Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

(03-03-2022, 10:46 PM)NH3 Wrote: [ -> ]So Russia has bombed Ukraine's nuclear facility releasing radiation?

How can anyone support this?

CNBC Television: Elevated levels of radiation now being detected near nuclear sight under Russian fire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH54mjbOsK0

NH3...

Don't watch the news coverage, go look at the actual live stream of the entire battle. The vehicles were reacting to the people firing at them. It appears that it's Russian troops attacking someone and they retreated to the administration buildings. Not the reactors. So while a fire in the administration building could have a small impact and firefighters have been let in to put it out.

They weren't shelling the nuclear power plant with their own vehicles right there. The vehicles did fire but that wasn't tanks with the power to effect a nuclear power reactor. I doubt the administration buildings are even within 1 mile of the reactors.


Here is most of the battle but it missed the beginning. You can see the building they were firing into. I'm looking for the full video as I still haven't seen the beginning.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tlC_y4mph8k
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

(03-03-2022, 10:38 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-03-2022, 07:56 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]They don't have primaries in Ukraine.  Or most of Europe, for that matter.  New parties are always coming and going. In the European Parliament, too.  Voters have LOTS of choices there.  Don't project our problems onto other countries.

Where did I say Ukraine had 2 parties, uniparty, etc? It was clear I was talking about the US, there was a new paragraph. Sure I didn't use proper structure for an essay but who cares it was obvious.

You may think you have choices but who had the most money behind them? Who had the media backing? It wasn't the guy who lost.

Poroshenko, in 2014, was also elected in a process where the voters had more than two viable choices.

FYI, looks like I was wrong, the administration buildings are close to the reactors but they are to the left of the camera. The buildings to the right of the camera is where the firing was focused.

(03-03-2022, 11:23 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-03-2022, 10:38 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]Where did I say Ukraine had 2 parties, uniparty, etc? It was clear I was talking about the US, there was a new paragraph. Sure I didn't use proper structure for an essay but who cares it was obvious.

You may think you have choices but who had the most money behind them? Who had the media backing? It wasn't the guy who lost.

Poroshenko, in 2014, was also elected in a process where the voters had more than two viable choices.

Who was backing him again? Could it be the people who started the revolution to remove Russian influence?

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

I missed this yesterday, now you can't have Russian teams in video games. I wonder if the 1st person shooter games will be next to remove them.

https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/2/229583...nhl-russia

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

(03-03-2022, 07:16 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-03-2022, 07:03 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]I haven't seen any condos or apt buildings blown up, certainly not with people in them. If you have a link and I missed it, please let me know.

Why should the world be against Putin? He has done targeted bombing against a corrupt country ..... the US has done the same thing and destroyed a bunch of buildings. If you look at the live streams of Kyiv, it looks nothing like Baghdad or Afghanistan. You may not agree with it but he is doing the same thing that the World has done previously to stop persecution and corruption.

I don't agree with killing civilians but I don't really care about taking out military targets to free a country. If someone did the same thing to Russia I wouldn't care about it either.

Zelensky was freely elected.
The last time the US took out a freely elected leader was Granada in the early 1980s of I'm not mistaken.

There were no freely elected officials running Granada. It was a dictatorship.Their last election was in 1976 and had been considered invalid after a coup and their constitution was suspended.

The US invaded after another coup by their military set up a Marxist government under another dictator.

(03-03-2022, 07:35 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-03-2022, 07:16 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Zelensky was freely elected.
The last time the US took out a freely elected leader was Granada in the early 1980s of I'm not mistaken.

Obama and globalist started the last color revolution in Ukraine. They then installed a puppet who was so hated and corrupt that Zelensky easily won. He isn't exactly a freely elected individual, he is closely tied to all the globalist and liberals.

The false image of having a true choice in who leads you is the scam the globalist have been running for years. It's why there is the uniparty in DC. If you control the primaries, you control who has a chance to win the election. If you have 2 people that are really only different because of the letter next to their name, did you really have a choice to begin with?

When was the last time Russia had a free election? Putin has set himself as leader until at least sometime in the 2030's. He is a dictator.

If Russia is justified because they are attacking a corrupt government then the entire world is justified to go against Russia for that very same reason.

It's surprising to me that there are people on this message board defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It makes me wonder who they really are.

Putin's goal is to take back the former soviet states. He does not agree with the Russian leaders back in 1991 who allowed the former states self determination. Some stayed with Russia while other chose sovereignty and were freely and legally granted that.

Putin is using the exact same nationalistic justification that Hitler used to invade Czechoslovakia, Poland, and France.

You can make the case that Hitler had more theoretical justification than Putin does. Hitler was attacking to take back lands lost by war. Putin is trying to take back lands that his country freely gave their independence. It would be like the UK invading Canada, Australia, or India because a new Prime Minister decides it was a mistake when they were given their sovereignty.

I just realized, right now I'm listening to the Leningrad Symphony Orchestra.  Spotify will send a little tiny amount of money to the Leningrad Symphony Orchestra as a result.  Maybe I should do my part and personally sanction Russian Orchestras. 

Oh, the sacrifices we make...

I'll wait until they're finished.

(03-04-2022, 08:01 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]It's surprising to me that there are people on this message board defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  It makes me wonder who they really are.

This happens, in part, because people don't know how to clearly delineate their feelings from the facts. The other part of this is you failing to recognize the crux of an argument. I was clear in my post to say Putin should not invade Ukraine. It is not moral. The point of my post was that if you really wanted to "stand with Ukraine," as is common in the virtue signaling communities, maybe you should consider voting out OUR terrible politicians who have contributed to this mess. Russia has legitimate grievances, but the US doesn't care because they don't have to. TWe have abandoned the geopolitical principals that helped bring down the wall in the first place. You can only push people so far before they break. 

Sometimes, I am astounded by the gullibility of people.

(03-04-2022, 08:28 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-04-2022, 08:01 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]It's surprising to me that there are people on this message board defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  It makes me wonder who they really are.

This happens, in part, because people don't know how to clearly delineate their feelings from the facts. The other part of this is you failing to recognize the crux of an argument. I was clear in my post to say Putin should not invade Ukraine. It is not moral. The point of my post was that if you really wanted to "stand with Ukraine," as is common in the virtue signaling communities, maybe you should consider voting out OUR terrible politicians who have contributed to this mess. Russia has legitimate grievances, but the US doesn't care because they don't have to. TWe have abandoned the geopolitical principals that helped bring down the wall in the first place. You can only push people so far before they break. 

Sometimes, I am astounded by the gullibility of people.

Russia has legitimate grievances, you say?  Nato was falling apart, Germany had disarmed, the Western democracies have deep political divisions, and no one did anything when Russia took Crimea.  And at that point, you think Russia felt so threatened they just had to invade a neighboring country?   Balderdash.  They didn't feel threatened.  Putin saw an opportunity.  He thought he saw weakness.  He thought he could get away with it.  And now he's committing mass murder in order to take over another country by force, and you justify it, because they have, in your words, "legitimate grievances."  No.  They don't.

(03-04-2022, 07:03 AM)Predator Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-03-2022, 07:16 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Zelensky was freely elected.
The last time the US took out a freely elected leader was Granada in the early 1980s of I'm not mistaken.

There were no freely elected officials running Granada. It was a dictatorship.Their last election was in 1976 and had been considered invalid after a coup and their constitution was suspended.

The US invaded after another coup by their military set up a Marxist government under another dictator.

So there you go.  We'd have to go back to Salvador Allende to see the US taking down a freely elected leader, and you'd have to go back to Hitler to see the US doing it with guns and bombs.

Point remains, the US usually plays nice, not always, but it's been a long time since we've ever done anything as heinous as what Putin's doing to Ukraine, if we ever did.

(03-04-2022, 08:08 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I just realized, right now I'm listening to the Leningrad Symphony Orchestra.  Spotify will send a little tiny amount of money to the Leningrad Symphony Orchestra as a result.  Maybe I should do my part and personally sanction Russian Orchestras. 

Oh, the sacrifices we make...

I'll wait until they're finished.

I'm listening to Slipknot. They're from Iowa. I'm a true patriot. LOL.

(03-04-2022, 08:01 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]It's surprising to me that there are people on this message board defending Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  It makes me wonder who they really are.

Meh, I'd never defend Russia in Ukraine.

It's wrong on every level.

I think from a lot of independent research on the Cold War I've just come to the conclusion that we were the aggressors when it came to proliferation. The only reason there are over 100,000 nuclear warheads in the world is directly because of the United States' unfounded fear of Russia.

(03-04-2022, 07:27 AM)Predator Wrote: [ -> ]When was the last time Russia had a free election? Putin has set himself as leader until at least sometime in the 2030's. He is a dictator.

If Russia is justified because they are attacking a corrupt government then the entire world is justified to go against Russia for that very same reason.

I didn't say anything different. I even stated I wouldn't care if Russia was invaded. The issue is the world shouldn't get involved in local problems. While Putin is a czar or dictator (I don't think he is really anymore), he isn't really harming his people like in the past. His power has been slipping for a long time. He is still powerful but the large cities are more like EU cities than you think.

This war wouldn't exist if the US and EU/NATO would have stayed out of Ukraine.

---

(03-04-2022, 08:51 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]Russia has legitimate grievances, you say?  Nato was falling apart, Germany had disarmed, the Western democracies have deep political divisions, and no one did anything when Russia took Crimea.  And at that point, you think Russia felt so threatened they just had to invade a neighboring country?   Balderdash.  They didn't feel threatened.  Putin saw an opportunity.  He thought he saw weakness.  He thought he could get away with it.  And now he's committing mass murder in order to take over another country by force, and you justify it, because they have, in your words, "legitimate grievances."  No.  They don't.

Look at the polling for voting on Ukraine by NATO countries, it was finally over 50%. Then the pipeline and becoming EUs majority energy provider caused the US to act since they couldn't get the EU to stop the pipeline directly. Putin definitely was threatened.

There is no mass murder unless the MSM and I'm missing something. The MSM keeps telling everyone that Ukraine is destroying Russia.

Ya know what you all should be really scared of?

Germany has increased their military spending to over 2% of their GNP.

It's just a matter of time... soon their technology will be 10x better than the US and China... soon 1 of their soldiers will be worth 10 of any other nation - just like WW1 and WW2.

Not a good thing. Stop Russia now before Germany regains its power. They've always been considered the best soldiers of the modern era... their mercenaries worth 10x of other nations.... like I said.. just a matter of time before they take their rightful place in the military elites.

https://youtu.be/K5BAZ2bBUzM

If you want a seriously well thought out and educated perspective on what is going on in Ukraine from a former us infantrymen. Watch this video. One of my good friends who is a marine turned me on to this guy and I’ve been watching him ever since. 

This is not about the bs political side of this (which none of you can seem to agree on anyway).  This breaks down Russian(and Soviet) military doctrine in a way the media will not. It does a great job explaining why a lot of the stuff we see may be true but is not telling the entire story about this whole event and may be very misleading. What we see as weakness may in fact be part of their plan which they have always done. 

These are some other very good sources he he turned me on to.

https://www.understandingwar.org/

Well worth watching and reading those

The New York Times: China Asked Russia to Delay Ukraine War Until After Olympics, Biden Officials Say.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/02/us/po...china.html

China and Russia will be a Bad Combination especially is China backs Russia.

NH3...

https://youtu.be/KfaAyiP8Wuc

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I've been doing some reading because I'll be the first to admit I know little about Putin, Ukraine and its president, the role of the US in any of this (both historically and currently) and so on. After p_rushing's comments regarding the globalists vs Putin that explained a couple of things I had been wondering about- specifically the "canceling" of everything Russian that hasn't made sense to me- I decided to start reading from different sources so I could try and understand what the heck is going on. 

Questions I've had:
-Why is Russia allowed to dictate who Ukraine is as a country? I say Russia and not Putin specifically because it seems Ukraine has been jerked around by rulers of Russia for millennia. They're like the red headed stepchild of eastern Europe. 

-Why does Putin not want Ukraine in NATO? What does he lose if they join? I'm talking practical matters here. 

-What is with the explosion of cancel culture attitude from pretty much everyone from countries to sports organizations to companies? I don't remember this being a thing back in 2014 when Russia took Crimea. This is the one thing that has been a huge question mark for me. 

If the last six years, and especially the last two years, has taught me anything it's that the government and the media will make a boat load of noise and use cancel culture to divert our attention away from what it doesn't want us to pay attention to. So, what don't they want us to pay attention to? What's changed since 2014 when we seemed not to be overtly concerned with what Putin did in Crimea/Ukraine? 

-Who is Zelenskyy? Like, the man is not afraid to call out anyone who is not supportive of Ukraine and is asking anyone who will listen to aid his country. He is also calling out the likes of FIFA and other sport organizations to cancel Russian countries from competing and such. 

What I think I understand now:
-Ukraine wants to be part of NATO to have military backing in the event of Russian aggression. This article seems to describe this process. It also wants to be a sovereign nation. 

-Putin sees Ukraine as part of Russia- period. This article explains a lot of his mindset in providing some historical context as to why he/Russia can dictate who Ukraine is as a country. 

-Putin doesn't want Ukraine in NATO for Russia's national security but also because he sees the globalist threat being a problem for Russia as a country. An article I want to link doesn't seem to want to link to the specific story, only to the main site. I'll try to find another one. 

-The globalists want the people to think Putin is a nutcase. This article goes into that subject regarding the media and misinformation. This somewhat answers my third question regarding cancel culture.

-I haven't gotten around to Zelenskyy yet. 

I know these articles don't tell the whole story but they satisfied my questions for now in that they gave me some context. There is way too much history and way too many rabbit holes one could go down to try and understand the basics, much less the complexities, of how Russia and Ukraine got to where they are today. 

I still don't know what to think about it all. I'm a practical person. I think in practical terms. I can also be a literal thinker. These make me see Putin's nationalist POV to a degree in that he feels if he does "A" then "B" will happen, though I don't agree with invading a country and taking it against its will. Just because he sees Ukraine as part of Russia doesn't make it his to take. If that is his only goal/reason for invading then he's definitely wrong. 

If he feels a genuine threat from NATO for reasons I have yet to discover (that's a rabbit hole) then I can see why he feels like he has to take Ukraine before they become part of NATO. Again, I don't agree with him or his actions but I can see the "why".  And at this point Ukraine won't be joining NATO unless they go against their own requirements for how a nation joins (described in part in the first article I linked to) so the point is moot.

As for the "globalist" part of all of this, I have not really ever understood it as a thing, organization, or whatever you want to call it, but I think I'm beginning to, and it's not something I feel good about. At all. I'll reserve my thoughts on that for now.