Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
A lame bluff by you, Hawk. My assessment stands valid via the chronology of your posts.
"We are fighting against the genocide of the Russian-speaking population" - Rus. Com.
- Thread starter Scott
- Start date
A lame bluff by you, Hawk. My assessment stands valid via the chronology of your posts.I suspect said American leaders are getting the drift now regarding Russia and China. Even The Hill published an article yesterday making it abundantly clear that Russia and China are closer than ever now:
China and Russia declare Cold War II against the West | The Hill
I also agree with you on your second point, but I suspect that'll take a long time for the mainstream media to admit. I just found an article on the subject of the war in Ukraine and the U.S.'s role in it that I think is quite good:
America’s Perilous Choice in Ukraine: How Proxy War Accelerates Great Power Decline | peacediplomacy.org
I have more than one belief, as do you. If you don't specify the specific beliefs you have issue with, I can't defend them. I'm careful to call my beliefs by that name when talking about things that I know or suspect you or others here might disagree with. The fact that you don't doesn't change the fact that you hold various beliefs that I and others here clearly don't agree with. The trick to having a productive discussion where people have opposing beliefs is to try to figure out -why- the parties have opposing beliefs.
I've made my case why your assertions are not wholly accurate. You disagree and reiterate your previous assertions. The chronology of the posts shows this (with links to read fully and comprehensively), so to continue in this vein is essentially
Again, by going abstract and not actually mentioning the assertions you're referring to, you're all but guaranteeing that our discussion will come to a close. You've suggested in the past that that's your goal, so if that's the case, you may well be on your way.
That's right.
If that's your stance, you may well be right. A good discussion requires both parties to put in a significant effort. I think at this point, you seem set on putting in the least effort possible.
I'll admit that if you didn't click on his link, what Hawkeye said can be seen as a possible derailment of the thread. However, after clicking on the link, I found the video did in fact deal with the Ukraine war, specifically the U.S. spending on said war.
Glad to here you identify as a progressive as well
. I'm still not quite sure what a utopian progressive looks like, so I'll stick to being an anti war progressive. As to the members of congress who call themself progressives, I've only really been following 2 to some extent, Bernie Sanders and AOC. I still like both of them, even if I'm dissapointed with their handling of Covid and the U.S.'s spending in Ukraine.Glad to here you identify as a progressive as well
The WOKE are some of the most UTOPIAN people who have ever been seen.
I might go for that but the WOKE are also abusive and extremely ignorant...some of the dumbest ever......so dumb that they have no idea.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Nice try, but only the guy you see in the mirror is buying it.
See, when you admit that you DO NOT want to read material offered, but instead argue partial response/information from someone, that is willful ignorance...and building on that to substantiate your beliefs is akin to trying to debate how many angels can dance on a pinhead.
Essentially, you're just stubborn on this issue to the point of insipidness. So there's no further point in my wasting time trying to debate the issue with you. You may have the last word, as I'll see you on the next subject. Adios for now.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Ahh, but the problem is Hawk's agenda of tying everything into this "woke agenda" of Dems and "the left", as he's done throughout this thread. Touting opportunistic anti-Biden clowns like Gaetz (who should be in jail) just fits Hawk's agenda.
Glad to here you identify as a progressive as well
The WOKE are some of the most UTOPIAN people who have ever been seen.
I might go for that but the WOKE are also abusive and extremely ignorant...some of the dumbest ever......so dumb that they have no idea.
As I've mentioned in the past, woke is a term that is too ambiguous for my tastes. I've now found that even in Scheerpost, an online publication that I read regularly, there are some authors that are using it in a negative way, but the fact remains that its origins are quite different. An ABC News article's introduction to the term sums up why I'm generally quite averse to using the term at all:
**
What does 'woke' mean and why are some conservatives using it?
ByKiara Alfonseca
January 20, 2023
The definition of "woke" changes depending on who you ask.
The term has recently been used by some conservatives as an insult against progressive values.
The term, however, was originally coined by progressive Black Americans and used in racial justice movements in the early to mid-1900s.
To be "woke" politically in the Black community means that someone is informed, educated and conscious of social injustice and racial inequality, Merriam-Webster Dictionary states.
One of its earliest uses was in a historical recording of the protest song "Scottsboro Boys" by Lead Belly. In that recording, it was used as a term about staying aware of the potential for racist violence as a Black person in America.
**
Full article:
What does 'woke' mean and why are some conservatives using it? | ABC News
I hope you consider the very real possibility that by bashing the term, you could be seen as racist, because the term clearly originated from the black community to be aware of racist violence and to this day, those who use the term are generally against the teaching of Critical Race Theory, or CRT for short, which seems to simply compound the impression that those who are against "wokism" are racist.
Now, don't get me wrong, I -do- believe there is a problem in the strong focus on CRT in the news as opposed to social inequality as a whole. Monita Mungo, who happens to be black, actually wrote an article in The Hill that brings up this point in the following article:
The real problem with critical race theory | The Hill
Quoting a bit from her article:
**
As Derrick Bell summarizes in his book “Faces at the Bottom of the Well,” white people fail to see how the people in power, who look like them, have failed to change their plight because white people have been socialized to think of themselves as being better than racialized groups.
So instead of seeing how equitable access to all social resources helps them, the white underclass resists any social policy change along racial lines.
The racial tension distracts people from what they should be focusing on — social inequality.
**
That I can agree with wholeheartedly, particularly the very last line there. She makes some much more radical claims at the end of her article:
**
By arguing against the ability of organizations and educational institutions to use critical race theory, important issues, such as why workers are making more money from unemployment benefits as opposed to going back to work for a livable wage, are getting pushed aside.
Critical race theory reveals how race has been used as a tool to create and exert power in ways that affects everyone – of all races – economically and politically.
The real problem with critical race theory is that it exposes those who have used race as a tool for their own political and economic gain.
**
I am always hesitant to ascribe motives to actions without hard evidence. So I'm not sure she's right on the above quote. But whether or not those in power are intentionally using the debate on CRT to distract from the very real issue of most Americans of all colours being a lot poorer than they have been in previous decades, the result is the same. The important conversation of -wealth- inequality has been fairly effectively sidelined.
Not true. Even in this discussion, tt seems rather clear that Hawkeye isn't with you here either.
Not without some kind of non cryptic explanation as to -why- you want me to read it. You may have noticed that whenever I post a link, I am very specific as to why I'm posting it. Frequently, I even quote sections of linked articles that I find particularly relevant to the discussion.
I actually agree with you that Hawkeye does talk about the 'woke agenda' a lot and I've finally decided to do a deep dive on the subject in response to one of his posts in post #109 in this thread. But Hawkeye and I are generally in agreement when it comes to the Ukraine war.
As to Gaetz, I've heard some stories about him, but in the Fox News clip that Hawkeye posted, he definitely impressed me. The thought of finally diminishing these insane omnibus bills where all sorts of junk is put in is great news in my view. And that Fox News clip also shows that Gaetz' is one of a select few politicians that is willing to push against the insanity of spending billions of American's tax dollars on a war in Ukraine.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
1. Hawkeye and I rarely agree on anything, so your observation here is non-surprising.
2. You can blow all the hot air you want, but the bottom line is the same.....I link information that factually dismisses your previous contention....you REFUSE to read it and try to bluff your way out. That dog of yours won't fly, no matter how you throw it. I READ any and all material offered in order to continue a rational, logical discussion based on ALL things presented. Clearly in this instance, you lack the intellectual courage/honesty to do so. A shame, because this is an anonymous format, and no one in the real world knows you. So conceding a point is not a blow to your ego or stature among your peers. Whatever....carry on.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
You seem to be under the impression that Ukraine is a united country. While it has had divides for a while, those divides became lethal after Euromaidan in 2014 and the Ukrainian civil war started. As I've stated in the past, it seems highly likely that Russia started its military operation when it did due to a renewed military assault by the western Ukrainian military a few days prior to Russia's operation. So while I can certainly agree that the Kyiv power brokers were probably upset that Russia wouldn't let western Ukraine massacre eastern Ukrainians in peace, I think it's a safe bet that eastern Ukrainians were grateful. Which would help explain the landslide wins in the Eastern region referendums to join Russia.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
are you saying deep state would lie?
Definitely, although in this case it may well be that all they did was omit certain important information in order to mislead their readers into drawing an erroneous conclusion.
No, you post some links with some cryptic explanation as to why you're posting them. This style of posting strongly suggests you have little to no interest in persuading your ideological opponent, which definitely seems true in this case.
I think it's likely that that article actually demonstrates that Gaetz knows more about the miltary situation in Ukraine prior to Trump's arrival than most. Your article points out the rather fine distinction that the Obama administration didn't provide -lethal- military aid, but did provide military aid such as "vehicles, patrol boats, body armor and night-vision goggles, as well as humanitarian assistance." I did know that the Obama administration provided -some- aid, but I wasn't aware that some of it was military, albeit non lethal. In all the nit picking, the most important point was lost, namely that there's a big difference between providing non lethal military aid and lethal military aid. Had the U.S. stuck to only providing non lethal military aid, I think it's quite possible that Ukraine may not have started their renewed military assault on the Donbass region that ultimately appears to have drawn Russia into the military fray.
I never said Gaetz doesn't have flaws.
No country is united. They all have sects. However, people that get their homes bombed and their families killed seem to agree that the aggressor should pay.
Putin controlled the elections. There are plenty of Russians who want Putin out and the war stopped, but they are afraid to say it in public.1420 interviews Russians on the street, and the fear of saying what they believe is palpable. It seems that older people are on Putin's side.
Ukraine has the right to make its own decisions.
Russia has a long history of conquering its neighbors You have to build up resistance to Russian aggression. This war of Putin aggression proved that.