Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

whYNOT

Regulars
  • Posts

    3668
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    112

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    whYNOT got a reaction from Jon Letendre in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    What could go wrong? So the collective west for years builds and supplies the Ukraine regime's military powers in order to beat (a legitimately defensive) Russia - a nuclear superpower, btw - and expects that Russia will just fade away at the first sign of resistance. But they haven't, instead are beating Ukraine at conventional warfare; so you send more armour and 'advisers' and consider sending F-16 fighters, next. What could possibly go wrong?
    Barack Obama said it exactly in 2016: "Russia has escalatory dominance". I.e: In their particular location, they are more than able to meet and raise the stakes at anything thrown at them by foreign forces, and could probably defeat a Nato alliance Army. And then what? How does Nato respond to losing? Obama's caution forgotten by the tough-acting kids in charge of the kindergarten now. You may go to war with Russia if you wish, on the strength of 'noble principles', but do so at your country's, Ukraine's - and the global - peril. The absolute sacrifice, iow. Spare me a lecture on what is "immoral".
    You demonstrate little conception of reality outside the MSM bubble, you think reality must conveniently conform to a priori, acontextual principles. 
     
     
  2. Thanks
    whYNOT reacted to Jon Letendre in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    The sooner the Russians complete the encirclement of Bakhmut, liquidate all the fighters within and move on to eliminating Zelensky's Biden-blackmailing human sacrificing clown regime -- the better for Ukrainians, Russians and Americans.
  3. Like
    whYNOT got a reaction from Grames in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Excerpt:
    "Russia refuses to accept a negotiated outcome that entails its retreat from the Donbas or Crimea. Moscow now insists that Ukraine accede to the suicidal Minsk II agreement that would effectively convert Ukraine into a confederation whose sovereignty could be punctured at any point by the Donbas, much as the confederacy attempted to destroy the Union in the American Civil War 150 years ago. Yet it remains the case that the real problem with the Misnk II accords is that Russia has never even bothered to hide its refusal to comply with it in any form. Thus its demands are without merit and a dodge to avoid compliance. At the heart of this crisis is the fact that Russia still cannot accept Ukraine’s de jure independence as a sovereign and separate state. In Moscow, power rests on the notion of an imperial state to whom all other members of the former Warsaw Pact must surrender part of their sovereignty".
    I maintain "propaganda" on this article. A load of assertions creating a 'flipped narrative'. Perhaps and unsurprising not being mentioned much in the msm, but in the past year, ex-Ukraine President Poroshenko, the ex-Chancellor Merkel, and ex-President Hollande have each confirmed independently that their meetings at Minsk were never meant to bear fruit, "suicidal" for Ukraine - or life-saving for the Donbass.
    They reiterated the same duplicitous purpose, Minsk in 2014/15 was "to buy time" to build the Ukraine Army for - obviously - wiping out the Donbass resistance - and its coming, anticipated encounter with the Russian Army.
    As everyone should know, Zelensky was elected on the platform "peace in Donbass": he backed down to threats from his ultra-nationalists and continued the (civil) war with a vengeance. Not the only time, he again backed down to Johnson/Biden just before beginning negotiations with Russia in March that could have ended hostilities (by simply implementing "Minsk" and declaring Ukraine neutrality). He is a traitor to his country. He sacrificed his people to Western blandishments and promises of a glorious victory over Russia...
     
  4. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Excerpt:
    "Russia refuses to accept a negotiated outcome that entails its retreat from the Donbas or Crimea. Moscow now insists that Ukraine accede to the suicidal Minsk II agreement that would effectively convert Ukraine into a confederation whose sovereignty could be punctured at any point by the Donbas, much as the confederacy attempted to destroy the Union in the American Civil War 150 years ago. Yet it remains the case that the real problem with the Misnk II accords is that Russia has never even bothered to hide its refusal to comply with it in any form. Thus its demands are without merit and a dodge to avoid compliance. At the heart of this crisis is the fact that Russia still cannot accept Ukraine’s de jure independence as a sovereign and separate state. In Moscow, power rests on the notion of an imperial state to whom all other members of the former Warsaw Pact must surrender part of their sovereignty".
    I maintain "propaganda" on this article. A load of assertions creating a 'flipped narrative'. Perhaps and unsurprising not being mentioned much in the msm, but in the past year, ex-Ukraine President Poroshenko, the ex-Chancellor Merkel, and ex-President Hollande have each confirmed independently that their meetings at Minsk were never meant to bear fruit, "suicidal" for Ukraine - or life-saving for the Donbass.
    They reiterated the same duplicitous purpose, Minsk in 2014/15 was "to buy time" to build the Ukraine Army for - obviously - wiping out the Donbass resistance - and its coming, anticipated encounter with the Russian Army.
    As everyone should know, Zelensky was elected on the platform "peace in Donbass": he backed down to threats from his ultra-nationalists and continued the (civil) war with a vengeance. Not the only time, he again backed down to Johnson/Biden just before beginning negotiations with Russia in March that could have ended hostilities (by simply implementing "Minsk" and declaring Ukraine neutrality). He is a traitor to his country. He sacrificed his people to Western blandishments and promises of a glorious victory over Russia...
     
  5. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    The latest (2019) and predictive film by Oliver Stone, some rehashed evidence, some new.
    https://youtu.be/lRivDlc_hz4
     
  6. Like
    whYNOT got a reaction from Jon Letendre in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    To be pro-Western/American, borrowing Twain's phrase --yes, when they, the government, "deserves it".
    A government is not to be obsequiously obeyed, "since they are ¬the Government¬, after all!".
    An institution is only as "good" as the individuals charged, elected, appointed to running it, an objective good. ("Of objective value? For whom and for what purpose?").
    The reputation of the USA doesn't absolve it from corrupt men and women with evil ambitions in power. Among all of them and their European counterparts I've been watching, Putin and Lavrov are emerging as the only sober adults, not disconnected from reality, in the room.
    Every present western gvt. does not "deserve it". Their leaders reveal themselves to be morally bankrupt and cognitively deficient, and some, probable militant sociopaths. In covert conspiracy, they premeditated and deliberately prolong this war for material and geopolitical gains, have ducked using their certain influence to curtail it, and are now running about like headless chickens because it didn't turn out as expected, and all they have to offer is more of the same poison ... and hope *anything* turns up to save their embarrassment: Like a little nuke.
    They have brought the world to the brink of holocaust - because they mustn't be seen to 'lose face'. Where did these second-hander bureaucrats and corporatists and media chiefs earn the right to tinker with the lives of Ukrainians  - or the present and future world population?
    Just who do they think they are? Where did they find their authority?
    What's occurring is the end game, anticipated by some clear thinkers then, which began 30 years ago with the assurance "Not one more inch eastwards", and every action after that has displayed utter contempt by the West for Russia and its concerns. The Western govt's deserve whatever they will get now - their people, even useful idiots, don't.
    Many as you, are obedient to the State whatever it does. A reminder, "Statism is the cause of war - statism *needs* wars". You all give the state the sanction it needs.
     
     
  7. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    To be pro-Western/American, borrowing Twain's phrase --yes, when they, the government, "deserves it".
    A government is not to be obsequiously obeyed, "since they are ¬the Government¬, after all!".
    An institution is only as "good" as the individuals charged, elected, appointed to running it, an objective good. ("Of objective value? For whom and for what purpose?").
    The reputation of the USA doesn't absolve it from corrupt men and women with evil ambitions in power. Among all of them and their European counterparts I've been watching, Putin and Lavrov are emerging as the only sober adults, not disconnected from reality, in the room.
    Every present western gvt. does not "deserve it". Their leaders reveal themselves to be morally bankrupt and cognitively deficient, and some, probable militant sociopaths. In covert conspiracy, they premeditated and deliberately prolong this war for material and geopolitical gains, have ducked using their certain influence to curtail it, and are now running about like headless chickens because it didn't turn out as expected, and all they have to offer is more of the same poison ... and hope *anything* turns up to save their embarrassment: Like a little nuke.
    They have brought the world to the brink of holocaust - because they mustn't be seen to 'lose face'. Where did these second-hander bureaucrats and corporatists and media chiefs earn the right to tinker with the lives of Ukrainians  - or the present and future world population?
    Just who do they think they are? Where did they find their authority?
    What's occurring is the end game, anticipated by some clear thinkers then, which began 30 years ago with the assurance "Not one more inch eastwards", and every action after that has displayed utter contempt by the West for Russia and its concerns. The Western govt's deserve whatever they will get now - their people, even useful idiots, don't.
    Many as you, are obedient to the State whatever it does. A reminder, "Statism is the cause of war - statism *needs* wars". You all give the state the sanction it needs.
     
     
  8. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Scholar, Glenn Diesen one of the most balanced, independent voices out there.
    https://www.rt.com/russia/561135-russia-nato-ukraine-propaganda/
  9. Like
    whYNOT reacted to Grames in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    The U.S. has always been an empire, both legally and culturally.  Ever encounter the principle of "Manifest Destiny" in American history?  What is new is the degenerate corruption, arrogance and recklessness of the de facto ruling class.  It is a consequence of the ending of the long Cold War with the Soviets, who by simply existing at least kept the American leaders somewhat in check.  It is now a unipolar political world, a world organized around only one great power, America.  There is no one and nothing to dispel the illusions and self-deceptions of the American leaders, except the eventual disasters that bad policy creates, and not even then as long as some other country does the suffering.
  10. Like
    whYNOT reacted to Leonid in Trying to come up with an argument that demonstrates that to deny the existence of objective reality is also to deny the existence of mind. Can anyone help?   
    Mind is secondary to existence since mind is a faculty of awareness. To be aware one should be aware of something. To deny existence is more than to deny mind. It’s a contradiction in terms since the process of denial is an action of mind. If there is no existence than there is no mind and one can’t deny anything.
  11. Like
    whYNOT got a reaction from tadmjones in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    We've been over that too. Democracy cannot be pressured on countries, they, the majority within them, need to discover its benefits for themselves - ideologically - otherwise the commitment to it will not last from one generation to the next. Then the slippage back to authoritarianism.
    No more can it be "making the world safe for democracy" - delivering "Democracy" around to the natives, missionary-style. The system is not new on any, any more.
    Additionally, and generally in the West, the exemplars of the system aren't as dedicated as they once were. Yet they keep up the pretensions of nominal adherence to democracies.
    It's becoming more today like making the world safe for plutocracy. Or corporatocracy, perhaps.
  12. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    You were "not as clueless" as I was. You kept yourself "in the light" - Was all you have proferred about the Maidan and Donbas events.
    I have finally figured btw, your demands for "evidence" is a cover for evasion.
     
    Not clueless, you must have overlooked or were not allowed to know of a few minor details that don't put many Ukrainians in a good light:
    Graphic content.
     
  13. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    The opposite of altruistic, Russia has proven they will resist sacrificing themselves. A high cost to pay, but rational if the values gained are hierarchically higher.
    Please, let's not be naive, there exist no other "groups" which could and would have enforced a just solution to NATO expansion, NATO building a greater Ukraine army, Ukraine's neutrality, the failed MInsk accords, etc. --in short: Russia's security concerns.
    The extreme and insane efforts we see by NATO et al to assist the Ukraine forces in defeating Russia while avoiding an armistice, even when it is looking very bad for Ukraine, should remind anyone that this is all being done by NATO for a *non*-NATO member (I don't know, if legally)--now imagine what they'd do for Ukraine within NATO!
    A permanent neighboring presence with a large and well trained NATO military contingent - in addition, being able to base ICBM's near the border any time they wanted, and any other measures intended to destabilize and threaten Russia.
    Those conditions ~would~ pose the "existential threat" Putin is always on about; a ploy he used as self-justification for his belligerence- say the media pundits. 
     Except he predicted correctly. NATO plus Ukraine are plainly demonstrating their enmity to Russia, for all time.
    To avoid that certain scenario in years to come, a rational far-sighted leader would know to act now.
    Among the many facts to interpret, that I consider Russia "a legitimate government" or not, is of little importance.
    Any country's gvt. has the right and responsibility to defend its citizens, in this case, pre-emptive self-defense, even if from another attacking country with 'better' governance and liberties. The legitimacy of the Kyiv Gvt. has little to boast about on that basis. One cannot claim "self determination" for one 'group' in a nation, forcibly denying the right to another.  
    What matters, do the Russian people consider it legitimate? Does Putin and his Gvt. policies represent their interests? Do they back him?
    On his approval rating still in the 80's, it seems they do. Many I think don't like this war (most don't hate the Ukrainian 'enemy' anything like they hate Russians), but I have noticed Russians articulate their understanding that there wasn't another way, no other options to external pressures, and simply want the war over quickly.
  14. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    How westerners were permanently indoctrinated into a unified, collective mind (in a monolithic, 'alternate reality').
    A Swiss study:
    "The Propaganda Multiplier"

    https://swprs.org/the-propaganda-multiplier/
     
     
  15. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    " Docudramas" are not usually for me, but the film looks to my slight experience an authentic taste (to you warhawks present) of the micro realities in battle. Features the "Yellows" versus "Whites", neither shown in particular moral preference; while propagandist certainly for the infamous private Wagner Group. If war is hell, so you don't enter it lightly--but when you do, all bets are off.  I aim that, of course, at the Western alliance, who initiated and made the conditions for war unavoidable, and who tellingly shunned any diplomatic steps to stop it. The hypocrites who pretty it up and glamorize their Ukraine "heroes" (to their detriment) to justify prolonging and dangerously expanding the conflict for foul purposes.
    "200's" are killed, "300's" the wounded.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4ZxWaRHhnQ
     
  16. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    The American foreign policy seems ruled by pragmatism. My enemy's enemy is my friend. (No, not necessarily). In that way, it has supported and enlisted some dubious political, ideological types in surrogate conflicts against other dubious types. For now it's utilizing Ukraine to damage/weaken/change regimes/etc. in Russia (with an eye on China). It should have left both alone, now it is clear. Some like me maintain that very few of those foreign "entanglements" (Thomas Paine?) have been in the US rational self-interest. And given those many more detractors an "imperialist US" reputation.
  17. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Laid out quite clearly below.
    The more one finds out and interprets all these events, the greater the realization that combined Ukraine, NATO, the US, UK and EU did everything, pre-22, a foot short of making a full declaration of war on Russia.
    While yet maintaining their "plausible deniability" with "unprovoked, unjustified invasion" if it went haywire.
    Their pet media publicists covering for them - to keep their loyal people onside and riled up at the wrong instigator.
    Russia was sent an engraved invitation they couldn't refuse, to a war party.
    https://strategic-culture.org/news/2022/12/09/merkel-spills-beans-how-us-and-nato-partners-planned-war-ukraine-against-russia/
  18. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Russell hits some marks
    https://youtu.be/CLF7P4T2AC8
     
  19. Like
    whYNOT got a reaction from dream_weaver in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    I think "Empire" is often used loosely and metaphorically, the USA isn't one. It might appear to act like one.
    Dramatizing 'the War between two Empires' seems how neocons and Leftist militants (dangerously) view their world. It looks to me they'd relish a return to the Evil Empire, so it can be soundly defeated in war this time.
    We should be more precise.
    empire. noun. em·pire ˈem-ˌpī(ə)r. : a major political unit with a large territory or a number of territories or peoples under one ruler with total authority. especially : one having an emperor as chief of state. I suggest the US "hegemony".
    heg·e·mon ˈhe-jə-ˌmän : something (such as a political state) having dominant influence or authority over others : one possessing hegemony
     
  20. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    But no. One can't ignore that Putin was very slow to action. If he'd chosen to expand a Russian Empire he could have invaded 1. soon after Ukraine's independence in 1991 2. after the Kyiv coup. 3. shortly after the Donbas civil war began.
    The first two times, the country's forces were weak and could have been defeated easier.
    But very apparently he endorsed the (fraudulent) Minsk attempts--and for 8 years waited to see if there was a peaceful resolution.
    Only did he invade when (his Intel would have informed him all along) NATO had already strengthened the UAF and he no longer had the luxury of delaying further. That, or allow the Donbass to be lost. 
    None of this affirms a move and intention by "the Russian Empire" -- the opposite, a reluctance to intervene. 
  21. Thanks
    whYNOT got a reaction from Grames in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    ?? Why must I be the one tasked with an opinion?
    An aside (may be relevant):
    "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it". Mark Twain
    IF, as I believe, NATO is inextricably tied to "American and Western interests"  I am of the opinion the USA should prepare to leave NATO.  (After this is over). Not that I can see it happening soon. But the binding "encumbrances" elsewhere are not in American - rational - interests.
    The big picture I hear from geopoliticians is nearing the close of "a unipolar world" and the "rules -based order". Dominated and led by the USA during this post-Cold War period, for which I and most in the world would be thankful. But it has served its critical purpose - all good things must end.
    I think their analysis is true, and the war was a catalyst for this change, for better or worse.
    (They enthuse about the emerging multi-polarity of neutral, non-aligned, non-western countries, which would not support and/or condemn the West/Ukraine or Russia on issues of sanctions etc. . I have doubts).
     
     
     
  22. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    At least the defense minister put this unmentioned but widely-accepted fact out in the open. Ukraine is de facto in NATO, (and has been pre-invasion). Look out for his emotional blackmail - the guilt-trip, which without fail, accompanies the altruist doctrine.  The western support capacity, arms, instruction, covert troops, cash -etc.  (they die, we pay) ever digging the West into a deeper hole, demonstrates: Guilt works.
    https://sputniknews.com/20230107/bombshell-admission-ukraine-is-carrying-out-natos-mission-against-russia-defense-chief-says-1106118578.html
  23. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Taken from an article by Joshua Cho, early 2022; Putin explicitly states his invasion rationales. Yeah, the Donbass features as one.
    A widely unpublished essay, the reasons will become clear.
     
    "Recreating empire?"
    An oft-repeated corollary to the Western media’s frequent Hitler comparisons is that there was little point before the invasion in addressing Russia’s security concerns surrounding NATO expansion and the US’s unilateral abandonment of arms control treaties, since Putin supposedly wanted to recreate the Soviet Union or Russian Empire despite his repeated explicit denials. Putin’s alleged belief that the modern state of Ukraine has no right to exist, the argument goes, is proof of his supposed Hitlerian expansionist ambitions.
    “Talk of ‘de-Nazification,’ while absurd on a factual level, is nonetheless revealing. It tells us that Putin is acting on his long-held belief that the Ukrainian government has no right to be independent. It hints at his ultimate goal: to transform Ukraine into a vassal of a new Russian empire,” wrote Zack Beauchamp for Vox (2/24/22).
    The two sources Western media most cite to make this claim are Putin’s speech (2/21/22) recognizing the independence of the separatist Donbas republics, and an essay he wrote last year (7/12/21) titled “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians.” Vox’s Zack Beauchamp (2/24/22) wrote that Putin “believes that Ukraine is an illegitimate country that exists on land that’s historically and rightfully Russian.” Ha’aretz (3/17/22) published an op-ed comparing Putin’s July essay, with its “Hitlerian motifs,”  to Hitler’s Mein Kampf—particularly “the notion of an artificial and tragic division of a people that must be rectified by reunification.”
    Perhaps the most frequent purveyor of this narrative is Timothy Snyder (4/18/18), who claimed that the war in Ukraine is a “colonial war”:
    "In a long essay on “historical unity,” published last July, [Putin] argued that Ukraine and Russia were a single country, bound by a shared origin. His vision is of a broken world that must be restored through violence. Russia becomes itself only by annihilating Ukraine".
    However, when one actually reads both sources, rather than relying on secondhand sources to explain what Putin meant, it quickly becomes apparent that these are blatant misrepresentations of what Putin said. Putin’s essay “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians” is long and convoluted, but although Putin talks about Russia and Ukraine’s shared historic, religious and linguistic heritage, and claims that “modern Ukraine is entirely the product of the Soviet era,” he also stresses that Russia has acknowledged new geopolitical realities:
    "Things change: Countries and communities are no exception. Of course, some part of a people in the process of its development, influenced by a number of reasons and historical circumstances, can become aware of itself as a separate nation at a certain moment. How should we treat that? There is only one answer: with respect!… The Russian Federation recognized the new geopolitical realities: and not only recognized, but, indeed, did a lot for Ukraine to establish itself as an independent country". 
    This point was repeated in Putin’s later speech (2/21/22), where Putin blamed the existence of the modern Ukrainian state on Vladimir Lenin and the USSR. Putin’s claim was not that Moscow should continue to govern all of Ukraine, however, but that Russia’s recognition of Ukrainian independence was an act of political generosity, in contrast to what he presented as Kyiv’s ungenerous treatment of the residents of Donbas:
    "Despite all these injustices, lies and outright pillage of Russia, it was our people who accepted the new geopolitical reality that took shape after the dissolution of the USSR, and recognised the new independent states. Not only did Russia recognise these countries, but helped its CIS partners, even though it faced a very dire situation itself. This included our Ukrainian colleagues, who turned to us for financial support many times from the very moment they declared independence. Our country provided this assistance while respecting Ukraine’s dignity and sovereignty".
    Putin’s efforts to justify Russia’s invasion are not based on events that happened centuries ago; his historical accounts in these two texts, however self-serving, are not linked to attempts to justify violence. Rather, the speech (2/24/22) that declared the “special military operation” did so on the grounds that the “eastward expansion of NATO” that began in 1999 is “a matter of life and death,” and a “red line” for Russia’s security that had been crossed despite several warnings. 
    He also maintained it was to “protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime” in the Donbas region. Such concerns are generally dismissed as pretextual in the West, but the UN’s count of civilian deaths in the Ukrainian civil war—3,321 as of January 2019 (UN OHCHR, 9/23/21)–is comparable to the UN civilian death toll from the Russian invasion, with a tiny fraction of the international outrage.
    [...]
  24. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    I notice from Israel the (I think) minority who are bitterly against Zelensky because of his allegiances have taken to calling him "the Kapo" - a Jew and sell-out to his people who assisted the Nazis (in concentration camps).
    Zelensky can well be Nazi-like in his dictates without self-contradiction. To attract approval simply because he's nominally Jewish and therefore purportedly has certain inbuilt attributes is stupid. Really, my point is that the ambivalence about a "Jewish" Zelensky's dealings with neo-Nazis `proves` to the pro-Ukraine fans that there clearly exist no such people, and is all Russian propaganda. They'd like to deny and hide the ugly reality there indisputably are neo-Nazis in positions in Govt. and Army--and they support them.
    A Jew - or anyone - hasn't "chemical predestination" to believe anything. While many Jews have followed their parents'/teachers' religious education, religious Jewishness is not in their blood.
  25. Haha
    whYNOT got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Bla bla bla. To prove that Russia will lose. That Russia too has its share of anti-war dissidents and pacifists and draft dodgers. To prove Russia will lose.
    You fanatics set a lot of store in a Ukraine victory, I notice. This is a massive psychological investment.
    If they win, it shows finally how 'good' they are - and *I am*, by association -- but, if they lose...
    I think the realization will begin to set in. A defeat means it was all for nothing. In tune with our gvts, we resisted rational, diplomatic efforts between two countries whose fight was none of our business.  We verbally urged Ukraine on to its heroic sacrifice and destruction, but nothing came of it. The harsh economic measures back home enacted by our government sanctions - self-sacrifice all for nothing. And the loathing of reality: Russia must not win! (Nuke Moscow).
×
×
  • Create New...