Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[BashiChuni]

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

which face is general chang? asking for a friend

[Lord Ratner]

17 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

An argument I was replying to was essentially that we must protect Ukraine in order to defend NATO from follow on incursion.  You're making an unrelated point, which although laudable, is not good enough reason for me to support continued un-audited spending on UKR while our border remains open.  Sorry dude, US first then I'm open to your perspective.

I don't tie the border to my support for international policy. Both sides are being really cute trying to connect the two, but let's face it, the border isn't being dealt with because the Democrats don't want to deal with it. And when Republicans had the opportunity to, they didn't.

 

By this twisted logic, the United States should deal with no international issues unless the domestic issues are suitably addressed. But when your party loses elections, you don't get to decide what domestic issues get addressed.

 

You're basically arguing for an all or nothing approach, but you certainly can do, but I find it to be a completely unrealistic political philosophy.

[Lord Ratner]

8 hours ago, HeloDude said:

If the Ukrainians were willing to die for their country then you wouldn’t need forced conscription.  And this goes for any country in a similar situation.  This is the exact opposite of freedom by the way.

Yeah that's just not how countries have ever worked. Including the freeest bestest country in the world, the United States.

 

Conscription is a age-old and normal component of statehood.

 

World war II would have worked a lot differently without draft. And I don't think the world would have been better off if the axis had won...

[Lawman]

Of course.  But the perception is a mother er

Story of this damn war apparently…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

7 hours ago, HeloDude said:

If not enough people voluntarily wanted to fight the Nazis, then no, to them it wasn’t worth it.  You either have enough volunteers under the terms of an agreement (ie an enlistment) or you don’t.  You can use whatever emotional arguments you want, but either you believe in personal freedom to go/not to go a war if asked, or you don’t believe in it.  If freedom and liberty and can be suspended then you were never actually free.  Don’t forget, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

This is why libertarianism is ultimately a failed ideology. Honestly I put it into the same category as communism. Romanticized ideals of how the world should be, that never survive contact with real societies.

 

 

[Lawman]

This is why libertarianism is ultimately a failed ideology. Honestly I put it into the same category as communism. Romanticized ideals of how the world should be, that never survive contact with real societies.
 
 

I always like that one “taxation is theft” guy 5 beers in on TDY….

Like bro… where do you think this Per Diem came from?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Yeah that's just not how countries have ever worked. Including the freeest bestest country in the world, the United States.

 

Conscription is a age-old and normal component of statehood.

 

World war II would have worked a lot differently without draft. And I don't think the world would have been better off if the axis had won...

So send people off to die against their will…sounds like so much freedom and liberty.  If enough people won’t voluntarily fight for something they believe in, then it’s not worth it.  This is the litmus test…vs just voting for the government to force your neighbors at the barrel of a gun to go to war.  

[Lawman]

So send people off to die against their will…sounds like so much freedom and liberty.  If enough people won’t voluntarily fight for something they believe in, then it’s not worth it.  This is the litmus test…vs just voting for the government to force your neighbors at the barrel of a gun to go to war.  

You’ve got it twisted into something it’s not. We don’t, “vote for a government to force” anything.

The entire purpose of a representative constitutional democracy is that the consent of the governed provides the government with its mandate to action. We do that because simply having a vote over every decision whether small or big would be impossible both in theory and in practice. A representative democracy means send forward your desires in the form of your elected officials and let them come to consensus with all the other citizens reps who did same.

You can aspire to the lofty goal of perfect utopian liberty but it’s not reality anymore than shouting “I should be allowed to drive as fast as I want” or “if I were truly free I could walk around nude next to this elementary school.” Those aren’t constitutionally enshrined rights being trampled by some authoritarian society, they are agreements by society through their representatives in the legislature that you can neither drive like you stole it or walk around with your dick out. Selective service is the same the stakes are just higher. As I said earlier if you disagree with that your option of conscription as an option to your government your options are either grass roots change through representative influence in congress or a popular uprising. Either way until one of those two occurs the selective service and draft have long been constitutionally upheld.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

9 hours ago, HeloDude said:

So send people off to die against their will…sounds like so much freedom and liberty.  If enough people won’t voluntarily fight for something they believe in, then it’s not worth it.  This is the litmus test…vs just voting for the government to force your neighbors at the barrel of a gun to go to war.  

Yeah dude, because it turns out that freedom and liberty are not provided for by an all-loving and generous universe. They are luxuries of societies that are either isolated from intruders, protected by an external guardian, or so strong themselves as to ward off foreign threats.

 

This would be simpler if you just pointed to the societies in history that survived on individual choice for funding and defense. No mandatory taxes or conscription, but the successful defeat of a foreign invader. After all, if they won't voluntarily pay for it, it's not worth it, right?

 

The system works because people don't actually care about freedom and liberty as their primary concerns. They care about fairness and family/tribe. You can force me to do many things as long as I perceive the same obligation being imposed on those around me. Literally to include an almost certain death, because that death ultimately supports the long-term survival of my family/tribe.

 

Political ideology never trumps human nature.

[kaputt]

You guys are wasting key strokes. This is the same guy who equated deer hunting to killing dogs with jumper cables; because “freedom”. 

[ClearedHot]

Sobering report that details a lot of the damage done to the Russian military in the last two years.  Here is where you money has gone.

Russia has lost 87% of troops it had prior to start of Ukraine war, according to US intelligence assessment

"Of the 360,000 troops that made up Russia’s pre-invasion ground force, including contract and conscript personnel, Russia has lost 315,000 on the battlefield, according to the assessment. 2,200 of 3,500 tanks have been lost, according to the assessment. 4,400 of 13,600 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers have also been destroyed, a 32 percent loss rate."

“Since launching its offensive in October, we assess that the Russian military has suffered more than 13,000 casualties along the Avdiivka-Novopavlivka axis and over 220 combat vehicle losses-the equivalent of 6 maneuver battalions in equipment alone,”

[HeloDude]

3 hours ago, kaputt said:

You guys are wasting key strokes. This is the same guy who equated deer hunting to killing dogs with jumper cables; because “freedom”. 

Nah, I just use logic and reasoning vs emotions.  But I’m sure you subscribe to the “Liberty for me but not for thee” philosophy.

[HeloDude]

10 hours ago, Lawman said:

You’ve got it twisted into something it’s not. We don’t, “vote for a government to force” anything.

You can’t be serious?  The only power the government has is force at the ultimate barrel of a gun.  Have you ever heard of a “victimless crime”?  Let me know if you need just a few examples.

[BashiChuni]

3 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Sobering report that details a lot of the damage done to the Russian military in the last two years.  Here is where you money has gone.

Russia has lost 87% of troops it had prior to start of Ukraine war, according to US intelligence assessment

"Of the 360,000 troops that made up Russia’s pre-invasion ground force, including contract and conscript personnel, Russia has lost 315,000 on the battlefield, according to the assessment. 2,200 of 3,500 tanks have been lost, according to the assessment. 4,400 of 13,600 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers have also been destroyed, a 32 percent loss rate."

“Since launching its offensive in October, we assess that the Russian military has suffered more than 13,000 casualties along the Avdiivka-Novopavlivka axis and over 220 combat vehicle losses-the equivalent of 6 maneuver battalions in equipment alone,”

and you believe that leak? leaked on the day zelensky was in DC asking for more money?

after watching our government lie during COVID i don't take anything they leak out at face value.

 

"a source familiar with a declassified US intelligence assessment provided to Congress told CNN"

[Lawman]

You can’t be serious?  The only power the government has is force at the ultimate barrel of a gun.  Have you ever heard of a “victimless crime”?  Let me know if you need just a few examples.

The government is the consensus of votes of the masses thereby granting it power to conduct its actions at the consent of its citizens.

The fact it can jail/kill an individual doesn’t change that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ClearedHot]

2 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

and you believe that leak? leaked on the day zelensky was in DC asking for more money?

after watching our government lie during COVID i don't take anything they leak out at face value.

 

"a source familiar with a declassified US intelligence assessment provided to Congress told CNN"

Sorry dude, I turned in my tin foil hat a long time ago.

[Blue]

24 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Sorry dude, I turned in my tin foil hat a long time ago.

"A source familiar with the matter" seems to be the most cited reference by CNN over the past seven years or so.

I wouldn't consider it "tin-foil" territory to be a bit skeptical.

[BashiChuni]

58 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Sorry dude, I turned in my tin foil hat a long time ago.

brother look what they did with covid? trust the experts? man everything the government put out was a lie. they're still pushing the vax even after it's been proven not to work.

i don't know how you have such blind faith in the words our government says.

[ClearedHot]

10 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

brother look what they did with covid? trust the experts? man everything the government put out was a lie. they're still pushing the vax even after it's been proven not to work.

i don't know how you have such blind faith in the words our government says.

I don't put blind faith int he government.  I've compared against a lot of other sources and tend to believe these numbers are very close.

[BashiChuni]

fair enough, but it's also fair for citizens to not trust the official narrative.

 

[HeloDude]

6 hours ago, Lawman said:

The government is the consensus of votes of the masses thereby granting it power to conduct its actions at the consent of its citizens.

The fact it can jail/kill an individual doesn’t change that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So people can indeed (and do) vote for a government that forces people to do/not do things to their neighbors at the barrel of a gun.  And I guess in your opinion this is just fine, unless I’m reading you incorrectly?
 

If you’re sticking up for a forceful government over individual liberty, then we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

Oh, and if you’re bored, take a look at what the US government did to Japanese Americans in the early 1940s…but hey, it was done by a President who was elected, so I guess it was alright.

[Lord Ratner]

8 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

So people can indeed (and do) vote for a government that forces people to do/not do things to their neighbors at the barrel of a gun.  And I guess in your opinion this is just fine, unless I’m reading you incorrectly?
 

If you’re sticking up for a forceful government over individual liberty, then we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

Oh, and if you’re bored, take a look at what the US government did to Japanese Americans in the early 1940s…but hey, it was done by a President who was elected, so I guess it was alright.

Should littering be legal?

[Stoker]

We conscripted people to fight in the American Revolution. The idea that your community could go to war and you had a right to shirk your duty to defend it is alien to our country and most others (certainly any successful ones). We've decided to spend the money to create a military machine that doesn't need conscripts, and that's a good thing, but not every country has that luxury.

[Lord Ratner]

14 minutes ago, Stoker said:

We conscripted people to fight in the American Revolution. The idea that your community could go to war and you had a right to shirk your duty to defend it is alien to our country and most others (certainly any successful ones). We've decided to spend the money to create a military machine that doesn't need conscripts, and that's a good thing, but not every country has that luxury.

Nevermind the obvious paradox that freedom and liberty are only possible because of the wars fought by conscripted soldiers.

[BashiChuni]

Putin agents!!!