Adopt Sunny and Flurky to Support BlueCheck Ukraine

[NineSpine]

Do you have a source for Iraq stating they would invade Kuwait in 1993 because I have never heard that.

I'm not your fucking tutor. This is like asking for a source that 9/11 was an attack on the Twin Towers. It's bizarre that you keep bringing shit like this up and then demandning a source for the basic information about it. THh No Fly Zone was established in August when Iraq threatened to re-invade on the second anniversary of the original invasion. Iraq then started violating that no-fly zone, moving anti-aircraft into the area, and even exchanging fire with Kuwaiti troops.

WHY WOULD YOU BRING UP 1993 IF YOU DON'T KNOW THIS? It's one thing to disagree on some aspect of it, but to bring it up when you don't know the basics of it is fucking embarrassing. Why do you keep doing this?

We were bombing Sadaam's army every couple years in support of the ethnic minority insurgents, had special forces there working with them, Al Qaeda cited our continuing military presence in Saudi Arabia from the first war as their motivation for 9/11, but the first gulf war is totally different!

Neither bombing in 1993 had anything to do with "ethnic minorities".

The US established a military alliance with the Saudis during FDRs administration. I don't know where you got the bizarre idea that this started in the 90s.

Even worse its still the same bad actors in charge of our foreign policy, but totally different!

Hitler was a vegetarian so vegetarians are Nazis hur dur dur dur. Ideas stand on their merits, not through some complex guilt by association web. It's not a bad idea to take shits just because Condoleeza Rice takes shits.

Not Eastern Europe, I showed you Zelensky in bed with the corrupt oligarchs and more Nazi connections than you can shake a stick at.

Oh no! There are oligarchs in Eastern Europe? And Nazis in Europe? Well fuck, you better alert the newspapers because nobody knew that.

Donetsk was the center of these claims and it did not exceed 100%. Maybe some hamlet somewhere did.

Districts within Donetsk. But nice dodge. Keep flailing around like a child proven wrong. Anyone with half a brain can see that the facts lead to brazen fraud, but half a brain is a lot to ask from someone who thinks leftism is when Putin finishes on your face.

There were cases in the US where 100k more votes were counted than showed up on the registration rolls. I believe that was in Nevada 2020 but later it turned out they just weren't updating the rolls like they should have. Exit polls have been off in many places in US elections. Nothing you've said is particular to Ukraine.

Oh yeah, the rolls just got messed up in the two months between the fucking votes, and the exit polls were wildly off in Yanukovich-supporting areas for some other excuse, and the widespread reports of voter intimidation and fraud by observers were also a coincidence. You are such a comically dishonest fascist.

The bigger issue is the country is so corrupt I'd assume all of them are cheating and to have elections overturned twice to the favor of only one side is going to agitate the other side into not respecting the new government foisted onto them. This was not some peaceful, legit democracy before the war began in 2014.

Do you ever stop lying? The election was not "overturned". They did not kick Yanukovich out in 2004. They held the vote again with stronger fraud protections and Yanukovich LOST. He was removed in 2014 through legal means after he tried to establish a dictatorship by making protest against him illegal.

Yeah, if only you were there to shout at everyone with perfect future vision googles and convince them to fight and die one more time as the only way forward. Of course, if you did this while history is actual unfolding without perfect future vision googles you would make us the Nazis. Its also highly questionable if just declaring war earlier would have been ended the war earlier. Nevermind dealing with real people in real time, the solution is to shout slogans louder and stronger than the other guys!

I already explained the specific mechanics of why it would have ended the war earlier. Germany had no ability to withstand an invasion from the West. Their forces were all in the East. Hitler banked on Western cowardice. The West sat their with their thumbs up their asses making excuses until it was too late.

The main issue is that the appeasement trope gets brought up everytime the US wants to get into a new war. Its a way to claim you should never negotiate and should only fight wars. Every war is like WWII and we're fighting the Nazis again!

Go argue with someone who is comparing every conflict to WWII if you want to have that discussion. I'm comparing THIS conflict because it is apt, and you desperately want to avoid the merits of the comparison and ramble about how some other guy said Vietnam was just like WWII. I dont' care about that guy.

No one said NATO invaded Russia. They did bomb Serbia their traditional ally back to the stone age and Libya and a few others. They did have talks with Ukraine and Georgia about joining Nato and had expanded to the Baltic Republic, moving US military on the border of Russia, but apparently its the Russians that are the aggressors and just looking to fight all of Europe!?

Oh good, let's ramble about Serbia and Librya now. Let's talk about anything but this conflict.

Yes, the invaders are the aggressors. It's not terribly complicated for anyone who isn't a fascist freak.

NATO is only a threat to Russia because Russia wants to invade sovereign nations. Russia can completely neutralize any threat from NATO by minding its own fucking business and respecting borders.

Its rarely that simple, especially when friendly ethnicities get pressured on one side of a nation state's border . the RPF invading Rwanda from Uganda? Vietnam into Cambodia? How bout the US bombing Serbia during their civil war?

Rwanda! Uganda! Vietnam! Cambodia! Let's talking about anything except this conflict!

Here's my op with copy paste from Blizz forums that got me banned -

According to you calling out ethnic cleansing means I'm a nazi. According to you libertarians should support wars their government assures them are just (nevermind they always claim they are just). If you believe in peace you should support all the wars your government does. This absurd logic sums up your arguments right here. Do you think forcefully expelling millions of people from their homeland is acceptable? Which part of my post specifically merited being banned?

For one thing, there are 6 million refugees and only a quarter of those are in Russia, but I do realize expecting you to get one fucking fact correct is asking a lot.

[Marakesh]

I'm not your fucking tutor. This is like asking for a source that 9/11 was an attack on the Twin Towers. It's bizarre that you keep bringing shit like this up and then demandning a source for the basic information about it. THh No Fly Zone was established in August when Iraq threatened to re-invade on the second anniversary of the original invasion. Iraq then started violating that no-fly zone, moving anti-aircraft into the area, and even exchanging fire with Kuwaiti troops.

WHY WOULD YOU BRING UP 1993 IF YOU DON'T KNOW THIS? It's one thing to disagree on some aspect of it, but to bring it up when you don't know the basics of it is fucking embarrassing. Why do you keep doing this?

I've never heard of Iraq stating they were going to invade. The reason you don't want to "tutor me" is because it didn't happen.

Neither bombing in 1993 had anything to do with "ethnic minorities".

All the bombings through the 90s were related to the ungoing civil war. We left and the Kurds and Shiites took over the direct fight against Sadaam.

The US established a military alliance with the Saudis during FDRs administration. I don't know where you got the bizarre idea that this started in the 90s.

There were 1000's of US troops on Saudi soil after the first gulf war. This was important to bin Ladin and caused the Saudis some problems at home. A few personnel for training did not cause them problems, having regular air strikes into Iraq did. No comparison.

Hitler was a vegetarian so vegetarians are Nazis hur dur dur dur. Ideas stand on their merits, not through some complex guilt by association web. It's not a bad idea to take shits just because Condoleeza Rice takes shits.

The same people making the same decisions isn't about Hitler being a vegetarian, whatever that means. Blinken, Nuland, McCain were all pro Iraq War for the same reasons they brought us into conflict with Russia.

Oh no! There are oligarchs in Eastern Europe? And Nazis in Europe? Well fuck, you better alert the newspapers because nobody knew that.

You were the one claiming this was just on the Russians and now you don't want to admit Zelensky is as bad or worse.

Districts within Donetsk. But nice dodge. Keep flailing around like a child proven wrong. Anyone with half a brain can see that the facts lead to brazen fraud, but half a brain is a lot to ask from someone who thinks leftism is when Putin finishes on your face.

Oh yeah, the rolls just got messed up in the two months between the fucking votes, and the exit polls were wildly off in Yanukovich-supporting areas for some other excuse, and the widespread reports of voter intimidation and fraud by observers were also a coincidence. You are such a comically dishonest fascist.

A good rule is not to post when you're this high.

Do you ever stop lying? The election was not "overturned". They did not kick Yanukovich out in 2004. They held the vote again with stronger fraud protections and Yanukovich LOST. He was removed in 2014 through legal means after he tried to establish a dictatorship by making protest against him illegal.

People disagreeing with you aren't lying. You have a very black and white world view.

I already explained the specific mechanics of why it would have ended the war earlier. Germany had no ability to withstand an invasion from the West. Their forces were all in the East. Hitler banked on Western cowardice. The West sat their with their thumbs up their asses making excuses until it was too late.

You gave some strange list of events in the phoney war after going on about appeasement.

Go argue with someone who is comparing every conflict to WWII if you want to have that discussion. I'm comparing THIS conflict because it is apt, and you desperately want to avoid the merits of the comparison and ramble about how some other guy said Vietnam was just like WWII. I dont' care about that guy.

Your analogy is very poor then. I gave you a lot of reasons further back, but you never really respond to facts.

Oh good, let's ramble about Serbia and Librya now. Let's talk about anything but this conflict.

Yes, the invaders are the aggressors. It's not terribly complicated for anyone who isn't a fascist freak.

NATO is only a threat to Russia because Russia wants to invade sovereign nations. Russia can completely neutralize any threat from NATO by minding its own fucking business and respecting borders.

NATO expansion is why we went from Russian leaders like Yeltsin to Putin. That and our intervention in the Yugoslav civil war. It was the end of history after the cold war and we were all going to get along from here on out and then Russia just turned bad for no reason at all.

Rwanda! Uganda! Vietnam! Cambodia! Let's talking about anything except this conflict!

I've given more explanation about this conflict than you have, you've said nothing. You claimed its always wrong to invade another country and I'm pointing out how often it happens and the common thread of threatened ethnicities across borders.

For one thing, there are 6 million refugees and only a quarter of those are in Russia, but I do realize expecting you to get one fucking fact correct is asking a lot.

Answer the actual question I asked. Is it acceptable to call for ethnic cleansing millions of people? This wasn't a math question although you still did the math wrong by adding all the other countries vs Russia which is funny in itself.

Here's another question - if the peace agreement at the end of all this involves Crimea and the 2 eastern provinces going to Russia was it worth 100's of thousands of people dying? Or do you think like Mitt Romney that its worth it if a decent number of those dead are Russians?

[NineSpine]

I've never heard of Iraq stating they were going to invade. The reason you don't want to "tutor me" is because it didn't happen.

Here is a newspaper article from the time:

https://www.tampabay.com/archive/199...gns-on-kuwait/

You are so embarassing.

All the bombings through the 90s were related to the ungoing civil war. We left and the Kurds and Shiites took over the direct fight against Sadaam.

Neither bombing in 1993 had anything to do with the ongoing civil war. One was because of Kuwait no-fly-zone violations and the other was because of an assassination attempt on George Bush.

There were 1000's of US troops on Saudi soil after the first gulf war. This was important to bin Ladin and caused the Saudis some problems at home. A few personnel for training did not cause them problems, having regular air strikes into Iraq did. No comparison.

The idea that bin Laden's gripe was the number of troops and not the actual military alliance and support for the Saudi royals is probably the dumbest thing you've said so far.

The same people making the same decisions isn't about Hitler being a vegetarian, whatever that means. Blinken, Nuland, McCain were all pro Iraq War for the same reasons they brought us into conflict with Russia.

Ideas are bad when they are bad on their merits, not when you can attribute those ideas to people who also had other bad ideas 20 years ago.

You were the one claiming this was just on the Russians and now you don't want to admit Zelensky is as bad or worse.

Zelensky isn't a dictator who invaded a neighboring country.

A good rule is not to post when you're this high.

So, you've just given up on even pretending to have a counter-argument to the mountain of evidence of blatant fraud?

If Zelensky was elected under similar circumstances, you would be screaming it from the rooftops, you hack.

People disagreeing with you aren't lying. You have a very black and white world view.

You lied, so I called you a liar.

You gave some strange list of events in the phoney war after going on about appeasement.

I accurately laid out a timeline of events.

Your analogy is very poor then. I gave you a lot of reasons further back, but you never really respond to facts.

Except when I provided a comprehensive overview of the build up to WWII you just ignored it and called it a "strange list of events".

NATO expansion is why we went from Russian leaders like Yeltsin to Putin. That and our intervention in the Yugoslav civil war. It was the end of history after the cold war and we were all going to get along from here on out and then Russia just turned bad for no reason at all.

Russia is a sovereign, autonomous nation responsible for its own decisions, not a precious little child that needs to be coddled and caressed to prevent it from crying.

I've given more explanation about this conflict than you have, you've said nothing. You claimed its always wrong to invade another country and I'm pointing out how often it happens and the common thread of threatened ethnicities across borders.

Your only explanation is "Everyone but Russia is responsible for Russia's decisions".

You literally just argued "but but but johnny did it too" is a serious defense of a foreign invasion.

Answer the actual question I asked. Is it acceptable to call for ethnic cleansing millions of people? This wasn't a math question although you still did the math wrong by adding all the other countries vs Russia which is funny in itself.

No, it is wrong to call for ethnic cleansing, so maybe you should stop defending the ethnic cleansing of Ukraine by Russia.

Here's another question - if the peace agreement at the end of all this involves Crimea and the 2 eastern provinces going to Russia was it worth 100's of thousands of people dying? Or do you think like Mitt Romney that its worth it if a decent number of those dead are Russians?

The precedent that Russia can invade anyone they want without consequence could kill billions in the long run.

[Relapses]

A shame Bezos couldn't compete in building space ships, eh? As much as a clown Musk might be on social media he has built multiple productive industries from the ground up. Unlike most of those other tech billionaires who mostly make money on what's effectively entertainment, advertising, and monoply. But to you, its some great accident that he's the one mass manufacturing all those electric cars, won the space race (for now), and made satellite internet viable?

Man, you're an Elon simp too? Are you trying to farm Ls?

Allowing the government to use Starlink however it pleases is not a good idea for Americans anymore than it is for opponents of the US military. I guess if you think being libertarian means joining any conflict your government claims is just, you aren't going to see the issues with that either.

If you can't trust the government to use technology in a way which aligns with your beliefs then you shouldn't be providing that technology in the first place. Musk has called for Ukraine to capitulate to Russian peace talks which include giving up Crimea and standing down from its bid to join NATO. Let's not pretend that this petty personal bias had more to do with his decision to shut off Starlink access than any actual moral principle.

[Marakesh]

Man, you're an Elon simp too? Are you trying to farm Ls?

If you can't trust the government to use technology in a way which aligns with your beliefs then you shouldn't be providing that technology in the first place. Musk has called for Ukraine to capitulate to Russian peace talks which include giving up Crimea and standing down from its bid to join NATO. Let's not pretend that this petty personal bias had more to do with his decision to shut off Starlink access than any actual moral principle.

Simp? I described Musk as I see him with some negative as well as positive traits. People who live on the interwebs all days overestimate how much the rest of us care about your online ego. Don't get this insult, is there some Elon fan club out there you're worried is going to overtake the Swifties or something?

Any pushback against the intelligence agencies and the military is welcome. Should we weaponize every IT system to make sure no one misbehaves in this country and abroad? Your speculation about his motive isn't convincing either. The end result is almost certain to involve Crimea being recognized as part of Russia, its over 2/3rds Russian at a minimum. How else do you fix that? Force march them out is the unspoken answer to that.

Here is a newspaper article from the time:

https://www.tampabay.com/archive/199...gns-on-kuwait/

You are so embarassing.

That doesn't say what you think it does. Claiming its part of your territory is the same thing China or Mexico or any number of countries will do. Its not "we're invading right now" which is why every account I've ever read of this (left, right, and center) says "US claims Iraq would invade again." I mean when your country is in the middle of a civil war and Basra right next to Kuwait isn't safe for your own troops, how exactly are you going to get an army into Kuwait while the USAF is still running out of Saudi Arabia in full force? I guess the same way you win WWII in your imagination - by just yelling slogans at people louder!

Neither bombing in 1993 had anything to do with the ongoing civil war. One was because of Kuwait no-fly-zone violations and the other was because of an assassination attempt on George Bush.

What was the no fly zone covering again? They were put in effect to protect the Kurds and Shiites. This was explicitly stated when it happened. You've also not touched the later dates when having a pretext for US bombing became less important. You have a strategy to internet argue around one piece and not worrying that the whole of what you are saying makes no sense in the real world.

Maybe you believe Iraqi soldiers were kicking babies out of incubators too.

The idea that bin Laden's gripe was the number of troops and not the actual military alliance and support for the Saudi royals is probably the dumbest thing you've said so far.

This was the key complaint for bin Ladin and it is why we pulled so many troops out after the second gulf war. Equating a minor amount of training personnel with 1000's of troops running active operations into Iraq is something you'll only see from politicians and internet arguments. When you say these things you aren't just arguing with me, you are arguing with established history. Right, left, or center - this is not something that gets argued but here you are to set the rest of us straight.

Ideas are bad when they are bad on their merits, not when you can attribute those ideas to people who also had other bad ideas 20 years ago.

Its the same ideas being applied by the same people to different countries and has gotten the same result for 30 years. A healthier republic would have moved on from this foreign policy but sometimes countries at a peak don't believe anything can hurt them and that's why empires can decline so rapidly.

Would you hire a manager whose business plans wrecked multiple other companies? And he doesn't even think he did anything wrong, he's going to keep operating the same way. Would you want your sports team to hire a coach who lost at every place he's been but keeps insisting his scheme and system aren't at fault so he's not going to change at all.

Zelensky isn't a dictator who invaded a neighboring country.

His elections are about as legitimate as Putin's as well as his respect for civil liberties. He likes hanging out with the oligarchs that rob the country, getting money from them, and then entertain some Nazis to keep the frontlines intact. For us to be involved in a war on the other side of the world there should be major differences between the two and there is not.

So, you've just given up on even pretending to have a counter-argument to the mountain of evidence of blatant fraud?

Donetsk did not have > 100% vote totals, I already showed you that. Then you keep going with some claim about smaller districts which would have to be pretty small considering Donetsk had a pop of 1 million. So, a dozen over? A few hundred? There have been discrepancies of 100k over here in the US.

And none of this explains why the pro Russian faction kept winning elections, why their core base of support were in the exact same regions to revolt, and are now part of Russia.

If Zelensky was elected under similar circumstances, you would be screaming it from the rooftops, you hack.

He was elected without a free press and the dissenting regions of the country had left. That's probably a worse circumstance.

You lied, so I called you a liar.

Fact remains Kyiv overturned the two elections won by the eastern political parties. That's not a functional democracy.

I accurately laid out a timeline of events.

Except when I provided a comprehensive overview of the build up to WWII you just ignored it and called it a "strange list of events".

Your list was for the months after WWII had been declared which isn't really about appeasement. It didn't provide any reasons for why the Allies moved so slowly in those early months either.

Russia is a sovereign, autonomous nation responsible for its own decisions, not a precious little child that needs to be coddled and caressed to prevent it from crying.

They didn't cry they started punching. If we keep this attitude in our foreign policy maybe we can get the whole world to fight us.

Your only explanation is "Everyone but Russia is responsible for Russia's decisions".

You literally just argued "but but but johnny did it too" is a serious defense of a foreign invasion.

If you want to prevent wars it would help to know why they keep happening. It also points to the absurdity that we are so concerned about this war and not all the others. For example, what the Saudis did in Yemen with our weaponry.

No, it is wrong to call for ethnic cleansing, so maybe you should stop defending the ethnic cleansing of Ukraine by Russia.

If you want to look at it that way then you're responsible for all the ethnic cleansing done by Ukraine and all the many other guilty countries around the world because the US hasn't intervened in their conflict yet.

Recognizing you can't control everything is not the same thing as actively supporting it.

The precedent that Russia can invade anyone they want without consequence could kill billions in the long run.

They cannot invade anyone they want and they don't have anywhere near the casualty count we do. In fact there would have been no invasion if we hadn't played hardball in the first place. I doubt the east and Crimea would have separated either if there wasn't a "revolution." Since power had been going back and forth, its just as likely the pro west side would have won as many elections as the pro east parties.

[Shadowferal]

Should be interesting to see how Ukraine does with f-16s, in addition to the Swedish "Gripen" which has a bit more versatility.

[NineSpine]

That doesn't say what you think it does. Claiming its part of your territory is the same thing China or Mexico or any number of countries will do. It's not "we're invading right now" which is why every account I've ever read of this (left, right, and center) says "US claims Iraq would invade again." I mean when your country is in the middle of a civil war and Basra right next to Kuwait isn't safe for your own troops, how exactly are you going to get an army into Kuwait while the USAF is still running out of Saudi Arabia in full force? I guess the same way you win WWII in your imagination - by just yelling slogans at people louder!

They didn't just claim it was their territory. They claimed it was their territory and then moved military assets into position, violated the no fly zone, and changed fire with Kuwaiti troops.

What was the no fly zone covering again? They were put in effect to protect the Kurds and Shiites. This was explicitly stated when it happened. You've also not touched the later dates when having a pretext for US bombing became less important. You have a strategy to internet argue around one piece and not worrying that the whole of what you are saying makes no sense in the real world.

Maybe you believe Iraqi soldiers were kicking babies out of incubators too.

That's the Northern No Fly Zone. The Southern No Fly Zone, which is the one violated in this case, has nothing to do with the Kurds, largely because its over 1000 kilometers from where the fucking Kurds live.

You are addicted to embarrassing yourself.

This was the key complaint for bin Ladin and it is why we pulled so many troops out after the second gulf war. Equating a minor amount of training personnel with 1000's of troops running active operations into Iraq is something you'll only see from politicians and internet arguments. When you say these things you aren't just arguing with me, you are arguing with established history. Right, left, or center - this is not something that gets argued but here you are to set the rest of us straight.

Have you bothered to even read bin Laden's Letter to America that your claim even comes from? No, you haven't. He cites over 50 grievances/demands, and you are referring to ONE of them. He spends more time in that letter talking about the Monica Lewinsky scandal than he does US military bases. That's not what the "key complaint" looks like.

But, as noted above, you cant stop embarrassing yourself.

Its the same ideas being applied by the same people to different countries and has gotten the same result for 30 years. A healthier republic would have moved on from this foreign policy but sometimes countries at a peak don't believe anything can hurt them and that's why empires can decline so rapidly.

Would you hire a manager whose business plans wrecked multiple other companies? And he doesn't even think he did anything wrong, he's going to keep operating the same way. Would you want your sports team to hire a coach who lost at every place he's been but keeps insisting his scheme and system aren't at fault so he's not going to change at all.

Defending allies against foreign invasion is not something Dick Cheney came up with.

His elections are about as legitimate as Putin's as well as his respect for civil liberties. He likes hanging out with the oligarchs that rob the country, getting money from them, and then entertain some Nazis to keep the frontlines intact. For us to be involved in a war on the other side of the world there should be major differences between the two and there is not.

This

Donetsk did not have > 100% vote totals, I already showed you that. Then you keep going with some claim about smaller districts which would have to be pretty small considering Donetsk had a pop of 1 million. So, a dozen over? A few hundred? There have been discrepancies of 100k over here in the US.

If in 2019 districts in Western Ukraine experienced a bizarre spike in voting participation which was not reflected anywhere else, and exit polls were only wrong in the West, and some districts went over 100%, and there were reports from international observers of intimidation and multiple voting, and all international observers agreed it was fraud, you would say it was obvious Zelensky stole the election. You just don't care what is true, because you are a sick, fascist freak.

And none of this explains why the pro Russian faction kept winning elections, why their core base of support were in the exact same regions to revolt, and are now part of Russia.

Yankovich ran on getting closer to the EU. He forged the EU deal. He pressured his party into it. People in Western Ukraine voted for him thinking he had changed his stance and decided to go with the popular position.

He was elected without a free press and the dissenting regions of the country had left. That's probably a worse circumstance.

You mean he was elected without districts Russia invaded and compromised the election security in? And he would have won anyway. He won by an unprecedented, massive landslide.

Fact remains Kyiv overturned the two elections won by the eastern political parties. That's not a functional democracy.

As I have had to remind you over and over again: The 2004 election was not overturned. They just held the vote again with tighter fraud restrictions, and SURPRISE your guy lost once he couldn't cheat. No election was overturned in 2014. They used the LEGAL PROCESS to remove a wannabe dictator, which was always something their legislature had the authority to do.

Your list was for the months after WWII had been declared which isn't really about appeasement. It didn't provide any reasons for why the Allies moved so slowly in those early months either.

War was not declared on Germany until the invasion of Poland, and I started well before that. The Allies moved slowly because they thought Hitler would get satisfied and stop.

They didn't cry they started punching. If we keep this attitude in our foreign policy maybe we can get the whole world to fight us.

Describing Russia as an aggressive, belligerent, violent child does not make my analogy worse.

If you want to prevent wars it would help to know why they keep happening. It also points to the absurdity that we are so concerned about this war and not all the others. For example, what the Saudis did in Yemen with our weaponry.

Russia keeps starting them because nobody stops them. Thankfully, that has changed.

I'm not really interested in whataboutism, a tactic ironically invented by the Soviet Union.

If you want to look at it that way then you're responsible for all the ethnic cleansing done by Ukraine and all the many other guilty countries around the world because the US hasn't intervened in their conflict yet.

There was no ethnic cleansing, except what has been done by Russia.

Recognizing you can't control everything is not the same thing as actively supporting it.

You've made it exceptionally clear that you actively support it.

They cannot invade anyone they want and they don't have anywhere near the casualty count we do. In fact there would have been no invasion if we hadn't played hardball in the first place. I doubt the east and Crimea would have separated either if there wasn't a "revolution." Since power had been going back and forth, it's just as likely the pro west side would have won as many elections as the pro east parties.

Yeah, the big bad West forced them to invade country after country. Absolutely pathetic.

[Venara]

/closed

This is a news post about special in-game pets where proceeds were donated to humanitarian relief. The sale ended almost 3 week ago.

If you want to discuss the Ukraine/Russia conflict, there is an existing mega-thread: https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...ion-of-Ukraine

This is not the place to do it.