Shoot The Breeze 3.0

[AB19]

Can’t blame an isolationist libertarian for trying.

Usually agree with remaining isolationist when it comes to conflict, but I also think we are the ones responisble for boning Ukraine, and we should have had a stronger respone to Crimea under Obama

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Yes, that is what I said. You need to learn that different words have different meanings.


Peter Gibbons, this was a good segment on Maher’s show last Friday that talks about how the Left has gone off the rails, and no one wants to call them out about it, which is related to my point.

I don’t always agree with Maher but he’s more of a realist than most people on the Left these days.

I don't always agree with him, but he always says what's on his mind, and that I do like. Aside from a few key points I think I agree with him more than not though.

I agree we shouldn't be involved with this crap, but you must know the Biden family and their involvement with Ukraine, right?

Oliver Stone has a really good doc on the maidan protests, it goes a lot deeper than HuNtEr BiDeN's LaPtOp, but yes. It's called Ukraine on fire. Worth a watch.

Are you.

You guys are gargling russias balls so hard. Yah Russia amassing 100k troops at the border of a sovereign country is bidens fault.

Yep just like they did 6 months ago. And 6 months before that. But this time we are making a stink of it?
I'm not gargling anything just saying we don't have to poke our nose in everything.

Usually agree with remaining isolationist when it comes to conflict, but I also think we are the ones responisble for boning Ukraine, and we should have had a stronger respone to Crimea under Obama

1) we sanctioned the fuck out of them. You can't even use a credit card in Crimea. Your US based phone wont work there. None of your us based apps work. You can't even use an ATM for withdrawls outside of like 2 Russian based banks.

2) there was a referendum. The people in Crimea overwhelmingly wanted to rejoin the Russian federation.

I'm not stanning Putin here, he's a bad guy, just stating facts.

 

[Homsar]

Usually agree with remaining isolationist when it comes to conflict, but I also think we are the ones responisble for boning Ukraine, and we should have had a stronger respone to Crimea under Obama

Sometimes the right decision is to forget the past and walk away, and that’s what we should do here, agreement or not.

 

[32andBelow]

Sometimes the right decision is to forget the past and walk away, and that’s what we should do here, agreement or not.

This isn’t Afghanistan. They are gonna have 100k troops on the border of Poland next

 

[AB19]

Sometimes the right decision is to forget the past and walk away, and that’s what we should do here, agreement or not.

I worry that if no one responds to Russias aggression that they continue past Ukraine, but Europe needs to do more

 

[novelist1985]

Outdated studies, that you yourself admitted. ThE sCiEnCe ChAnGeS, remember?

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting on you to share a scientific study.
I'm somehow a science denier because I claimed that masks don't have a 0% filtration rate. Even common sense will tell you shit you stick in front of your face will catch some of what expels from your mouth.

That post did not feature me saying cloth masks aren’t scientifically effective by a long shot.

Fair, but your sentiment on masks is still revealed in these posts. Hence your insistence on bringing up Omicron as your apparent motivator for complaining about mask mandates is irrelevant.

No fallacies here except your buying that straw in bulk and making claims that you can’t back up with fact, bub.

No, I wasn't saying that you had a fallacy, I was suggesting you quit talking about fallacies.

Only some of us.

Are you seriously implying you're not included? 90 percent of your posts contain the words "fallacy" or "straw".
If you can't see it, you can't be helped.


Seems like the topic has moved on to war.
Have fun, boyz.

 

[Homsar]

This isn’t Afghanistan. They are gonna have 100k troops on the border of Poland next

Sounds like a Europe problem.

I worry that if no one responds to Russias aggression that they continue past Ukraine, but Europe needs to do more

Exactly.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting on you to share a scientific study.

Well, we have the CDC saying they shouldn’t be mandated in clinical settings, so I think it’s just a matter of time where they feel the same about the general public.

I'm somehow a science denier because I claimed that masks don't have a 0% filtration rate. Even common sense will tell you shit you stick in front of your face will catch some of what expels from your mouth.

See above.

Fair, but your sentiment on masks is still revealed in these posts. Hence your insistence on bringing up Omicron as your apparent motivator for complaining about mask mandates is irrelevant.

“See, what I meant by saying you said it, is that you didn’t say it, but I totally know you think it.”

No, I wasn't saying that you had a fallacy, I was suggesting you quit talking about fallacies.

Says the guy who admits to a blatant straw man? Okay buddy.

Are you seriously implying you're not included? 90 percent of your posts contain the words "fallacy" or "straw".
If you can't see it, you can't be helped.

It does get tiring point out how many people make fallacies on here all of the time, I suppose you have a point there.

 

[32andBelow]

Sounds like a Europe problem.



Exactly.


Well, we have the CDC saying they shouldn’t be mandated in clinical settings, so I think it’s just a matter of time where they feel the same about the general public.



See above.



“See, what I meant by saying you said it, is that you didn’t say it, but I totally know you think it.”



Says the guy who admits to a blatant straw man? Okay buddy.



It does get tiring point out how many people make fallacies on here all of the time, I suppose you have a point there.

Your cdc study is from 2020. The latest cdc guideline is west surgical or n95. Not cloth

 

[Peter Gibbons]

This isn’t Afghanistan. They are gonna have 100k troops on the border of Poland next

LMAO Bruh touch some grass.

I worry that if no one responds to Russias aggression that they continue past Ukraine, but Europe needs to do more

1) people in the know say they aren't capable of doing so.
2) Yes *EUROPE* does need to do more (maybe it Europe is worried about it), but Germany loves that cheap gas.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Ukraine is not a part of NATO so we have no obligation to defend errr pretend to defend them. And Biden just needs to stop taking about it, about what he will allow [minor incursions] how many troops he will sen (8500), where they will go, what they will do, what weapons he will send and how many. What a moron, just like Obama allowing them to take the Crimea. What a frickin moron!

I'm not disagreeing with the first half but the first and second halves of this seem pretty incongruous.

 

[AB19]

Ukraine is not a part of NATO so we have no obligation to defend errr pretend to defend them. And Biden just needs to stop taking about it, about what he will allow [minor incursions] how many troops he will sen (8500), where they will go, what they will do, what weapons he will send and how many. What a moron, just like Obama allowing them to take the Crimea. What a frickin moron!

We do have an obligation to defend them, we signed an agreement that we would come to their aid if they were attacked if they denuclearized, I guarantee they wouldn't be invaded if they had nukes

 

[GBDCZF]

Anybody here good at illustrating?

I’m going to create a coffee table book for each Shoot the Shit thread.

 

[Homsar]

We do have an obligation to defend them, we signed an agreement that we would come to their aid if they were attacked if they denuclearized, I guarantee they wouldn't be invaded if they had nukes

You need to read the actual treaty.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf

As I tried to teach 32 yesterday, specific word choices have specific meanings. This article explains it well:

Washington did not promise unlimited support. The Budapest Memorandum contains security “assurances,” not “guarantees.” Guarantees would have implied a commitment of American military force, which NATO members have. U.S. officials made clear that was not on offer. Hence, assurances.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Anybody here good at illustrating?

I’m going to create a coffee table book for each Shoot the Shit thread.

I mean I can fingerpaint. Should suffice for this level of discourse.

 

[32andBelow]

You need to read the actual treaty.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf

As I tried to teach 32 yesterday, specific word choices have specific meanings. This article explains it well:

We only assured we’d protect them. Not guarantee it.

 

[Homsar]

We only assured we’d protect them. Not guarantee it.

Yeah, and we should say that things have changed a lot in the world, since that was going on 30 years ago, and due to that, we no longer wish to do what we “assured” we would. Simple as that. No more Team America World Police.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

We only assured we’d protect them. Not guarantee it.

What benefit is it to US interests to involve ourselves in a situation which could very easily end in enourmous loss of life of US service members?

I mean really.... Say hypothetically Russia gobbles up everything east of the Dnieper river. How does that negatively affect anything either domestically or internationally for us?

They aren't a big trade partner either way.

They aren't a massive ally we have long standing partnerships with.

They don't have much of anything to offer in terms of payout for defending them.

We just got done with 2 decades of war for little or no benefit, and arguably only made things worse for ourselves at home and abroad by doing so. No sane person in this country wants to turn around and do that again against another superpower where our losses in human life and money would make the war on terror look like a schoolyard fight.

I'll say it again, if you feel like defending Ukrainian interests is to your benefit somehow, they take foreign volunteers.

 

[32andBelow]

What benefit is it to US interests to involve ourselves in a situation which could very easily end in enourmous loss of life of US service members?

I mean really.... Say hypothetically Russia gobbles up everything east of the Dnieper river. How does that negatively affect anything either domestically or internationally for us?

They aren't a big trade partner either way.

They aren't a massive ally we have long standing partnerships with.

They don't have much of anything to offer in terms of payout for defending them.

We just got done with 2 decades of war for little or no benefit, and arguably only made things worse for ourselves at home and abroad by doing so. No sane person in this country wants to turn around and do that again against another superpower where our losses in human life and money would make the war on terror look like a schoolyard fight.

I'll say it again, if you feel like defending Ukrainian interests is to your benefit somehow, they take foreign volunteers.

The main concern is losing the buffer between Russia and NATO. Cus if they decide to do Poland then we are really in a pickle.

I’m not saying to send troops into Ukraine. But I have no problem with the west giving them aid

 

[BDUB]

Change this thread to “Politics” because y’all have made it completely irrelevant

 

[Peter Gibbons]

The main concern is losing the buffer between Russia and NATO.

This is literally the Russia talking point on the matter. NATO encroachment on their border. I'm not saying it's currently a real issue for them, but the past 300 years of Russian history is "western power invades, burns cities, kills millions".

Again, not saying it's a currently valid viewpoint, or cause for concern for them, but it is the history of the matter and why historically they feel like they need the buffer.

Cus if they decide to do Poland then we are really in a pickle.

Poland is a NATO Ally, which we have an obligation to defend. This would obviously start ww3 and Russia isn't gonna risk that, ever. Also, Poland, Estonia etc being NATO allies is part of why we are in the current pickle, reference above.

I’m not saying to send troops into Ukraine. But I have no problem with the west giving them aid

Sure. Agreed. Aid is great. I'm rooting for Ukraine. That's not the rhetoric coming from DC though. It's all talk of escalation.