. (It's also a good litmus test to tell if people support Russia and are just regurgitating Kremlin propaganda...)

A few key critical facts about these so-called "peace talks" that Boris Johnson supposedly torpedoed;

1. They never progressed far
2. Russia demanded that they keep Crimea, Donbass, and the other territory they'd taken
3. Russia demanded that Ukraine never join NATO
4. Russia alluded to demands that would have resulted in a pro-Russian puppet government being installed in Kyiv
5. Ukraine obviously was never going to agree to any of these demands as it was essentially a full surrender

The 'peace talks' ended not because Boris Johnson or anyone in the "west" told Ukraine to pull out. They ended because Ukraine was re-assured that support would continue and they didn't have to surrender.

That's a massive, massive difference.

Russia demanded that they didn’t join NATO because it was against the original treaty, which tbf has been pushed far, far beyond west Germany where it was originally meant to stop.

Anyone with actual "common sense" wouldn't ignore the first and most important part of that paragraph you posted;

View attachment 2184489


Honestly? Yes, it is somewhat of a "proxy war". As that article says, this war provided an opportunity to support a country (Ukraine), and in doing so also has the added benefit of "debilitating" an adversary.

It's yet another reason why Putin was stupid to invade Ukraine. His invasion opened the gates for that. Nothing else.

You don’t think pushing NATO closer to Russia played a role?

 

[Chadwiko]

Russia demanded that they didn’t join NATO because it was against the original treaty, which tbf has been pushed far, far beyond west Germany where it was originally meant to stop.


You don’t think pushing NATO closer to Russia played a role?

You said it yourself above; the only thing preventing Russia from invading Estonia is NATO.

If Russia was a good and trustworthy neighbour, then the countries near Russia wouldn't want or need to join NATO.

And yet... here we are.

Once again, the blame lies with Russia, and not NATO.

 

[Chadwiko]

Russia demanded that they didn’t join NATO because it was against the original treaty, which tbf has been pushed far, far beyond west Germany where it was originally meant to stop.

Oh, and by the way - this is wrong.

It's a lie that has been pushed by Putin, but is factually incorrect.

In fact, the literal opposite is true, because in 1997 Russia and NATO signed a treaty where they specifically agreed to recognise the rights of former Soviet/"Eastern Bloc" nations to join NATO.

‘There was no promise not to enlarge NATO’ - Harvard Law School

Robert Zoellick, the U.S. diplomat who helped negotiate the end of the Cold War, says Vladimir Putin’s claims about Ukraine are part of a disinformation campaign.

hls.harvard.edu

So that argument holds zero weight.

 

[Val Keating]

You said it yourself above; the only thing preventing Russia from invading Estonia is NATO.

If Russia was a good and trustworthy neighbour, then the countries near Russia wouldn't want or need to join NATO.

And yet... here we are.

Once again, the blame lies with Russia, and not NATO.

Do you think America would let Russia set up military bases in Canada or Mexico?

 

[Val Keating]

Oh, and by the way - this is wrong.

It's a lie that has been pushed by Putin, but is factually incorrect.

In fact, the literal opposite is true, because in 1997 Russia and NATO signed a treaty where they specifically agreed to recognise the rights of former Soviet/"Eastern Bloc" nations to join NATO.

‘There was no promise not to enlarge NATO’ - Harvard Law School

Robert Zoellick, the U.S. diplomat who helped negotiate the end of the Cold War, says Vladimir Putin’s claims about Ukraine are part of a disinformation campaign.

hls.harvard.edu

So that argument holds zero weight.

It doesn’t matter. That was before Putin managed to take control of Russia from the gangsters that ran it before he took power.

Your hawkishness is astounding, you claim to be a leftist, but the truth is, you are a limousine liberal, gobbling up the US party line. You refuse to look at anything from the opposition viewpoint you hold.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Do you think America would let Russia set up military bases in Canada or Mexico?

Or cuba

 

[Val Keating]

Or cuba

Exactly. Yet, apparently Russia is supposed to allow themselves to be surrounded by adversary bases and do nothing about it.

Edit- bloody autocorrect

 

[Bojan KantKick]

 

[giantroo]

 

[Chadwiko]

Do you think America would let Russia set up military bases in Canada or Mexico?

Or cuba

Exactly. Yet, apparently Russia is supposed to allow themselves to be surrounded by advisory bases and do nothing about it.

Russia had bases in Cuba until 2002. They withdrew because they didnt want to keep spending the money on them.

So... yes?

It's adorable how you keep trying to defend and justify Russia's actions but then get offended when you learn you have a reputation on this forum as a Pro-Russian shill.

 

[bengrina]

Interested to get some more educated views on the situation in Syria. My wife and her family are Alawi Muslims. Given Assad is also Alawi a lot of her family are quite upset. My wife mentioned that Assad had mosques and churches throughout the country? They are really concerned that family members in Syria are possibly going to be killed based purely on religious ties.

 

[Chadwiko]

It doesn’t matter. That was before Putin managed to take control of Russia from the gangsters that ran it before he took power.

The "gangsters" that held the only genuine free elections in Russia in the last 120~ years?

The "gangsters" that brought Russia closer to the rest of the world than ever before, with the highest levels of international cooperation and partnership that we had ever seen?

The "gangsters" that were in charge in Russia for the most peaceful and safe decade over the last century?

The "gangsters" that were the unquestionably best Russian leaders in terms of human rights for Russians that we had ever seen?

I think you're revealing your bias here a bit, Comrade...

And sure, Yeltsin and his party were far from perfect. There was definite corruption and abuse of power.

But compared to Putin?! It's not even close.

Under Putin's literal dictatorship, we have seen the rise of the uber-wealthy Russian oligarchy, horrible human rights abuses, tyrannical behaviour in Georgia, Chechnya, Ukraine... etc etc.

But sure...

Your hawkishness is astounding, you claim to be a leftist, but the truth is, you are a limousine liberal, gobbling up the US party line. You refuse to look at anything from the opposition viewpoint you hold.

Mate, it's hilarious that you're the one who throws out the "you refuse to look at anything from the opposing view" line. You literally and consistently justify and defend Russia's invasion of another country, to the point where you LITERALLY posted and agreed with a tweet saying that even if Russia NUKED Ukraine, you still wouldn't blame Putin.

Geez... get a mirror, mate.