Same Party, Different House
https://fanlax.com/forum/
Right here.....
Acting as though China was already arming them. The word HAVE. There was no prediction. You were claiming that they already were doing it.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:10 pm I wonder if Russia (& China) have this problem ?
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2023 ... ys/383615/
BS ! that story's about capacity to produce. Don't worry. You seem to think China won't do it. What, me worry ?a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:45 amRight here.....
Acting as though China was already arming them. The word HAVE. There was no prediction. You were claiming that they already were doing it.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:10 pm I wonder if Russia (& China) have this problem ?
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2023 ... ys/383615/
I don't SEEM to think anything. I already told you i have no idea....and said you have no idea either.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:54 amBS ! that story's about capacity to produce. Don't worry. You seem to think China won't do it. What, me worry ?a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:45 amRight here.....
Acting as though China was already arming them. The word HAVE. There was no prediction. You were claiming that they already were doing it.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:10 pm I wonder if Russia (& China) have this problem ?
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2023 ... ys/383615/
a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:14 amI don't SEEM to think anything. I already told you i have no idea....and said you have no idea either.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:54 amBS ! that story's about capacity to produce. Don't worry. You seem to think China won't do it. What, me worry ?a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:45 amRight here.....
Acting as though China was already arming them. The word HAVE. There was no prediction. You were claiming that they already were doing it.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:10 pm I wonder if Russia (& China) have this problem ?
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2023 ... ys/383615/
The capacity of China to produce currently, right now, is immaterial to the conversation. Otherwise? You're outright claiming that China is currently arming Russia.
So which is it? If you're going to split hairs like this, you have to pick a lane when called out to clarify.
I'll answer for you: China isn't arming Russia currently. So your post roping China into a discussion about Russia & Ukraine's CURRENT ammo woes was made in error. China doesn't factor in.
...the article is about the capacity to produce munitions. Does China have enough capacity to help Russia, should they choose to ?I'm responding to your claims that we've been "telling" Ukraine those 3 things.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:32 pmYou're listening through rose colored ear plugs (especially to Gen Milley), hearing only what you want to hear.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:27 amWe're definitely not doing so in our official words, nor in the increasing armaments.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 11:26 pmThose 3 points are (imo) what we are currently telling Ukraine, in our actions & our words, direct & indirect.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 11:13 pmYes, certainly collectively.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 10:32 pmIs that a "yes", you consider those 3 statements to be appeasement ?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 10:09 pmI'm 100% for honest assessments discussed privately.old salt wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 8:24 pmWith respect, that's double talk. Would you consider it appeasement for the US, or any NATO member, to tell Zelensky --MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 05, 2023 9:41 amaccepting such armistice, not necessarily.old salt wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 10:59 pmDo you consider an armistice with anything less than Ukraine recovering all territory lost since 2013 to be appeasement ?MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Mar 04, 2023 8:24 am What if the US and EU had chosen instead the appeasement policies advocated on here?
Heck, if the US and EU adopted such now?
F-16 tease --
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poli ... -zelsensky
https://www.reuters.com/world/ukrainian ... 023-03-05/
https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/ ... -rcna73426
https://eurasiantimes.com/assault-from- ... as-france/
https://eurasiantimes.com/mirage-2000c- ... ghter-jet/
But pressuring the non-aggressor to accept such armistice? absolutely.
That's what some have been advocating.
Arguing that gains by an aggressor should be accepted, accepting the war atrocities committed.
And that the Russians have a valid argument that Ukraine has no right to exist (Ukraine was part of Russia, they didn't do enough to defend themselves...)
Appeasement.
And why 'not necessarily'? an armistice is merely a cessation of active military hostilities, a truce, not necessarily the permanent ending of all other such hostilities, eg cyber, and not necessarily addressing reparations and accountability.
And that would embolden aggressors, including Russia and China.
And certainly not provide justice.
-- we don't think you can win back all the territory
-- we can't afford to continue to support you at this level beyond 2023
-- we will support your claims for reparations & war crimes tribunals, but we don't have the means to enforce them ?
# 1 I think is not accurate. It's a matter of willingness to provide them the means.
#2 is definitely not accurate. Yes, making that statement is "appeasement"
#3 is arguable; There are lots of Russian assets that could be used for reparations as well as ways to extract "taxes" going forward. War crimes can be 'enforced' through sanctions for now, more when the situation allows.
Will these matters be hard?
absolutely and they should be discussed as such.
But I read defeatism in those 3 statements and that's the "justification" for appeasement.
As is any notion that Putin will be satisfied (appeased) with a portion of Ukraine...that's simply a precursor to more.
And expressing such a notion, prior to Russia's thorough military defeat, is active appeasement.
doing so officially would be tragically wrong.
We can levy unilateral sanctions but we can't force the rest of the world to comply.
Likewise with seizing assets. If we overreach, we could jeopardize our leadership position.
We're saying it's going to be hard and likely not quick.
If you mean by "we" the right wing media and politicians, who have suddenly embraced isolationism now that a Dem is the POTUS, then I understand what you mean. But that's not the official stance, nor the ongoing national support of a majority of Americans.
I do think that could shift further "defeatist" under the ongoing onslaught of right wing politicians and media, but it's definitely not where we are now.
The trend in polling of US domestic support is downward. That's why Zelensky is now saying they can win in '23.
The EUroburghers are wavering. The delivery of Leopards is slowing & Germany is backing off their defense budget increases.
Welcome to wartime propaganda. You're telling me you that you're going to mock DocB for listening to the propaganda...when ten seconds later YOU fall prey to the same propaganda?old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:22 ama fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:14 amI don't SEEM to think anything. I already told you i have no idea....and said you have no idea either.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:54 amBS ! that story's about capacity to produce. Don't worry. You seem to think China won't do it. What, me worry ?a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:45 amRight here.....
Acting as though China was already arming them. The word HAVE. There was no prediction. You were claiming that they already were doing it.old salt wrote: ↑Mon Mar 06, 2023 9:10 pm I wonder if Russia (& China) have this problem ?
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2023 ... ys/383615/
The capacity of China to produce currently, right now, is immaterial to the conversation. Otherwise? You're outright claiming that China is currently arming Russia.
So which is it? If you're going to split hairs like this, you have to pick a lane when called out to clarify.
I'll answer for you: China isn't arming Russia currently. So your post roping China into a discussion about Russia & Ukraine's CURRENT ammo woes was made in error. China doesn't factor in.
China doesn't factor in ? Why is the global media blowing up about the possibility of China doing just that ?
a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:17 pmWelcome to wartime propaganda. You're telling me you that you're going to mock DocB for listening to the propaganda...when ten seconds later YOU fall prey to the same propaganda?
Who do you think pitched that 'China MIGHT give arms to Russia story, OS? Use your head.
But sticking to the point, you keep acting like it's happening now. It's not. Stop. What's more? You sound like you're gloating, maybe choose your words more carefully. Or don't...it's up to you.
...yeah, just wartime propaganda. You're smarter than the rest of the world that takes the possibility seriously.Sigh. That's not what I meant. You're back to the insults. I'm about done with the kindness, and about to go right back to returning fire.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:32 pma fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:17 pmWelcome to wartime propaganda. You're telling me you that you're going to mock DocB for listening to the propaganda...when ten seconds later YOU fall prey to the same propaganda?
Who do you think pitched that 'China MIGHT give arms to Russia story, OS? Use your head.
But sticking to the point, you keep acting like it's happening now. It's not. Stop. What's more? You sound like you're gloating, maybe choose your words more carefully. Or don't...it's up to you.
You're smarter than this. Your being willfully obtuse if you don't see the message the Biden admin is sending to Zelensky.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 9:00 am We're definitely not doing so in our official words,
I'm responding to your claims that we've been "telling" Ukraine those 3 things.
That's incorrect, indeed it's a "lie", a work of propaganda.
I've read your subsequent discussion with a fan, so I don't want to repeat it, but you indeed implied that Russia doesn't have the problem of running out of munitions...
Don't be so thin skinned. Say what you mean.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:43 pmSigh. That's not what I meant. You're back to the insults. I'm about done with the kindness, and about to go right back to returning fire.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:32 pma fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:17 pmWelcome to wartime propaganda. You're telling me you that you're going to mock DocB for listening to the propaganda...when ten seconds later YOU fall prey to the same propaganda?
Who do you think pitched that 'China MIGHT give arms to Russia story, OS? Use your head.
But sticking to the point, you keep acting like it's happening now. It's not. Stop. What's more? You sound like you're gloating, maybe choose your words more carefully. Or don't...it's up to you.
For a guy who says he doesn't want that, you sure seem to dish it out.
What I meant was: Biden is sending a message for the whole world to hear. And the papers are dutifully picking it up. That's war propaganda, my man...wartime governments manipulating the media to do their bidding. The fact that you don't see this is frankly depressing.
The message is "we know you're considering this, XI. And you better think three or four times before you do it. And doing it clandestinely isn't going to work....we're letting the whole world know you're mulling this over".
I'm not blowing it off. I'd put it at a 10% chance they'd do it. The risk/reward of messing with trade with the US isn't worth it. What does XI get in arming the losing side, versus what does Xi lose if he does it? But sure, it's a possibility. EVERYTHING is a possibility.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:49 pmDon't be so thin skinned. Say what you mean.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:43 pmSigh. That's not what I meant. You're back to the insults. I'm about done with the kindness, and about to go right back to returning fire.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:32 pma fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:17 pmWelcome to wartime propaganda. You're telling me you that you're going to mock DocB for listening to the propaganda...when ten seconds later YOU fall prey to the same propaganda?
Who do you think pitched that 'China MIGHT give arms to Russia story, OS? Use your head.
But sticking to the point, you keep acting like it's happening now. It's not. Stop. What's more? You sound like you're gloating, maybe choose your words more carefully. Or don't...it's up to you.
For a guy who says he doesn't want that, you sure seem to dish it out.
What I meant was: Biden is sending a message for the whole world to hear. And the papers are dutifully picking it up. That's war propaganda, my man...wartime governments manipulating the media to do their bidding. The fact that you don't see this is frankly depressing.
The message is "we know you're considering this, XI. And you better think three or four times before you do it. And doing it clandestinely isn't going to work....we're letting the whole world know you're mulling this over".
I'm not being thin skinned----you asked me to stop with the hectoring. That's what I'm doing. But what that means is....You don't get to hector me, either.
Savvy? So if you want to go back to that------giving and taking fire? Just say the word. Otherwise....be polite. Pick one.
Of course I recognize Biden's public utterances as wartime propaganda,
that was my point in pointing out the actual message being sent to Ukraine.
So you do take seriously the threat of China supplying Russia ? You seem to blow it off ?
I was not hectoring you. I was responding when you quoted me. You began the exchange, as usual.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:23 pmI'm not blowing it off. I'd put it at a 10% chance they'd do it. The risk/reward of messing with trade with the US isn't worth it. What does XI get in arming the losing side, versus what does Xi lose if he does it? But sure, it's a possibility. EVERYTHING is a possibility.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:49 pmDon't be so thin skinned. Say what you mean.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:43 pmSigh. That's not what I meant. You're back to the insults. I'm about done with the kindness, and about to go right back to returning fire.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:32 pma fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 12:17 pmWelcome to wartime propaganda. You're telling me you that you're going to mock DocB for listening to the propaganda...when ten seconds later YOU fall prey to the same propaganda?
Who do you think pitched that 'China MIGHT give arms to Russia story, OS? Use your head.
But sticking to the point, you keep acting like it's happening now. It's not. Stop. What's more? You sound like you're gloating, maybe choose your words more carefully. Or don't...it's up to you.
For a guy who says he doesn't want that, you sure seem to dish it out.
What I meant was: Biden is sending a message for the whole world to hear. And the papers are dutifully picking it up. That's war propaganda, my man...wartime governments manipulating the media to do their bidding. The fact that you don't see this is frankly depressing.
The message is "we know you're considering this, XI. And you better think three or four times before you do it. And doing it clandestinely isn't going to work....we're letting the whole world know you're mulling this over".
I'm not being thin skinned----you asked me to stop with the hectoring. That's what I'm doing. But what that means is....You don't get to hector me, either.
Savvy? So if you want to go back to that------giving and taking fire? Just say the word. Otherwise....be polite. Pick one.
Of course I recognize Biden's public utterances as wartime propaganda,
that was my point in pointing out the actual message being sent to Ukraine.
So you do take seriously the threat of China supplying Russia ? You seem to blow it off ?
Ah, i get it. You don't know what the word hector means. You think it's hectoring when you step into a conversation here, and give your opinion without being directly addressed. That's not hectoring.
You left out this :
Sure...more of the same. How does this change my point? You were using the word incorrectly. That's fine (I do it, too)....I''m simply saying you were using it to essentially mean "injecting yourself into a conversation".old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:55 pmYou left out this :
hec·tor
/ˈhektər/
Learn to pronounce
verb
talk to (someone) in a bullying way.
"she doesn't hector us about giving up things
Similar:
bully
intimidate
browbeat
cow
badger
harass
torment
plague
coerce
pressurize
strong-arm
threaten
menace
a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 5:04 pmSure...more of the same. How does this change my point? You were using the word incorrectly. That's fine (I do it, too)....I''m simply saying you were using it to essentially mean "injecting yourself into a conversation".old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:55 pmYou left out this :
hec·tor
/ˈhektər/
Learn to pronounce
verb
talk to (someone) in a bullying way.
"she doesn't hector us about giving up things
Similar:
bully
intimidate
browbeat
cow
badger
harass
torment
plague
coerce
pressurize
strong-arm
threaten
menace
I thought you meant the correct usage.......and wanted to return to more pleasant, polite conversation.
Is that what you want, or not? Because everyone here is welcome to post whenever they want.
...similar does not mean incorrect.old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 5:12 pm
You badger me, just like you did Petey, but I don't take the bait & get banned.Certainly one interpretation. The other is: I called out both your hypocrisies. You and Pete both have one set of standards for things you like, and another one for things you don't.
Example? Neither of you complained about Trump's pre-Covid deficit spending. Not one word about it. Biden shows up? Suddenly you're E Scrooge, trying to lecture the rest of us about spending. I could list examples like this all day long. It's annoying, and it's beneath you. Whats more? You KNOW you are doing this now....yet you keep doing it anyway. Which is either dishonest, or trolling. Either way, yep, you're gonna get "badgered" when you troll or act like an idiot. Or are you going to pretend you wouldn't do the same thing if----out of nowhere----I completely changed my values simply because Biden showed up?
You and Pete just don't like getting called to account for having a code of ethics and morals that are entirely dependent on the party involved. So you call it badgering. You want to me to ignore this....and act like I'm the only guy who notices you do this, and the only guy who call you out.
EVERYONE knows you do this, OS. We're all saying the same thing. And it's absurd to pretend that you don't know this.
You just want someone to argue with.
What % of our exchanges do I initiate by quoting you or trolling you by name ?See? I was right. THIS is what you think hectoring is.
Glad that you agree.
I've said very little about deficit spending since our discussions years ago about sequester budget caps/military readiness & Simpson-Bowles.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:43 pmold salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 5:12 pm
You badger me, just like you did Petey, but I don't take the bait & get banned.Certainly one interpretation. The other is: I called out both your hypocrisies. You and Pete both have one set of standards for things you like, and another one for things you don't.
Example? Neither of you complained about Trump's pre-Covid deficit spending. Not one word about it. Biden shows up? Suddenly you're E Scrooge, trying to lecture the rest of us about spending. I could list examples like this all day long. It's annoying, and it's beneath you. Whats more? You KNOW you are doing this now....yet you keep doing it anyway. Which is either dishonest, or trolling. Either way, yep, you're gonna get "badgered" when you troll or act like an idiot. Or are you going to pretend you wouldn't do the same thing if----out of nowhere----I completely changed my values simply because Biden showed up?
You and Pete just don't like getting called to account for having a code of ethics and morals that are entirely dependent on the party involved. So you call it badgering. You want to me to ignore this....and act like I'm the only guy who notices you do this, and the only guy who call you out.
EVERYONE knows you do this, OS. We're all saying the same thing. And it's absurd to pretend that you don't know this.
You just want someone to argue with.
What % of our exchanges do I initiate by quoting you or trolling you by name ?See? I was right. THIS is what you think hectoring is.
Glad that you agree.
old salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 8:13 pmI've said very little about deficit spending since our discussions years ago about sequester budget caps/military readiness & Simpson-Bowles.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 7:43 pmold salt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 5:12 pm
You badger me, just like you did Petey, but I don't take the bait & get banned.Certainly one interpretation. The other is: I called out both your hypocrisies. You and Pete both have one set of standards for things you like, and another one for things you don't.
Example? Neither of you complained about Trump's pre-Covid deficit spending. Not one word about it. Biden shows up? Suddenly you're E Scrooge, trying to lecture the rest of us about spending. I could list examples like this all day long. It's annoying, and it's beneath you. Whats more? You KNOW you are doing this now....yet you keep doing it anyway. Which is either dishonest, or trolling. Either way, yep, you're gonna get "badgered" when you troll or act like an idiot. Or are you going to pretend you wouldn't do the same thing if----out of nowhere----I completely changed my values simply because Biden showed up?
You and Pete just don't like getting called to account for having a code of ethics and morals that are entirely dependent on the party involved. So you call it badgering. You want to me to ignore this....and act like I'm the only guy who notices you do this, and the only guy who call you out.
EVERYONE knows you do this, OS. We're all saying the same thing. And it's absurd to pretend that you don't know this.
You just want someone to argue with.
What % of our exchanges do I initiate by quoting you or trolling you by name ?See? I was right. THIS is what you think hectoring is.
Glad that you agree.
I don't like deficit spending any more than you do, but I'm not obsessed with it like you are, constantly shouting into the storm.
That does not disqualify me, or anyone else, from objecting to specific spending on things we do not approve of, which is the standard you are imposing. Sometimes I accept things that I cannot change.
If you want to stop playing stupid partisan games, then just stop. It's not team sports & you aren't the ref.
I'm happy to let you rant without comment, so long as you don't quote or troll me in the process.
ain’t that the truth.