Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,288,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

Page 122 of 123 FirstFirst ... 2272112120121122123 LastLast
Results 9,076 to 9,150 of 9179
  1. #9076
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    NATO expands its territory when someone asks to join and NATO accepts. They are not invading and claiming anything.

    The difference is night and day.
    Yes, the difference is clear. Covert vs overt.

    Empires aren't just built by invasions over land. This is a geopolitical empire. Does that make it a better kind of empire? That's a different conversation.

    This is the view of some folk...

    Quote Originally Posted by twitter
    The war in Ukraine didn't start 5 days ago.

    It started in 2014 when the democratically elected Ukrainian government was overthrown by Obama in an illegal coup and replaced with an anti-Russian regime that would go on to commit daily war crimes against ethnic Russians in Donbass.
    Is that person right? I haven't got a clue what's really going on. I can only speculate, just like everyone else who consumes mostly western media. I don't trust our leaders any more than I trust Putin. This is why I find it hard to "take sides". Taking sides is nothing more than making a conscious choice of which propaganda to believe.

    If self-ruled peoples agree to band together to safeguard each other from a very large and militant neighbor, that strikes you as wrong?
    I didn't say it was "wrong", I said it was reckless for Ukraine to infuriate Russia. And I think it would be "more right" for Western countries to engage with Russia somewhat more diplomatically.

    I don't at all understand what sovereignty means to you. Not that I ever really did, but what I thought it meant can't be what it means if that's your opinion on other people's sovereignty.
    I thought I was quite clear on this. I'm not suggesting Ukraine should not have the sovereign right to seek partnerships with Russia's enemies. I'm saying that exercising that sovereign right is reckless. Ukraine has the sovereign right to launch missiles at Moscow, too. But doing so would also be reckless. Me saying they shouldn't fire missiles at Russia is not the same as me saying they shouldn't have the sovereign right to do so. It's me saying it's stupid. Attempting to join NATO is not quite so stupid as launching missiles at Moscow, but it's still a dangerous thing to do. It's still reckless.

    I only blame Putin for feeling like a cornered rat.
    I don't. I blame Russia, NATO and Ukraine.

    I blame Putin for the invasion, and all those who die, that blood is on his hands, but I blame all parties for allowing it to get to this point. Now it's a matter of who can resolve this conflict, or more to the point, if the Western will to resolve it really is there.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  2. #9077
    Quote Originally Posted by poop
    It really isn't. He said NATO never invaded another country, and he's right. There's no ifs or buts about it.
    I'm attempting to have a more nuanced conversation that what you're saying here.

    No, NATO has not literally invaded anywhere. Has it interfered with a nation's politics in order to slowly expand into that nation? If it has done so, does this equate to a bloodless invasion? What does it matter how an invasion happens if the end result is the same? And the end result is satellite states of a superpower.

    How is that a bad thing? If a peacekeeping organisation tries to get more members?
    Because it creates security problems for the stated enemy of this so-called "peacekeeping organisation". If NATO was genuinely peaceful in its agenda, it would not do its best to enrage Russia, it would instead seek peaceful relations with Russia. NATO's rhetoric is not that of a peaceful entity. Militaries are not peaceful by their very nature.

    Fine, that's what you think. But no-one agrees with you.
    Nobody here agrees with me, but many do. It's not like I'm the only person who thinks NATO is a problem.

    If you want to dismiss the downside of NATO, fair enough, but it leaves you concluding that the only reason Putin is doing this is for Soviet glory territorial gains. To fully realise this ambition, he must fight NATO eventually. I'd rather believe that NATO's relationship with Ukraine is a critical factor that can be resolved, because that's a more optimistic position.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  3. #9078
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Is it lost on you that Putin warned Ukraine if they sought entrance into NATO that he would war them?
    Is it lost on you that Putin warned NATO that if they accepted Ukraine into NATO, he would war them?

    Is it lost on you that Ukraine is not a member of NATO and Putin is warring them?


    Is it impossible that the aggressive expansion of any nation, not just Russia, is also protected against by NATO?
    Hmm... let me check... oh fuck. Ong. You'll never guess! NATO isn't exclusively anti-Russia. No shit. They're anti-aggressive expansion of territory into other countries. No shit.

    I wonder if Russia wasn't doing that aggressive expansion shit if they'd have to give a fuck about NATO?
    Who knows. It's certainly never been tried.



    As for that quote from twitter... yeah... don't trust random people on twitter.
    You're a grown-up. I can't believe I need to tell you this.

    Here's a good source of up-to-date information that is well-curated by people to keep it as factual as they can.
    https://www.reddit.com/live/18hnzysb1elcs/

    Despite it being reddit, it's actually v. good.
    They often post twitter posts, but those are from gov't officials and people on the ground in location.

    It doesn't mean that everything they post is real. They do post retractions and corrections sometimes, though, which is reassuring that they're at least trying.


    It's all hyper pro-Ukraine / anti-invasion, though. So grain of salt at getting a full picture of everything that's happening.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  4. #9079
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    What does it matter how an invasion happens if the end result is the same? And the end result is satellite states of a superpower.
    Well Ong, a military invasion tends to cause a lot more deaths than spreading democracy to other countries peacefully does.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Because it creates security problems for the stated enemy of this so-called "peacekeeping organisation".
    Every country has security problems. We're all surrounded by potential enemies. Treaties get broken all the time, we don't know what's going to happen tomorrow. It's an insecure world.

    The difference is when one country decides its security problem means it needs to wage war on another. That's a security problem for everyone else. It's basically that country saying our security problem means we have to bomb your country, occupy your territory by force, and kill your citizens.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    If NATO was genuinely peaceful in its agenda, it would not do its best to enrage Russia, it would instead seek peaceful relations with Russia. NATO's rhetoric is not that of a peaceful entity. Militaries are not peaceful by their very nature.
    You're reading minds again here. It would be better if you stuck to what is actually known.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    it leaves you concluding that the only reason Putin is doing this is for Soviet glory territorial gains. To fully realise this ambition, he must fight NATO eventually. I'd rather believe that NATO's relationship with Ukraine is a critical factor that can be resolved, because that's a more optimistic position.
    I don't know what is motivating Putin. But, he's got big problems if he thinks the solution to NATO is to invade every country that isn't already in it. That's just going to push more countries into NATO and eventually Russia will have all of Europe against it. Doesn't seem like a wise strategy to me.

    As for NATO "solving" the problem, you basically seem to be arguing they should stop caring about any country that borders Russia, and leave them defenceless to invasion. That then becomes a security problem for NATO. What if Russia keeps gobbling up little countries, then allies with China to divvy up the rest of the world between them? Are you then going to say "good thing we didn't try to oppose them with NATO?"
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  5. #9080
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    NATO isn't exclusively anti-Russia.
    Its very purpose is to counter Russian influence.

    As for that quote from twitter... yeah... don't trust random people on twitter.You're a grown-up. I can't believe I need to tell you this.
    I mean, I'm just showing there are different angles to view this from. There are different opinions, which are shaped by different peoples' differing experiences.

    They often post twitter posts, but those are from gov't officials and people on the ground in location.
    There's a key difference to how we use social media. I'm more likely to trust the sincerity of a random civilian than I am to trust a government official. I know not everything is to be believed, that's just one such message that I decided to quote to give a different perspective. Maybe it's a Russian bot, who knows? I find random Twitter a better source of information than the British Foreign Secretary.

    It's all hyper pro-Ukraine / anti-invasion, though. So grain of salt at getting a full picture of everything that's happening.
    I think most people, including Russian civilians, are anti-invasion. This isn't an act of self defence. They're not even pretending it is. Ukraine was not preparing to attack Russia. So there's no justification.

    But there are reasons. And we need to explore those reasons if we're to avoid a war between Russia and NATO. And by "we" I don't mean you, me and poop, I mean those with the power to make things happen. I don't want a war against Russia, that would be terrible. This is why I oppose NATO expansion. It makes war more likely, not less likely.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  6. #9081
    Quote Originally Posted by poop
    I don't know what is motivating Putin. But, he's got big problems if he thinks the solution to NATO is to invade every country that isn't already in it. That's just going to push more countries into NATO and eventually Russia will have all of Europe against it. Doesn't seem like a wise strategy to me.
    I happen to agree here. It seem Putin is making mistakes. He's making it more likely that countries will want to join NATO. I think it's costing him public support, the Russian people aren't behind this invasion. His strategy doesn't seem to be a very good one. But let's see what the endgame is. So long as Ukraine isn't in NATO, Putin is winning.

    As for NATO "solving" the problem, you basically seem to be arguing they should stop caring about any country that borders Russia, and leave them defenceless to invasion.
    That's not what I'm saying at all. We can still defend countries that aren't in NATO. We can give them special status that basically means we help repel an invasion, but we only deploy defensive weapons there and not offensive weapons like missile systems. I have no idea if Russia will tolerate this, no idea if we've explored this option.

    If Russia invades Finland, I think that is world war territory. I think we have to step in there. Finland is not NATO, so this isn't a treaty obligation. That's the point where it becomes obvious that Russia's ambitions are continental and not just regional. So I'm not suggesting that we abandon border nations that aren't in NATO.

    That then becomes a security problem for NATO. What if Russia keeps gobbling up little countries, then allies with China to divvy up the rest of the world between them? Are you then going to say "good thing we didn't try to oppose them with NATO?"
    Now you're showing the same paranoia that Putin has over NATO. You might finally be in a position to see it from their pov.

    You want NATO to be the stronger than Russia+China. Well I do too. I just don't want to see a world war happen because we pushed NATO too far.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  7. #9082
    On the one hand, Western media is saying Russia has not gained air superiority. On the other hand, there's a 40 mile military convoy edging towards Kyiv, and it's not being attacked.

    If this convoy isn't attacked, Russia has air superiority. Either that, or Ukraine are allowing a siege of Kyiv to happen. There is no reason for Ukraine not to unleash everything they have at this convoy, it is a massive invading force and, assuming Russia does not have air superiority, it's a sitting duck.

    wtf is actually happening, it's anyone's guess.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  8. #9083
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Air superiority means one side can readily shoot down the other side's airborn stuffs. It means one side controls everything that happens in the skies.

    Neither side has it AFAICT.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  9. #9084
    Why would a nation not have superiority of its own skies? And it's kinda like a vacuum, once Ukraine lose air superiority, Russia gains it. Maybe it's subject to an ongoing battle, but there's not much footage of dogfighting or planes getting shot down, and what I can find is from the first day of hostilities.

    Ukraine are calling for a no-fly zone. That's basically an admission they don't have air superiority. They won't get a no-fly zone. People are talking about this like it's an easy thing to do, like sanctions. A no-fly zone means direct NATO involvement, there seems to be a lot of people who don't understand quite how much of a game changer that is.

    Russia have apparently committed 75% of their land army to this invasion. That leaves them insanely exposed. Now would be a perfect time for internal forces to overthrow Putin. He's taking big risks here. I think this is more likely to trigger a Russian revolution than WWIII.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  10. #9085
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I don't have the post, but a US Congressman did tweet something to the effect of

    "People are calling for the US to enforce a no-fly zone. Let's be clear what that is. That is the US at war with Russia. Congress will not allow that."

    To which the immediate response was

    "Congress hasn't had any say about who the US wars since WWII."


    At least the people that need to know the consequences do know them.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  11. #9086
    Yeah, no-fly zone is basically WWIII. Doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

    Depending on how you define it, air superiority can mean you have some advantage in the air (i.e., more / better fighter planes than the enemy) or that you basically own it (enemy planes won't even try to enter). Not clear what the situation in Ukraine is, but I'd expect the Russians to have some level of superiority given they have a lot more planes than Ukraine does.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  12. #9087
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,738
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    "Congress hasn't had any say about who the US wars since WWII."
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  13. #9088
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,738
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Yeah, no-fly zone is basically WWIII. Doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
    What do you mean! It's just a-no-fly-zone! You make zone where there is no fly. Easy. Why NATO don't make?
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  14. #9089
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Apparently, US intelligence can't figure out why Russia doesn't have air superiority, either.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  15. #9090
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Apparently, US intelligence can't figure out why Russia doesn't have air superiority, either.
    It is a weird strategy. Like, they were hoping Ukraine would just collapse so they didn't want to damage it. Or something. Like the article said, it should have been shock and awe but instead it's more like buzz and ho hum, and people coming out of their houses to yell at soldiers.

    Edit: according to that article Russia is only using 75 planes? WTAF? They have 1400 in their air force. Who's in charge of this shitshow lol.


    Also, seems Russian state media did a whoopsy.

    https://twitter.com/christogrozev/st...25819054264328
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 03-01-2022 at 08:49 PM.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  16. #9091
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Is it out of the realm of possibility that Putin's been drinking his own Kool-Aid?

    His angle of the people of Ukraine being "oppressed by neonazis" I mean?

    Like, did he actually think he was going to roll up in there as a liberator that was greeted with flowers and vodkas all 'round?

    'Cause it would at least be a semi-plausible way for me to understand how it is that Russia - of all countries - hasn't accomplished a lot more. Not to mention the dozens of documented, but still alleged, war crimes.

    Like, if they thought the "liberated" Ukranian people would just be bringing them gas cans and sandwiches, then who needs logistics, right?
    Who needs a command structure?

    ***
    IDK if any of you read the transcript of Putin's TV speech. Ong's pretty right about the way he talks about NATO and just randomly flings shit at the US. Also I think ong did mention the hypocrisy of the US running around invading places and installing puppet gov'ts and Putin's indirect allusions to using nukes were pinned onto a statement that went (paraphrasing)
    "Look, the US did it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc., and it pissed me off, but I did not act like a bitch about it. Now I take Ukraine and you wont be a bitch about it. Reminder, I have nukes, so you can't just invade me like you did those other nations."


    ...

    My version of Putin is way better than irl Putin.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  17. #9092
    This "denazification" that Putin talks of is propaganda for the people of the West, ie the likes of you and me. Yes Ukraine has problems with Nazism, but Putin doesn't give a shit about that, and frankly the people of Ukraine are more concerned about Putin than Hitler.

    Putin might have underestimated the will of the Ukrainian people to resist, though it's not really a surprise to me. What is a surprise if that Russia seems to be holding back. Is that because the Russian military lack the will to carry out Putin's orders? Or is Putin himself holding back for some reason? If it's the former, then that's a clear sign of revolution on the horizon. A disobedient military can only mean instability.

    There's a third option, of course, and that is the world greatly overestimates Russia's military capability. Maybe Russia just aren't that strong. If Russia cannot subdue Ukraine, what hope do they have of winning a cold war against NATO?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  18. #9093
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    You think so? I've interpreted the nazi claims to be intended to sell this to the Russian citizens.

    The rest of the world knows that the nazi elements were only operating in isolated parts of Ukraine, mostly near the border with Russia.
    Many have alleged (though I've seen no proof) that those neonazi groups were supported by Putin all along.

    I think the information in the West is available to at least confirm the former statement. That there were indeed neonazi militant groups operating in Ukraine. The lie is that they had widespread control. The lie is that the Jewish Ukrainian President was supporting them.

    There is sense, if not truth, IDK, about Putin's assertion that the Ukrainian President is a puppet of the US. I honestly don't know anything about how he came to power.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  19. #9094
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    You think so? I've interpreted the nazi claims to be intended to sell this to the Russian citizens.
    This might be accurate, idk, but I kinda feel like it's aimed at the West. But maybe it is for his own people, not sure how much they believe it as a prime motivation. Surely everyone in Russia is subject to anti-NATO propaganda, so it makes more sense for him to use this to sell the war to his own people. When he even has sympathy in the West for the NATO problem, you'd think Russians would overwhelmingly be anti-NATO.

    The rest of the world knows that the nazi elements were only operating in isolated parts of Ukraine, mostly near the border with Russia.Many have alleged (though I've seen no proof) that those neonazi groups were supported by Putin all along.
    idk about this. I don't think a Jewish actor is a Nazi though, so I do not believe Ukraine is led by a Nazi. I don't think the pro-Russian rebels are Nazis either though, that sounds like propaganda to me.

    I think the information in the West is available to at least confirm the former statement. That there were indeed neonazi militant groups operating in Ukraine. The lie is that they had widespread control. The lie is that the Jewish Ukrainian President was supporting them.
    I don't believe information in the West any more then from the East. We have our own agenda here, we're pumping out propaganda too.

    There is sense, if not truth, IDK, about Putin's assertion that the Ukrainian President is a puppet of the US. I honestly don't know anything about how he came to power.
    He's a puppet only in the sense that he's pro-West, pro-NATO, which makes him a de facto puppet. He has the West's support because he is aligned with Western policy. So in that sense, he's a puppet. But not in the same way Belarus is a puppet of Russia.

    He came to power in 2019 after playing the role of President in a hugely popular Ukrainian TV comedy. He's not the guy who came to power in 2014 when the democratic government was overthrown. So he's not the guy who USA supported back then.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  20. #9095
    RT, basically the Russian BBC, are pushing the narrative that Putin's motivation is to protect the breakaway states from Ukrainian aggression, while also mentioning denazification. Not a word about NATO.

    https://www.rt.com/russia/551021-rus...ukraine-tower/

    For the lulz, the BBC have published this comment...

    In recent days, the authorities have sent threatening letters to a number of independent media demanding they take content about the war in Ukraine down or be blocked. According to the demands, media are not allowed to use words such as "war" and "invasion" and must not include "unverified" (i.e. not from official state sources) information about civilian casualties and killed and injured troops.
    RT specifically use the word "invasion" in that article above. They did avoid the word "war" though.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  21. #9096
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    RT, basically the Russian BBC
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 03-02-2022 at 12:05 PM.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  22. #9097
    Putin should never have poked the sausage.

    https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/st...95170167549953
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  23. #9098
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Did you see the video of the leader of Belarus being interviewed about how Putin promised to make him a colonel, but never did? The interviewer is openly laughing at him and asking follow up questions.

    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  24. #9099
    I wish we had some journalists like that.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  25. #9100
    That Belarussian guy is an absolute nutcase. As bad as Putin looks right now, I'd rather he have control of nuclear weapons than the Belarus leader.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  26. #9101
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  27. #9102
    This isn't great.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8

    Live footage of what is, apparently, the largest nuclear power station in Europe. There's a fire.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  28. #9103
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    It looks like the fire was an admin building / museum on the same property as the nuclear reactor.

    Firefighters have put the fire out.

    I hear radiation levels are normal.


    There are 6 reactors at that location, 3 of which are active. None of them were hit, AFAICT.
    Last edited by MadMojoMonkey; 03-03-2022 at 10:10 PM.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  29. #9104
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Saw that. Made me tear up.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  30. #9105
    Not a nuclear physicist, but would a reactor go up from a fire or shelling? I thought it needed some kind of nuclear reaction gone wrong.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  31. #9106
    Don't you remember Fukushima? All it takes it for the cooling systems to be compromised. A simple power cut can do that if the backup systems fail. In the case of Fukushima, the tsunami flooded the backup generators.

    Thankfully, this does appear to not be as serious as it could have been. Of course Russia is being condemned for this, but it's war, it might not have been Russia. If NATO are looking for excuses to get involved, a nuclear crisis would be an excellent way to do so. Not saying that's what I think happened, but I'm not ruling it out either. Attacking nuclear power plants is ridiculously stupid for any party to do, more so Ukraine or Russia themselves.

    Whoever did this is fucking nuts. Russia is the most likely culprit, for obvious reasons.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  32. #9107
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Don't you remember Fukushima?

    Obviously not.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    it might not have been Russia. If NATO are looking for excuses to get involved, a nuclear crisis would be an excellent way to do so.
    Yeah, maybe NATO secretly moved artillery and planes into Ukraine for just this purpose.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  33. #9108
    This is your problem poop. You won't consider the seemingly unlikely scenarios. False flag operations have been war tactics for as long as humans have waged war.

    Who stands to gain the most from this turning into a nuclear crisis? I don't think it's Russia.

    I don't think it's likely. But nor do I find it likely that Russia would intentionally target nuclear power plants with missiles so close to Russia. That seems absolutely nuts as a battle tactic.

    It's possible that the fire was a fail safe of some sort, a controlled means of destroying nuclear secrets in the event of a Russian invasion. But it could have been started with the sole intention of making this a nuclear crisis. I don't dismiss that idea. Or maybe Russia are just really fucking stupid. I don't dismiss that idea either.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  34. #9109
    I did consider it. I considered it and realised quickly that it was ridiculous. The problem here isn't that I don't consider ridiculous possibilities, it's that you are so badly wanting to find reasons to be against NATO that you're prepared to consider ridiculous possibilities as plausible.

    For one, you can't even answer the basic question: How? How does NATO shell a nuclear power plant in Ukraine? You think they have a secret unit with Russian uniforms, Russian artillery, and Russian planes that they secretly parachute into Ukraine to do this, and hope no-one notices?

    Nor can you answer the question: Why? Why would NATO want to poison Ukraine with nuclear waste? What is there to be gained from that?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  35. #9110
    it's that you are so badly wanting to find reasons to be against NATO that you're prepared to consider ridiculous possibilities as plausible.
    You have a funny way of interpreting others.

    How? How does NATO shell a nuclear power plant in Ukraine?
    They're saying it was shelled, but I'm yet to see footage of anything actually striking the building, even though there's a security camera pointing right at the site. So right now it's a simple fire. Anyone can star a fire.

    Nor can you answer the question: Why? Why would NATO want to poison Ukraine with nuclear waste? What is there to be gained from that?
    There is no poison. It's merely a controlled fire, right? Let's see if this incident is used as leverage.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  36. #9111
    I mean, you seem to think that because I suggest NATO might be looking for a reason to enter Ukraine, and that securing their nuclear power plants could be a pretext for doing this, that I imagine NATO as some special military force that is sneaking into countries to sabotage power plants. They can simply recruit Ukrainians to do it. NATO are already supplying weapons to Ukraine. It would be easy to sponsor an act of sabotage without actually entering the country.

    I'm just open to the idea that this isn't necessarily an act of Russian aggression. It's crazy for anyone to attack a nuclear power plant, so whatever happened is ridiculous. There is no non-ridiculous way for this to happen.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  37. #9112
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You have a funny way of interpreting others.
    Well, you've been trying to blame NATO since this thing started. Granted, at least you're aware enough to realise the country that is the aggressor deserves most of the blame, but still...



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    They're saying it was shelled, but I'm yet to see footage of anything actually striking the building, even though there's a security camera pointing right at the site. So right now it's a simple fire. Anyone can star a fire.
    Citation for bolded? Have you seen footage of the fire starting that resulted from something other than shelling?




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Let's see if this incident is used as leverage.
    So anything bad that happens in Ukraine is potentially a NATO covert op to use as "leverage." Leverage to do what?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  38. #9113
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I mean, you seem to think that because I suggest NATO might be looking for a reason to enter Ukraine, and that securing their nuclear power plants could be a pretext for doing this,
    If the invasion of a sovereign democratic country isn't a good enough pretext to send troops to Ukraine, the shellling of a nuclear power plant won't be either.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    They can simply recruit Ukrainians to do it.
    This is even more ridiculous than parachuting in a fake Russian army unit. What Ukrainians are going to set fire to their own nuclear plant?



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    NATO are already supplying weapons to Ukraine. It would be easy to sponsor an act of sabotage without actually entering the country.
    You have to find someone in the Ukraine who is actually willing to do this to their own country. You're basically asking them to commit treason. "Here, Ukrainian agent. Go blow up your nuclear station, kill thousands of your own citizens, and turn the surrounding countryside into a radioactive zone. You up for that? Good. Any questions?"



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I'm just open to the idea that this isn't necessarily an act of Russian aggression. It's crazy for anyone to attack a nuclear power plant, so whatever happened is ridiculous. There is no non-ridiculous way for this to happen.
    It's fine to entertain ideas, but you should at least think about what reason there would be to do it for NATO. So they can go in and start WWIII? You think that's what the West wants?

    Russia has a long history of not caring about people's lives. They sent in soldiers to Chernobyl when it happened to clean it up, knowing they were going to die. Not volunteers mind you, they were ordered to go in. Their favourite war tactic for hundreds of years has been to send so many men into the attack they overwhelm the opponent, even if it means taking huge casualties.

    You think Putin cares if more Ukranians die? He doesn't even care if his own soldiers die.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  39. #9114
    Well, you've been trying to blame NATO since this thing started. Granted, at least you're aware enough to realise the country that is the aggressor deserves most of the blame, but still...
    No. This is your binary way of seeing things.

    I've been assigning blame to both Russia and NATO.

    So anything bad that happens in Ukraine is potentially a NATO covert op to use as "leverage." Leverage to do what?
    Potentially being the key word. I never stopped believing 9/11 was an inside job of some sort. There are no limits to what people will do to preserve power. If they're not throwing nukes about, it's because nobody wants a nuclear wasteland as a prize for winning a war.

    Citation for bolded? Have you seen footage of the fire starting that resulted from something other than shelling?
    The link I posted above was a livestream of the security camera, but I didn't see it start, I tuned in after hostilities had ceased. It's no longer a live stream, and is up as evidence of the attack.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYUT36YGOh8

    See comments for a timeline of events.

    The fire appears to have started after a tank fired at the building. From the pov of this camera, the reactors appear to be behind the action, the focus of the attack is presumably where the power plant security are based.

    It's not a false flag. It's a straight up capture of a nuclear power plant. It doesn't look like the reactors were ever in danger of being hit, but it's still shit the bed action.

    But NATO are certainly capable of false flag events. I really don't know if they are itching for an excuse or not. I just don't trust NATO any more than I trust Putin. That might look to you like I'm looking to blame NATO, or taking Putin's side, but that's once again a binary way of looking at it.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  40. #9115
    If the invasion of a sovereign democratic country isn't a good enough pretext to send troops to Ukraine, the shellling of a nuclear power plant won't be either.
    You're wrong. A nuclear incident in Ukraine makes this a global problem, not a regional problem.

    Interesting you call them democratic. I wonder what you were saying when the democratically elected pro-Russian government was overthrown in 2013?

    This is even more ridiculous than parachuting in a fake Russian army unit. What Ukrainians are going to set fire to their own nuclear plant?
    It's a building on the outskirts of the site. At no point did the reactors look in danger. I'm suggesting that the motivation might exist, yes.

    "Here, Ukrainian agent. Go blow up your nuclear station"
    No. "Here, Ukrainian agent, go start a controlled fire and we'll use propaganda to make it look like the world just dodged a nuclear bullet".

    That's how I would imagine such an incident playing out.

    It's fine to entertain ideas, but you should at least think about what reason there would be to do it for NATO. So they can go in and start WWIII? You think that's what the West wants?
    Who knows? We threw nukes about to end WWII, and somehow convinced everyone it was for the greater good. We can take Russia out now before they get stronger, and convince the world it's for the greater good. Maybe it would be for the greater good. Maybe WWIII now is better than WWIII in 20 years.

    So yes, maybe NATO do want WWIII.

    Russia has a long history of not caring about people's lives.
    So does every country that ever went to war. You do know how many people NATO have killed, right? It's a lot. And those lives weren't lost defending NATO territory. They were lost defending NATO interests.

    I don't think I've ever once suggested that Russia are the good guys. But NATO are not the good guys either. The West are not the good guys. Our recent history shows we are no better than Putin. Ok we might revolve our leaders, but the same people pull the strings of government, which is why foreign policy never changes. USA foreign policy is UK foreign policy. It's NATO foreign policy. The West. We're basically USA's sphere of influence.

    I'd rather be on NATO's side than Russia's, but not because of any moral reason. Simply because I think NATO is much, much stronger.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  41. #9116
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Interesting you call them democratic. I wonder what you were saying when the democratically elected pro-Russian government was overthrown in 2013?
    Popular revolution. Will of the people. If you elect someone and he turns out to be a cunt, you have every right to throw him out rather than suffer him until the next election.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's a building on the outskirts of the site. At no point did the reactors look in danger. I'm suggesting that the motivation might exist, yes.
    Again, so every time something bad happens in Ukraine we should raise the idea that it might be NATO. School gets bombed? Hospital razed? Holocaust memorial blown up? Any of those might be NATO.

    You live in a tinfoil hat world.





    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    No. "Here, Ukrainian agent, go start a controlled fire and we'll use propaganda to make it look like the world just dodged a nuclear bullet".

    That's how I would imagine such an incident playing out.
    Right, starting a fire near a nuclear reactor is going to be the false flag that brings NATO into the war.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Who knows? We threw nukes about to end WWII, and somehow convinced everyone it was for the greater good. We can take Russia out now before they get stronger, and convince the world it's for the greater good. Maybe it would be for the greater good. Maybe WWIII now is better than WWIII in 20 years.

    So yes, maybe NATO do want WWIII.

    The US decision to use nukes cost 150k Japanese lives, and saved probably the same number of US lives that would have been lost if they had invaded mainland Japan. Not saying that's fair, but it's certainly defensible.

    But now NATO not only want WWIII to happen, they're prepared to pre-emptively nuke Russia lol.





    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    So does every country that ever went to war. You do know how many people NATO have killed, right? It's a lot. And those lives weren't lost defending NATO territory. They were lost defending NATO interests.
    My point is no country in the world has been profligate in spending its own soldiers' lives as Russia.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Our recent history shows we are no better than Putin.
    It's sad if you actually believe this.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  42. #9117
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    The fire appears to have started after a tank fired at the building.
    So, it was a NATO tank disguised as a Russian tank? Or, a Ukrainian tank they got from NATO with the express mission of setting fire to the building?

    Or, can you now admit the idea that NATO was involved is not supported by anything approaching reality?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  43. #9118
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    The meat of this conversation hinges on ong fiercely adhering to being skeptical about every piece of information coming out of the fog of war, whereas poopy wants to believe some of it is true.

    I'm kinda in awe of ong's ability to remain logically distant from this and to provide a fairly consistently independent perspective.

    Though it is frustrating, to have every piece of information you try to use to understand what's actually happening called into question.
    I feel that on poopy's side of things, too.


    I think ultimately ong's right. We can't trust any single piece of information, and the echo chamber of news can make it seem like something is coming from multiple sources when it's just a lot of repetition w/o fact-checking.

    But I also think that when a preponderance of evidence in live videos coming not only from the war zone but also from nearby countries receiving refugees does allow for a statistical accumulation of tenuous, untrusted information to congeal into something real.


    Like, I don't trust any word from any captured Russian soldier about them not knowing where they were going or why. That's easy to tell troops to say. I do trust that at least some captured Russians are being treated well and given access to some communication to call their families.

    It's impossible to know of all that was staged to paint a picture for me. I've seen only a few videos of that happening. It could be the reality on the ground is that never actually happens unless there's someone trying to film it to propagandize things.

    I can't know.

    It's a shitshow.



    ***
    That nuclear reactor is leagues more advanced than the Chernobyl reactor. It's not even the same kind of reactor.
    It would take a dedicated bombarding of the reactor itself (not nearby buildings) to cause a nuclear disaster. More accurately, it would take a bombarding of the containment chambers, which are underground and made from 1 m thick steel.

    A fire on the site cannot cause a disaster. A stray or ricochet bomb/missile is not enough.
    Those can kill the plant, but not release any nuclear materials.
    It would take a dedicated bombarding to release the nuclear materials.

    This is a modern nuclear plant, not a 60 year old one.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  44. #9119
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,325
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    This is a modern nuclear plant, not a 60 year old one.
    Well kinda, the construction started in 1980, though it's been modernized recently. Still wouldn't call it modern, but at least a generation ahead of Chernobyl. From what I was quickly able to gather, the PWR design that it uses is significantly safer than the Chernobyl RBMK, in that it should auto-shutdown in case of cooling failure or runaway reaction.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  45. #9120
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,325
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    'm kinda in awe of ong's ability to remain logically distant from this and to provide a fairly consistently independent perspective.
    Another take would be that if you're equally skeptical of all information, you're also equally willing to accept any information. Just as an example, later independent research into the Ukraine reporting on kills in 2014 was found to be pessimistic, the real losses for Russia were higher. So far the US has more or less confirmed the numbers they have been reporting.

    You can just assume that everyone is lying, and to an extent you would probably be right. There are still levels to this game, and Russia is finding all new levels at the moment. Ukrainian junkie neo-nazi administration has been bombing their own civilians? Ok yeah. There's skepticism and there's willful ignorance.

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1499783085055004680
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  46. #9121
    Quote Originally Posted by poop
    Popular revolution. Will of the people. If you elect someone and he turns out to be a cunt, you have every right to throw him out rather than suffer him until the next election.
    Sure. That's one theory. Another theory is outside parties funding and arming opposition forces. You believe what you want to.

    Again, so every time something bad happens in Ukraine we should raise the idea that it might be NATO. School gets bombed? Hospital razed? Holocaust memorial blown up? Any of those might be NATO.

    You live in a tinfoil hat world.
    Fair. I never took my tinfoil hat off after 9/11.

    But now NATO not only want WWIII to happen, they're prepared to pre-emptively nuke Russia lol.

    You're so trigger happy, wanting to argue with me, that you miss the point and instead assume I'm talking about nuking Russia.

    I didn't say NATO want WWIII to happen. I made the point that it's possible that NATO might think it's better to go to war with Russia now than sometime in the future. Think about that. It might be true. It might not be. Neither of us know. But think about it. Is it possible that Russia will be a more dangerous enemy sometime in the future? Of course. Does that mean we should try to stop it from happening? ANd if so, at what cost?

    This is what people in NATO will at least be informally discussing. Nobody "wants" world war, but some might think it's inevitable, and the only question is how much worse it will be if we don't act now.

    This is every bit as much as a concern as being paranoid about Putin invading Poland. One small miscalculation from either side could trigger world war. One misplaced rpg at a nuclear power plant. Right now we're as close to world war as we've been in my life.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  47. #9122
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo
    I'm kinda in awe of ong's ability to remain logically distant from this and to provide a fairly consistently independent perspective.
    lol thanks, but I think it's evidence of sociopathy. Maybe decades of the west declaring war on foreign lands has desensitised me.

    I'm in no doubt that a lot of the time, I'm blinded by my mistrust of the authorities. But I'm also in no doubt that people like poop are often blinded by their trust of the same authorities. There is always more than one side of the story. Always. And there are rarely any good guys when it comes to war.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  48. #9123
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    Another take would be that if you're equally skeptical of all information, you're also equally willing to accept any information.
    I think you just have to weigh the probabilities of things based on evidence. If you're willing to entertain every far-fetched scenario as being plausible, you're not doing thinking right imo. A lot of things are "possible" in the sense they can't be disproven; that doesn't mean you should believe them.

    Ong likes to paint me as this naive guy who continuously falls for gov't propaganda when it comes to NATO, but when I habitually call out gov't propaganda in the Brexit thread, he tells me to go back to Canada.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  49. #9124
    I've never once told you to go back to Canada. I've asked you why you don't. There's a very subtle difference between the two. One implies I don't consider you welcome here, the other is a rhetorical question intended to make the point that you obviously don't think the UK is such a bad place to be. It's very disingenuous of you to pretend that I'm doing the former, not the latter.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  50. #9125
    Everyone knows the "why don't you go back to where you came from?" line is a dogwhistle and it's disingenuous of you to pretend you're using it without knowing somewhere in the back of your mind that it is.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  51. #9126
    Nonsense. You know the context in which I've used such language, because we've had this discussion before. I can't help it if you deliberately take my comments out of context. What's that Latin phrase about bananas?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  52. #9127
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Brute' et two bananas

    I think.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  53. #9128
    Et tu la banane?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  54. #9129
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Right, right

    Brute' et tu la banane

    but I'm pretty sure it means "Brutus ate 2 bananas!"
    which is what Julius Caesar said when he was falsely murdered for stealing bananas

    if I remember my Roman history, I mean.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  55. #9130
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,325
    Location
    Finding my game
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Brute' et two bananas
    Credit where credit is due, this was gold.

    Also the Putin thread title gave me a chortle.
  56. #9131
    I was going to call it the "Rootin' tootin' Putin done started a-shootin' thread" but it seemed a bit OTT.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  57. #9132
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO


    We do a little trolling.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  58. #9133
    Biden gets asked twice today if he thinks Putin is a war criminal. He says "no," both times.

    After the second time he walks back the journalist and asks her if she asked him if he thought Putin was a war criminal. She says "that was the question, yes." He replies, "Yes, yes I do think he's a war criminal."

    Ok Gramps, bedtime.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  59. #9134
    Trump still bragging about passing the dementia test. I like this take on it.


    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  60. #9135
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO


    George W. Bush, while giving a speech to criticize Putin's invasion of Ukraine, made a Freudian slip and accidentally called himself out.

    “The decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq. I mean of Ukraine.”
    -GWB

    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  61. #9136
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,325
    Location
    Finding my game
    "He shrugged and said ”Iraq, too” under his breath. “Anyway. I’m 75,” the Republican leader added as the crowd erupted in laughter."

    I'm liking GWB more and more, especially compared to what followed. He's a dumdum with no business ever being the president, being pulled around by Cheney and Rumsfeld, but he seems like an affable fella.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  62. #9137
    If we're ranking world leaders on how much fun they'd be to have over for a beer, I agree GWB is right up there. And, we'd have to invite Boris and Donald as well. Funny how highly negatively that quality relates to one's competence as a leader.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  63. #9138
    I don't reckon Hitler would be much fun to have a beer with.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  64. #9139
    You don't have to be a fun guy to be a shitty leader. But it helps.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  65. #9140
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    So Trump's entire staff and his daughter ratted on him for the Jan 6. event.
    Basically everyone around him was all, "Dude. You lost. Suck it up." and drunk Rudi Giuliani is all, "make them stop counting votes ASAP, declare victory, allege fake votes and blame the damn libs."


    All the money Trump raised at the end of his campaign to "fight the stolen election" was put into a fund and, conspicuously, not used to support any legal actions to do with the election being stolen.

    I, for one, am totally shocked that a man like Trump would scam people who trusted him to do a job, then scurry off with all the dough.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  66. #9141
    And he's still a legitimate contender for POTUS in 2024, apparently. Rudy for Vice Prez!
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  67. #9142
    It appears Texas wants to secdee from the nation. #MTGA

    https://twitter.com/NotDevinsMom/sta...17772776181761
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  68. #9143
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,738
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    The jokes write themselves.
    This is not going to have any consequences, will it? Isn't this kind of a Homelander situation? If you don't get that reference you'll have to watch the first 3 seasons of The Boys and then get back to me. tl;dw: in the sense that actually catching him could be more dangerous than not catching him. He gets a hell of a lot of free airtime through this.
    Last edited by oskar; 06-22-2022 at 02:38 PM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  69. #9144
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,738
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreak...nding_idly_in/

    I'm quite amused by the mental gymnastics people go through to still go with the "good guy with a gun" narrative after this one. I always thought it was stupid, and I was never burdened by any positive notions about cops, and I am still dumbfounded at the level of ineptitude on display here.
    At some point they'll have to release the body cam footage... that'll be quite something.
    Last edited by oskar; 06-22-2022 at 02:40 PM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  70. #9145
    ^^ This is why they need to arm the teachers, so they don't have to wait for the cops to grow a pair. Better yet, arm the kids.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  71. #9146
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,787
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    SCOTUS overturned Roe v Wade - ending 50 years of abortion rights in the US.

    I mean... other countries looking better by the minute.

    When's the brain drain?
    Count me in on that one.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  72. #9147
    UK definitely looking for academics. Can't say the package is very attractive though.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.
  73. #9148
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,738
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    The Onion is not fucking around.

    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  74. #9149
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    SCOTUS overturned Roe v Wade - ending 50 years of abortion rights in the US.
    Truly shocking decision. A group of old, (probably) religious bigots think they can tell women what they can and can't do with their bodies, no matter what the circumstances.

    Let's hope more than a few states see sense.
  75. #9150
    US obviously has not learned from UK policy to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda in order to deter people trafficking.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61961871
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Boris until we have all the facts through an inquiry, police investigation, and parliamentary commission.
    also,
    I'd like to be called Lord Poopy His Most Gloriously Excellent.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •