[Kenco]

youtu.be/KtJJC0nWs9s

For my buddy Faust. Lol.

-uploaded video directly ~wm

[kellyhound]

for Christmas: a Himalayan salt lamp.

[Roosta]

Originally Posted by WonderMomma ↗

"Video of a funny moment at the NATO summit, when Dutch Prime Minister Rutte insists that the Ukrainian president take coffee.

"You fight a war, it's yours," says Rutte."

If it was a bottle of Jack Daniels, it might be a different story.

[Roosta]

Originally Posted by kellyhound ↗

for Christmas: a Himalayan salt lamp.

[WonderMomma]

"Ukrainians will forever be thankful both to their defenders and to the allies from all around the globe!"

[WonderMomma]

"May feathers grow in the throats of our enemies". THAT... is a new one for me, but I like it.

"Ukrainian Defender from Georgian Legion tells what gifts she really appreciates."

[DrKGSmiff]

Originally Posted by Faust ↗

You yourself show to be disconnected from rational thought by ignoring everything that was ever historically and academically said about Ukraine joining Nato.

Nato membership was promised to Ukraine and by pursuing it, Ukraine would be destroyed. Ukraine was never not going to be destroyed by Russia if it didn’t sign neutrality. Zelensky in 2021 waving a plan around on how to attack and retake Crimea with western backing meant Ukraine would be destroyed. Not signing any peace treaties or neutrality meant Ukraine would be destroyed.

You don’t allow your house to catch fire, but when a fire is about to start and all of your actions involve having your handlers pour gasoline over the house with them promising to help put out the eventual fire (they are going to make you publicly beg for it the whole time). When your house eventually catches fire and still, more gasoline and promises from your handlers, and it eventually nearly burns down to the ground, you could argue you allowed this to happen.

And that is your cue to state invasion is wrong, putin is evil, nato is peace, 3 day war, trump is bad, Ukraine is winning, Biden is a saviour, Zelensky is a hero, ukraine is a proud peaceful multi-ethnic nation which never waged war on its own citizens, and whatever else you choose to believe.

Well, you certainly didn’t disappoint. Good job on reaching for the stars with your patented illogic.

First, I’d like to point out that you’re not talking to a brain dead leftist. I know better than to trust either side’s media. I’m aware that Trump is a boorish man-child, but I’m also aware that Biden is unimaginably corrupt and should be in jail. And, if you really want to have trouble figuring me out: I never took a single Covid shot.

So, back to the topic; namely your (now confirmed) statement that Zelenskyy is “allowing” Ukraine to be destroyed by not letting Russia have it.

On top of the logical fallacy of trying (unsuccessfully) to “pre-bunk” the fact that that the invasion was wrong, there are two key facts that you left out of your geopolitical synopsis placing the blame of this destruction on Zelenskyy.

1- NATO is a DEFENSIVE alliance, and Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Therefore, it’s none of Putin’s fucking business if Ukraine wanted to join NATO.

Putin warning Ukraine that it had “better not join NATO” is like a guy who breaks into all his neighbors’ houses telling his next door neighbor that he’d better not get a gun and, then, when the neighbor says he’s going to go get one anyway, the first guy breaks in and tries to kill him because he feels “threatened”.

2- Russia has been waging an insurgency in eastern Ukraine for almost 30 years. The minute the USSR finished its bankruptcy proceedings, it IMMEDIATELY started sowing the seeds of trying to reclaim Ukraine and Georgia. Georgia proved quite easy, but Ukraine has been more difficult. There have been uniformed and ununiformed soldiers and weapons pouring across the border into Luhansk and Donetsk since the late 90s or early 2000s. This war didn’t start in 2022, 2014 or even 2010. It started the minute the USSR Russia had saved back up two cents for ammo and cheap explosives to send to its nationals living in the Donbas. Once they’d saved up a whole $1.50, they sent their first soldier.

The ONLY reason the Russian Tzars “serving” since Yeltsin have objected to former USSR slave-states joining NATO is that they knew it would make it much harder for them to take them back once they got shit together again.

…so, taking the full geopolitical history into account, and not just the side that RT told you to “think”, it’s pretty clear that Zelenskyy had no choice but to seek membership in NATO while fighting back against General Secretary Putin’s play to “get the Union back together”.

[Roosta]

Originally Posted by WonderMomma ↗

"May feathers grow in the throats of our enemies". THAT... is a new one for me, but I like it.

"Ukrainian Defender from Georgian Legion tells what gifts she really appreciates."

Gotta luv the yoda patch.

[duntez]

Originally Posted by DrKGSmiff ↗

Well, you certainly didn’t disappoint. Good job on reaching for the stars with your patented illogic.

First, I’d like to point out that you’re not talking to a brain dead leftist. I know better than to trust either side’s media. I’m aware that Trump is a boorish man-child, but I’m also aware that Biden is unimaginably corrupt and should be in jail. And, if you really want to have trouble figuring me out: I never took a single Covid shot.

So, back to the topic; namely your (now confirmed) statement that Zelenskyy is “allowing” Ukraine to be destroyed by not letting Russia have it.

On top of the logical fallacy of trying (unsuccessfully) to “pre-bunk” the fact that that the invasion was wrong, there are two key facts that you left out of your geopolitical synopsis placing the blame of this destruction on Zelenskyy.

1- NATO is a DEFENSIVE alliance, and Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Therefore, it’s none of Putin’s fucking business if Ukraine wanted to join NATO.

Putin warning Ukraine that it had “better not join NATO” is like a guy who breaks into all his neighbors’ houses telling his next door neighbor that he’d better not get a gun and, then, when the neighbor says he’s going to go get one anyway, the first guy breaks in and tries to kill him because he feels “threatened”.

2- Russia has been waging an insurgency in eastern Ukraine for almost 30 years. The minute the USSR finished its bankruptcy proceedings, it IMMEDIATELY started sowing the seeds of trying to reclaim Ukraine and Georgia. Georgia proved quite easy, but Ukraine has been more difficult. There have been uniformed and ununiformed soldiers and weapons pouring across the border into Luhansk and Donetsk since the late 90s or early 2000s. This war didn’t start in 2022, 2014 or even 2010. It started the minute the USSR Russia had saved back up two cents for ammo and cheap explosives to send to its nationals living in the Donbas. Once they’d saved up a whole $1.50, they sent their first soldier.

The ONLY reason the Russian Tzars “serving” since Yeltsin have objected to former USSR slave-states joining NATO is that they knew it would make it much harder for them to take them back once they got shit together again.

…so, taking the full geopolitical history into account, and not just the side that RT told you to “think”, it’s pretty clear that Zelenskyy had no choice but to seek membership in NATO while fighting back against General Secretary Putin’s play to “get the Union back together”.

Your logic is simple. When you should know better what geopolitics are all about.

I think Faust is close to the opinion of this professor back in 2015. Over 30 millions views now. University did not close comment section so it’s interesting to see people opinion on his opinion as well.

[Guns N' Coffee]

It makes no sense to blame the west for the Ukraine war Prof. Mearsheimer

The argument that the US bears responsibility for the war in Ukraine ignores a principle fundamental to both morality and law — that the responsibility for a murder, or a murderous invasion, lies with the person who pulls the trigger or gives the command.

Preventive wars are sometimes regarded as acceptable — but only if a rival nation is poised to strike. Ukraine was obviously not in that position last year. By blurring this point, Mearsheimer does become an unwitting apologist for Putin’s war of aggression.

This is not to deny that his theories can be a powerful analytical tool, which provides insights not just into Russia’s behaviour, but also into China. As long ago as 2001, Mearsheimer was arguing that efforts to integrate China into a liberal world order were doomed to fail — and that Beijing would inevitably seek to dominate its own region, making war with the US likely. Those arguments also look prescient today. But dig deeper into Mearsheimer’s work and it sometimes bears the hallmarks of an academic too in love with his own theoretical constructs to accept that there are some facts that do not fit the theory.

In his famous 2015 lecture, Mearsheimer dismissed the idea that Russia would ever try to “conquer Ukraine” — arguing that “Putin is much too smart for that”. His view was that the Russian leader would stick with the goal of wrecking Ukraine as a state, to prevent it aligning with the west. Today, Mearsheimer is still arguing that Russia never intended to conquer Ukraine — an argument that seems hard to square with the columns of Russian tanks heading towards Kyiv last February.

-GIDEON RACHMAN for the Financial Times