Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 6:28 AM, Rob Browder said:

... where the "law" says you must NOT talk about obvious patterns of behavior, and the harm done as a result.  It's straight out of Orwell's 1984.

 

Granted, a "limited" version of similar is being attempted in the USA, currently - so we aren't far behind.  Once one "category" is protected, others will be added, until free-speech is dead.  But, per current court-rulings, the only "legal" limit on written-speech is making believable (vs joke / non-actionable) threats.

Expand  

 

You need to be more specific. What are you suggesting that there should be absolute free speech? For example, you would be happy for a person of influence to be able to freely state, "Kill all <insert name of group here>", and to be free of all moral and legal accountability and responsibility when someone does just that?

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 6:46 AM, Cameroni said:

 

I completely agree, Russia needs the Ukraine as a buffer to safeguard entry to the European plain so it has a chance of self defense. We need to give Russia this small gift to assuage their justifiably irritated nerves.

Expand  

Now factor in the unilateral withdrawal from the INF.  The question is, why would the Europeans be nervous?  The only way to MAKE Russia into the threat they describe, is by what they are doing.  One might even reach the conclusion the Neocons won't be satisfied unless they can dismember and destroy Russia - exactly as those maps they published describe.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 6:51 AM, RayC said:

 

You need to be more specific. What are you suggesting that there should be absolute free speech? For example, you would be happy for a person of influence to be able to freely state, "Kill all <insert name of group here>", and to be free of all moral and legal accountability and responsibility when someone does just that?

Expand  

That would be a direct threat - incitement to violence - which is not covered, by existing court-precedent.  There are people in prison for this sort of thing.  One CAN say "this person" or "this group" is "bad" - but not call for violent acts, in response.  Saying, "But, some nutter might act violently if they knew X," is not an excuse to ban speech.   Related, "The Noble Lie."

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 6:25 AM, Cameroni said:

 

It wasn't about that though. NATO KNEW full well that Russia's stratgegic defence  is hampered by the great European plain. As long as Russia controlled Ukraine it controlled virtually the whole entry point of the European plain. However, NATO encroaching ever more eastward actually meant Russia became impossible to defend due to its location on the European plain. So if a nation has to fear being invaded by Russia now, then because Russia is concerned about her own defense and security.

Expand  

Every eastern European country that joined NATO volunteered to because it didn't want to be under Russia's repressive rule. 

Likewise Ukraine. 

Putin couldn't bear seeing a nation on his border cosying up to the West, the next thing is his own citizens might start demanding freedoms from repressive rule so Ukraine had to be attacked.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Heart-broken 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 6:59 AM, Rob Browder said:

That would be a direct threat - incitement to violence - which is not covered, by existing court-precedent.  There are people in prison for this sort of thing.  One CAN say "this person" or "this group" is "bad" - but not call for violent acts, in response.  Saying, "But, some nutter might act violently if they knew X," is not an excuse to ban speech.   Related, "The Noble Lie."

Expand  

 

So you agree that there should be limits to free speech?

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 3/18/2025 at 11:17 PM, hotsun said:

Most Americans agree with what hes doing and don’t particularly care what the rest of the world thinks, because the rest of the world doesnt have free elections anymore. Do the facts bother you?

 

freedom comes at a high price, something only an American can understand

Expand  

 

I care about what the rest of the world thinks, but I care more about what I think. 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 7:06 AM, RayC said:

 

So you agree that there should be limits to free speech?

Expand  

Of course - direct violent-threats are prohibited, and should be.  That is exactly where the courts put the line.  This is being tested with new restrictions, however - will see what happens.

  • Agree 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 7:07 AM, simple1 said:

 

Really? trump negotiates with terrorists and aggressive authoritarian regimes. Even goes so far to admire them in the public domain e.g.

 

Trump calls Putin ‘genius’ and ‘savvy’ for Ukraine invasion

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

Expand  

Here is the transcript.

https://www.clayandbuck.com/president-trump-with-cb-from-mar-a-lago

 

Admiration. More propagandistic lies.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 7:14 AM, Rob Browder said:

Now do the same thing, but Mexico joining a Chinese alliance, and guess who "couldn't bear" that.

 

Also, only a portion of Ukrainians wanted what the West was pushing, after years of the USA spending literally Billions on propaganda, telling them how great it was going to be.  Then, when snap-elections were agreed, the coupsters nullified that with violence.

 

They had to get Crimean folks out of the voting, before they could "win" an election - while cynically pretending they were mad about what they KNEW would happen.   Yet, even then, the literal actor who was groomed for the role of president with a TV show (financed by an anti-Russian oligarch) had to promise to do the opposite of what he actually did, regarding all things Russian / peace.

Expand  

China is not in Central America! It's a false analogy.

In addition the states previously under Soviet rule since 1945 were simply seeking liberation from Russian oppression and rejoining Europe politically, the EU,cwhere they geographically belong. 

The Crimean 'folks' were Russians imported under Khrushchev.

What is Zelensky's current popularity? 67%.

  • Like 1
  • Heart-broken 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 12:03 AM, LiamB80 said:

I agree with the OP. I read these posts from non Americans and it’s pure insanity. I voted Trump and he’s doing exactly what i wanted him to do. The constant insults and childish names about President Trump show they never had any respect for America or our way of life to begin with.  

Expand  

The one thing one can say about America, they don't waste time on dignity.

  • Heart-broken 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 7:26 AM, Yagoda said:

Here is the transcript.

https://www.clayandbuck.com/president-trump-with-cb-from-mar-a-lago

 

Admiration. More propagandistic lies.

Expand  

 

Following is a quote from the interview, doesn't change my mind, just reinforces my negative opinion of trump as an enabler of Putin at the time and ongoing. Defining Putin's forces as 'peacekeepers" you have to laugh at the ignorance.

 

"So, Putin is now saying, 'It's independent,' a large section of Ukraine. I said, 'How smart is that?' And he's gonna go in and be a peacekeeper. That's [the] strongest peace force," Trump said, adding that that was the kind of show of force the United States could use on its Southern border.

  • Like 1
  • Heart-broken 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 6:46 AM, Cameroni said:

 

I completely agree, Russia needs the Ukraine as a buffer to safeguard entry to the European plain so it has a chance of self defense. We need to give Russia this small gift to assuage their justifiably irritated nerves.

Expand  

Omg  a Putin sympathizer!

Careful you don’t get the Musk treatment, being called a  Nazi.

  • Heart-broken 2
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 8:20 AM, riclag said:

Omg  a Putin sympathizer!

Careful you don’t get the Musk treatment, being called a  Nazi.

Expand  

 

I do like Putin, how could one not? 

 

Sticks and stones....hahahaha

  • Agree 1
  • Heart-broken 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
  On 3/19/2025 at 8:03 AM, simple1 said:

Following is a quote from the interview, doesn't change my mind, just reinforces my negative opinion of trump as an enabler of Putin at the time and ongoing. Defining Putin's forces as 'peacekeepers" you have to laugh at the ignorance.

Expand  

If you were living in the Donbass region, being shelled for 8 years (including Trump years) before Russia stepped-in, you would probably call the Russians peacekeepers, also. 

 

Trump's ridiculous position, is pretending he didn't continue the very "uniparty" escalation which caused the war.  Every time he says the war would "not have happened, if I were president," I want to puke.  He just hired one of the war's chief anti-Russia cheerleaders for Sec-of-State, and still brags about starting lethal-aid to Ukraine.

 

He's only trying to get a "deal" now, because the West's Ukraine proxy war was lost. They are out of military options to "turn the tide," short of WW3 - and would likely lose that, given Russia has now re-mobilized, and they have not.  Sadly, I suspect they merely want to "buy time" to re-mobilize their military - Europe's in particular - then resume the conflict in 5+ years. 

  • Heart-broken 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...