Ukraine Crisis

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
I'm against the death penalty by execution. I'm pro-death-penalty for the use of lethal force during justified self-defense. If Russia stops, then I'm against killing any of them for what they've done. But if Ukrainians kill Russians in self-defense that's justified in my book. I support the death penalty during justified self-defense.

But is it at all possible that Russia's not being immoral right now? The answer's only yes, as far as I can tell, if there were first degree rights violations happening in eastern Ukraine, perpetrated by the Ukrainian regime(s), either directly or indirectly.

That seems like something that could only be sorted out in court. But in international relations, the relations between truly free, truly independent nations and or nation-states, there is no court that has any more authority than every nation has. If all the world's nations vote against what one other nation is doing, there's no court with any power to impose a verdict on anybody. Being rogue is de facto legal in international relations.
Well, what else has this despotic Russian regime being doing under Putin than applying lethal force onto a nation that's simply defending itself and wanted no part in war? Putin and his despicable cohorts are not only responsible for the thousands of Ukrainian deaths but also for the deaths of their own soldiers who have died in this atrocity of a 'war'. The blame lies at the Kremlin. Individual cases of war crimes are another thing and there'll have been a fair share unfortunately but the blame for this risible invasion has a square source alone.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I'll be darned. You know, now that you say that, it's just occurred to me that so far as I know I have only ever seen "quahog" in print. I don't recall ever having actually heard anyone pronounce it, and somehow I had never thought to look up how it's supposed to be pronounced.
I think we just call them clams around my neck of the Boston woods. Quahog's a Rhode Island thing afaik.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I don't like Congress deciding our military policy any more than I like the president or the top brass in the military doing it. I just wish Russia would knock it off so that we can globally examine the case they're attempting to make, about Ukraine harboring Nazism and committing first degree rights violations against their own people. Instead Russia's judge, jury and executioner. They've unilaterally decided that Ukraine's an oppressor and needs to be stopped right away and just by Russia.

It's little wonder that to most all of the rest of the world Russia just looks like an aggressor with forced annexation on their minds.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Well, what else has this despotic Russian regime being doing under Putin than applying lethal force onto a nation that's simply defending itself and wanted no part in war?
The Confederacy wanted no part in war too, it didn't mean they shouldn't have been invaded and forcefully re-annexed.

The point is, is Ukraine a first degree human rights violator, of their own people? Russia claims yes, and they alone are determined to do something about it.
Putin and his despicable cohorts are not only responsible for the thousands of Ukrainian deaths but also for the deaths of their own soldiers who have died in this atrocity of a 'war'. The blame lies at the Kremlin. Individual cases of war crimes are another thing and there'll have been a fair share unfortunately but the blame for this risible invasion has a square source alone.
I think a court of law would agree with you, but as I said, we don't have one of those with the power to impose any verdicts on anybody.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
The Confederacy wanted no part in war too, it didn't mean they shouldn't have been invaded and forcefully re-annexed.

The point is, is Ukraine a first degree human rights violator, of their own people? Russia claims yes, and they alone are determined to do something about it.

I think a court of law would agree with you, but as I said, we don't have one of those with the power to impose any verdicts on anybody.
Putin is a tyrannical despot and if you're going to give even the remotest credence to his "reasons" for launching his invasion then you might as well call it a "special military operation" instead. There is no excuse whatsoever for the carnage inflicted by this odious regime, period.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I don't trust the propaganda from either side.
OK. But my point is the Russians are terrible liars. They were the ones who said, "We're not going to invade Ukraine," right up until the day they invaded Ukraine.

If you're going to lie, you have to be a good liar. If you can't lie well, then don't lie.
And I'm not an absolutist when it comes to lying by any means:

The Russians are bad liars, and this sounded like a bad lie.
 

way 2 go

Well-known member
That sounds like something Russia would say before they detonate a dirty nuclear bomb in Ukraine.
actually it sounds believable considering the shenanigans that have gone on in Ukraine

either way I hope no one uses nukes.


Ukraine. Across its eastern border is Russia and to its west-Europe. For centuries, it has been at the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its rich lands and access to the Black Sea. 2014's Maidan Massacre triggered a bloody uprising that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych and painted Russia as the perpetrator by Western media. But was it? "Ukraine on Fire" by Igor Lopatonok.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
actually it sounds believable considering the shenanigans that have gone on in Ukraine
Nothing Russia says sounds believable. They started this whole thing by lying. They did not say, "Ukraine's guilty of committing first degree felony human rights violations against their own people, and we're going to go in there and bring the perpetrators to justice," they just said, "We are not going to invade Ukraine," and then they invaded Ukraine.
either way I hope no one uses nukes.
Of course.

Ukraine. Across its eastern border is Russia and to its west-Europe. For centuries, it has been at the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its rich lands and access to the Black Sea. 2014's Maidan Massacre triggered a bloody uprising that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych and painted Russia as the perpetrator by Western media. But was it? "Ukraine on Fire" by Igor Lopatonok.
Only one side invaded another sovereign country: Russia

'Doesn't mean they're wrong, but all the evidence looks a lot like Russia just wanted to annex parts of Ukraine, rather than they are liberators and saviors of many Ukrainians.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Nothing Russia says sounds believable. They started this whole thing by lying. They did not say, "Ukraine's guilty of committing first degree felony human rights violations against their own people, and we're going to go in there and bring the perpetrators to justice," they just said, "We are not going to invade Ukraine," and then they invaded Ukraine.

Of course.

Only one side invaded another sovereign country: Russia

'Doesn't mean they're wrong, but all the evidence looks a lot like Russia just wanted to annex parts of Ukraine, rather than they are liberators and saviors of many Ukrainians.
The only thing out of place with your post here is the "Doesn't mean they're wrong" bit. Putin's insidious regime were absolutely wrong to invade Ukraine and there's no justification whatsoever for it.
 

way 2 go

Well-known member
Nothing Russia says sounds believable.
I know how you feel , nothing the mainstream media says sounds believable .

media-FPdEYS3XMAI3SOy.jpg
They started this whole thing by lying. They did not say, "Ukraine's guilty of committing first degree felony human rights violations against their own people, and we're going to go in there and bring the perpetrators to justice," they just said, "We are not going to invade Ukraine," and then they invaded Ukraine.
so ?

some country invaded another country over a lie of "weapons of mass distraction"
Of course.
I have no interest in this conflict other than Russia flippin the bird to the globalist

its too bad this proxy war by the globalist won't let Ukraine make a peace deal
Only one side invaded another sovereign country: Russia
and the globalist organized a coup in Ukraine in 2014


'Doesn't mean they're wrong, but all the evidence looks a lot like Russia just wanted to annex parts of Ukraine, rather than they are liberators and saviors of many Ukrainians.
the Russian speaking areas of Ukraine


media-FT15F6aWIAUlF6U.png
 
Last edited:

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
I know how you feel , nothing the mainstream media says sounds believable .

View attachment 4496
So you don't believe Russia lied at the start of this thing? Is that how skeptical you are? or do you think Russia did lie? Because the story is Russia lied, they said, "No we won't," and then they did. Do you believe that happened, or no? And please just say yes or no, I don't want to read, "Well here's what I do believe," I want you to just answer yes or no.
so ?

some country invaded another country over a lie of "weapons of mass distraction"

I have no interest in this conflict other than Russia flippin the bird to the globalist
So far it doesn't look like the regime's suicidal, like how Hitler's regime and Imperial Japan's regime were suicidal in WWII. Hopefully the Russian regime never goes suicidal. Same for the Chinese regime. And Pakistan's regime. Anybody with nuke tech, we really cannot afford any suicidal regimes anymore, it was a luxury that we can't afford any longer.
its too bad this proxy war by the globalist won't let Ukraine make a peace deal
Sounds to me like Ukraine's head of state doesn't want to make a deal.
and the globalist organized a coup in Ukraine in 2014



the Russian speaking areas of Ukraine
Doesn't change what I said. They were legitimately Ukrainians in February 2022, and Russia's only moral justification available is if Ukraine's regime was either directly or indirectly committing first degree felony human rights violations against their own people.

If that was happening then Russia's morally justified in what they're doing, it certainly is a reckless way to do it, but we administer justice recklessly sometimes ourselves, so we won't throw stones when we live in a glass tower. The bigger error is to do nothing when it comes to defending justice, not overdoing it, or doing it the wrong way. First, do something. Then, figure out the best way to do it. Do the right thing. Defend justice.

If that's what Russia's doing then OK.

Is that what Russia's doing?

It just looks like they wanted to annex unilaterally, but maybe I'm wrong.
I'm an American exceptionalist. This argument is flawed, and doesn't work on me.

The reason what we do is OK, is because we're moral and right and good, because our Constitution is. We're always perpetually the good guys, we're the good guys today and we were the good guys when we established all our military bases, which exist to protect Americans and our rights. It's just an extension of the Constitution.

We are the good guys. China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, and many, many African and Latin American regimes, are evil, wicked people, in their politics, which comes from their morals, which is wickedness.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Trying to compare America with any other country, but especially those ones in your picture, as if we're all just equal, is stupid. We are politically superior, because we are morally superior. So long as we are morally superior, we will always be politically superior, which means we are morally justified even if we build military based right up Kim Jong Un's and Putin's keisters.


=
Edit Un not Il
 
Last edited:

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
The only thing out of place with your post here is the "Doesn't mean they're wrong" bit. Putin's insidious regime were absolutely wrong to invade Ukraine and there's no justification whatsoever for it.
If they are truly punishing immorality on the part of Ukraine----and only if----then that would be justification.

It doesn't look to me like that's what's happening though, it just looks like an aggressive territorial expansion.

But is there a 0.001% chance I'm wrong? Sure. I just really doubt it and if I were a gambling man I'd bet on Russia just belligerently annexing parts of Ukraine as being the truth. I don't trust them. I don't trust Ukraine either, but the only invader here is Russia.
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Why should the US care so much?
I think just because WWI started when one European country invaded another European country and WWII started when one European country invaded another European country. With nukes involved, and a history of suicidal regimes in Europe, this looks like a powder keg, and why? Why risk a WWIII powder keg?
 
Top