Your framing of positions creates a ton of assumptions you present as fact and are, at best, a semi reasonable interpretation but not fact.Brooklyn wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:18 pmFarfromgeneva wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 3:45 pmI see your position but making comparisons like this is going to get you Pete Brown treatment eventually. If you care.Brooklyn wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 3:25 pmdislaxxic wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 3:10 pm Buncha NeoCon claptrap and convenient half-truths made up in an attempt to put Russia in the best light possible. This hack wants to complain about the DEMOCRATIC "overthrow" of a Soviet Puppet government?
Neville Chamberlain-like appeasement of the Putin authoritarian regime...a bunch of lame excuses why we should humor the Russian dictator.
Yep, NeoCon claptrap.
..
I'm certainly no apologist for Putin or the neoCONs. But my question is, if appeasement of imperialist Bush was tolerable for 20 years, shouldn't the world take the same policy in handling of Putin? Both power hungry, no doubt about that. But at least Putin's actions were an internal matter. When President Puigdemont declared freedom for Catalonia the world looked the other way as Madrid invaded with Falangist troops. Putin makes the same claims Madrid did -- that it was an internal affair which did not merit foreign intervention. By contrast traitor Bush sent troops overseas and lied about his real reasons. Yet, again, the world looked the other way.
So why should the world intervene now when it was indifferent to the claims made by Afghanistan, Iraq, and Catalonia?
Just a sec, Pal. As always, I am asking for people to take a consistent position in their principles like I do. How or why is that so troubling to you?
You don’t know nearly enough about Bush to declare “he’s power hungry” at all. I think he was some things and flawed surely but that’s an interpretation I think is way off base. That’s one example. You embed these all over and claim fact and incontrovertible things that are no such thing. Cool your principle is consistent but your interpretations are not facts and the nature of your statements to turn around and complain I attacked you while doing the same thing are PB territory.
To suggest Putin’s claims are equal to others is crazy specious yet again presented as hard truth. Either you’re so literal as to be wildly obtuse or intentionally presenting these things in a manner of heuristic that’s very similar to homeboy down under. I hope you understand the concept of a dynamic model and that variables exist. But you don’t present arguments as if you do.