on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?
On 7/11/23 10:18 PM, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?No, that was you, which you did by referring to a report you hadn't read.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 5:27:40 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/11/23 10:18 PM, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?No, that was you, which you did by referring to a report you hadn't read.
Now you claim to know what I read? Really?
On 7/12/23 10:58 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 5:27:40 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/11/23 10:18 PM, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?No, that was you, which you did by referring to a report you hadn't read.
Now you claim to know what I read? Really?You seemed unfamiliar with its contents and mischaracterized its tone
and conclusions.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 9:23:42 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/12/23 10:58 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 5:27:40 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:You seemed unfamiliar with its contents and mischaracterized its tone
On 7/11/23 10:18 PM, ScottW wrote:Now you claim to know what I read? Really?
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?No, that was you, which you did by referring to a report you hadn't read. >>>
and conclusions.
I cut through the BS and the fluff. Everything I said was true and corroborated by the report.
On 7/12/23 7:27 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 9:23:42 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/12/23 10:58 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 5:27:40 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:You seemed unfamiliar with its contents and mischaracterized its tone
On 7/11/23 10:18 PM, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?No, that was you, which you did by referring to a report you hadn't read.
Now you claim to know what I read? Really?
and conclusions.
I cut through the BS and the fluff. Everything I said was true and corroborated by the report.You didn't actually say anything. You quoted... Peggy Grande in the
Daily Express US. You wrote a subject line, "Scathing report on Joe's debacle of Afghan withdrawal," and the following:
"Ouch...Think Joe feels the pain? Anyone's pain and suffering? He's
f'ing clueless. The man with only 6 grand children has no integrity."
Couldn't even stay on topic for four sentences!
The report is silent on Biden's "pain and suffering." His cluelessness
and "no integrity" is your opinion only, not corroborated by the report.
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 4:37:37 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/12/23 7:27 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 9:23:42 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:You didn't actually say anything. You quoted... Peggy Grande in
On 7/12/23 10:58 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 5:27:40 AM UTC-7, mINE109You seemed unfamiliar with its contents and mischaracterized
wrote:
On 7/11/23 10:18 PM, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?No, that was you, which you did by referring to a report
you hadn't read.
Now you claim to know what I read? Really?
its tone and conclusions.
I cut through the BS and the fluff. Everything I said was true
and corroborated by the report.
the Daily Express US. You wrote a subject line, "Scathing report on
Joe's debacle of Afghan withdrawal," and the following:
"Ouch...Think Joe feels the pain? Anyone's pain and suffering?
He's f'ing clueless. The man with only 6 grand children has no
integrity."
Couldn't even stay on topic for four sentences!
The report is silent on Biden's "pain and suffering." His
cluelessness and "no integrity" is your opinion only, not
corroborated by the report.
You're lying and you know it because you can't deny the truth.
Try this simple case.
Biden was advised to hold the troop level at 2500. He refused. After
the debacle he claims he never received such advice. He's lying. And
so are you.
On 7/13/23 10:28 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 4:37:37 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/12/23 7:27 PM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 9:23:42 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:You didn't actually say anything. You quoted... Peggy Grande in
On 7/12/23 10:58 AM, ScottW wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 5:27:40 AM UTC-7, mINE109You seemed unfamiliar with its contents and mischaracterized
wrote:
On 7/11/23 10:18 PM, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?No, that was you, which you did by referring to a report
you hadn't read.
Now you claim to know what I read? Really?
its tone and conclusions.
I cut through the BS and the fluff. Everything I said was true
and corroborated by the report.
the Daily Express US. You wrote a subject line, "Scathing report on
Joe's debacle of Afghan withdrawal," and the following:
"Ouch...Think Joe feels the pain? Anyone's pain and suffering?
He's f'ing clueless. The man with only 6 grand children has no
integrity."
Couldn't even stay on topic for four sentences!
The report is silent on Biden's "pain and suffering." His
cluelessness and "no integrity" is your opinion only, not
corroborated by the report.
You're lying and you know it because you can't deny the truth.You say "lying" whenever you don't like something, and yet you complain about mindreading.
If I'm "lying" (oh, how you misuse that word), it will be easy for you
to cite the report to show where I'm mistaken.
Try this simple case.
Biden was advised to hold the troop level at 2500. He refused. AfterFrom the report:
the debacle he claims he never received such advice. He's lying. And
so are you.
Even prior to the signing of the February 2020 U.S.-Taliban Agreement, President Trump had signaled his desire to end the U.S. military
presence in Afghanistan, and he steadily withdrew U.S. forces following
that agreement. When the Trump administration left office, key questions remained unanswered about how the United States would meet the May 2021 deadline for a full military withdrawal, how the United States could maintain a diplomatic presence in Kabul after that withdrawal, and what might happen to those eligible for the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV)
program as well as other at-risk Afghans.
...Due to the enormous challenge of providing security for the large diplomatic mission in a conflict area, there was a plan to retain some
U.S. forces to provide critical security, but the details of that – and what stay-behind force the Taliban would accept as consistent with the February 2020 U.S.-Taliban Agreement – had not been clearly established
by the time Kabul fell to the Taliban in August 2021.
End quote.
Your generals' statements lack context:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/09/28/video-biden-versus-generals-2500-troops-afghanistan/
I'm not going to judge this on the basis of a
cherry-picked public statements.
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 12:33:24 PM UTC-4, mINE109 wrote:
I'm not going to judge this on the basis of a
cherry-picked public statements.
Neither am I.
On 7/13/23 11:35 AM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 12:33:24 PM UTC-4, mINE109 wrote:
I'm not going to judge this on the basis of a
cherry-picked public statements.
Neither am I.No, you go by the last thing you saw on Fox.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: “But your top military advisers warned against withdrawing on this timeline. They wanted you to keep about 2,500 troops.”
BIDEN: “No, they didn’t. It was split. That wasn’t true. That wasn’t true.”
— interview aired on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Aug. 19
“My assessment was, back in the fall of ’20 and remained consistent throughout that we should keep a steady state of 2,500 — and it could bounce up to 3,500 — or maybe something like that.”
Whether Biden’s remarks to Stephanopoulos were contradicted by the testimony of military leaders is open to interpretation.
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 9:33:24 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: “But your top military advisers warned
against withdrawing on this timeline. They wanted you to keep about
2,500 troops.”
BIDEN: “No, they didn’t. It was split. That wasn’t true. That
wasn’t true.”
— interview aired on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Aug. 19
“My assessment was, back in the fall of ’20 and remained
consistent throughout that we should keep a steady state of 2,500 —
and it could bounce up to 3,500 — or maybe something like that.”
Politico says
During the interview, Stephanopoulos asked Biden point blank: “So no
one told — your military advisers did not tell you, “No, we should
just keep 2,500 troops. It’s been a stable situation for the last
several years. We can do that. We can continue to do that”?
Biden answered: “No. No one said that to me that I can recall.”
Which we know is contradicted by DoD testimony in front of congress.
Watch the video and Biden spin. He contradicts himself. Even your
quote is contradictory and dependent on throughout not really being throughout. Because he went well below that at the end.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2nwusq_WcM
Whether Biden’s remarks to Stephanopoulos were contradicted by the
testimony of military leaders is open to interpretation.
Yeah....like grass is green.
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 1:24:29 PM UTC-4, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/13/23 11:35 AM, Art Sackman wrote:
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 12:33:24 PM UTC-4, mINE109 wrote:No, you go by the last thing you saw on Fox.
I'm not going to judge this on the basis of a
cherry-picked public statements.
Neither am I.
Mother Jones is ringing your dinner bell.
Go chow down on your Marxist propoganda.
No, you go by the last thing you saw on Fox.
Go chow down on your Marxist propoganda.
Many other veterans of the historic effort in the 1990’s to break the strangle hold of the Big 3 Networks and to build a fourth competitive
force in American television share our resentment that the reputation of
the Fox brand we helped to build has been ruined by false news.
mINE109 wrote:
This trope has been oozing into the MAGA drool-storm recently. I dug up a possible seed of Sackdork's latest idiocy:
No, you go by the last thing you saw on Fox.
Go chow down on your Marxist propoganda.
[]
Hours after pleading not guilty in federal court, Trump told a crowd of his supporters at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, that Biden, “together with a
band of his closest thugs, misfits and Marxists, tried to destroy American democracy.”
[]
Dumpster says it, and the MAGA-morons work it into their catechism of mindless obeisance.
It's somewhat heartening to learn that some participants in the Fucksenstein cult
Many other veterans of the historic effort in the 1990’s to break the
strangle hold of the Big 3 Networks and to build a fourth competitive
force in American television share our resentment that the reputation of
the Fox brand we helped to build has been ruined by false news.
have realized the error of their ways, but I have to gag at that crap about the
"strangle hold of the Big 3 Networks". It's true that Fucks and MSNBC were launched in the mid-90s, but CNN started in 1980. Not to mention that TV news did not fill an existing void; it supplanted, with increasing rapacity, print news, most
especially of the local stripe.
By comparison, the greed of TV and movie corporations that is forcing writers and actors
to strike is a monolithic force that really does "strangle" most of the industry.
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?the debacle wrought by Joe Biden.
He's either completely ignorant of what went down and as such should refrain from any discussion or he's fully aware and chooses to rewrite history to defend his holyness and the dem party.
Either one sucks as the documented history of what happened is readily available so ignorance is really no excuse for being the equivalent to a lying scumbag of a human being who would write off the lives of so many people who suffer even today from
How shitty and without soul can a person be?
ScottW
On 12/07/2023 1:18 pm, ScottW wrote:the debacle wrought by Joe Biden.
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?
He's either completely ignorant of what went down and as such should refrain from any discussion or he's fully aware and chooses to rewrite history to defend his holyness and the dem party.
Either one sucks as the documented history of what happened is readily available so ignorance is really no excuse for being the equivalent to a lying scumbag of a human being who would write off the lives of so many people who suffer even today from
How shitty and without soul can a person be?
ScottW
You don't give a shit about Afghans, Ukrainians, or anyone else that
does not resemble you.
On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 1:44:27 AM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:from the debacle wrought by Joe Biden.
On 12/07/2023 1:18 pm, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?
He's either completely ignorant of what went down and as such should refrain from any discussion or he's fully aware and chooses to rewrite history to defend his holyness and the dem party.
Either one sucks as the documented history of what happened is readily available so ignorance is really no excuse for being the equivalent to a lying scumbag of a human being who would write off the lives of so many people who suffer even today
How shitty and without soul can a person be?
ScottW
You don't give a shit about Afghans, Ukrainians, or anyone else thatI'm Ukrainian and Scott gives a shit about me. Well, "at leased"
does not resemble you.
a little bit.
David Suchet is of Russian and Lithuanian descent (Russians and Lithuanians look similar to
Ukrainians) and successfully portrayed a Belgian. If push came to shove, Scott could
pass himself off as Ukrainian.
On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 1:44:27 AM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:the debacle wrought by Joe Biden.
On 12/07/2023 1:18 pm, ScottW wrote:
on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan?
He's either completely ignorant of what went down and as such should refrain from any discussion or he's fully aware and chooses to rewrite history to defend his holyness and the dem party.
Either one sucks as the documented history of what happened is readily available so ignorance is really no excuse for being the equivalent to a lying scumbag of a human being who would write off the lives of so many people who suffer even today from
How shitty and without soul can a person be?
ScottW
You don't give a shit about Afghans, Ukrainians, or anyone else that
does not resemble you.
I'm Ukrainian
a little bit.
David Suchet is of Russian and Lithuanian descent (Russians and Lithuanians look similar to
Ukrainians) and successfully portrayed a Belgian. If push came to shove, Scott could
pass himself off as Ukrainian.
I'm Ukrainian**Are you? I had always assumed that you were an American citizen? Which would make you an American. Were you born in Ukraine?
and Scott gives a shit about me. Well, "at leased"
a little bit.**"at leased"? What does that mean? Is English your second language? I believe you meant to say: 'at least'. See if you can manage that next
time, so I don't have to correct you.
David Suchet is of Russian and Lithuanian descent (Russians and Lithuanians look similar to
Ukrainians) and successfully portrayed a Belgian. If push came to shove, Scott could
pass himself off as Ukrainian.
**Irrelevant. Scott and you don't give a shit about Ukrainians. If you
did, you would not support Putin's good friend, Trump.
**Are you? I had always assumed that you were an American citizen? Which
I'm Ukrainian
would make you an American. Were you born in Ukraine?
You are a stupid idiot who cant tell the difference between
"I'm Ukrainian"
and
"I'm a Ukranian"
The first refers to genealogical descent,
the second refers to citizenship.
Almost all Americans are of genealogical descent from some other country
But there are a few notable exceptions, such as Elizabeth Warren.
and Scott gives a shit about me. Well, "at leased"
a little bit.**"at leased"? What does that mean? Is English your second language? I
believe you meant to say: 'at least'. See if you can manage that next
time, so I don't have to correct you.
I have explained that to you before, several times over the years.
It's 'homage' to a gaffe once posted by Scott,'
It us purposeful.
David Suchet is of Russian and Lithuanian descent (Russians and Lithuanians look similar to
Ukrainians) and successfully portrayed a Belgian. If push came to shove, Scott could
pass himself off as Ukrainian.
**Irrelevant. Scott and you don't give a shit about Ukrainians. If you
did, you would not support Putin's good friend, Trump.
I clearly do not support Trump's Ukrainian policy.
I don't have to agree with him 100%on everything to support him.
If I applied that standard, I could not support any candidate.
I don't agree 100% with any candidate.
On 16/07/2023 2:05 pm, Art Sackman wrote:
**Are you? I had always assumed that you were an American citizen? Which >> would make you an American. Were you born in Ukraine?
I'm Ukrainian
You are a stupid idiot who cant tell the difference between
"I'm Ukrainian"
and
"I'm a Ukranian"
The first refers to genealogical descent,**So, you're an American, not a Ukrainian. That explains why you support Putin's good buddy, Trump. ANYONE supporting Trump clearly doesn't give
the second refers to citizenship.
a shit about Ukraine, or the rest of Europe, for that matter.
Almost all Americans are of genealogical descent from some other country But there are a few notable exceptions, such as Elizabeth Warren.**Good. Then you are an American. You are not Ukrainian, nor are you A Ukrainian. I am Australian. My ancestry is Irish/Scottish, but I am completely Australian.
Just as you are an American, albeit with a rather poor grasp of your own language.
and Scott gives a shit about me. Well, "at leased"
a little bit.**"at leased"? What does that mean? Is English your second language? I
believe you meant to say: 'at least'. See if you can manage that next
time, so I don't have to correct you.
I have explained that to you before, several times over the years.**It is stupid. Much like you.
It's 'homage' to a gaffe once posted by Scott,'
It us purposeful.
David Suchet is of Russian and Lithuanian descent (Russians and Lithuanians look similar to
Ukrainians) and successfully portrayed a Belgian. If push came to shove, Scott could
pass himself off as Ukrainian.
**Irrelevant. Scott and you don't give a shit about Ukrainians. If you
did, you would not support Putin's good friend, Trump.
I clearly do not support Trump's Ukrainian policy.**YOU SUPPORT TRUMP! Therefore, you support the destruction of Ukraine.
I don't have to agree with him 100%on everything to support him.**A logical thinking person would consider that something so fundamental
as the destruction of Ukraine would rule Trump out of any consideration.
You are not a logical thinking person. You are an uncaring arsehole.
If I applied that standard, I could not support any candidate.**We are talking not only about the destruction of a nation of more than
I don't agree 100% with any candidate.
40 million people, but the destruction of a nation that you claim some historical links to. Then, of course, are the other nations that Putin wishes to subjugate, after he succeeds (which, under Biden's leadership, seems remote) in destroying Ukraine. This is VERY serious stuff. Trump
has already tried to cripple NATO. If he is allowed to become POTUS
again, he will try again, since that is what his mater, Putin, wishes. Fortunately, NATO appears to be re-energised and Trump is headed for
prison.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com
The Ukraine situation is serious stuff. But not the most serious stuff.
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing. conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions
trumps the Ukraine.
On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 5:24:59 AM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 16/07/2023 2:05 pm, Art Sackman wrote:
**So, you're an American, not a Ukrainian. That explains why you support
**Are you? I had always assumed that you were an American citizen? Which >>>> would make you an American. Were you born in Ukraine?
I'm Ukrainian
You are a stupid idiot who cant tell the difference between
"I'm Ukrainian"
and
"I'm a Ukranian"
The first refers to genealogical descent,
the second refers to citizenship.
Putin's good buddy, Trump. ANYONE supporting Trump clearly doesn't give
a shit about Ukraine, or the rest of Europe, for that matter.
**Good. Then you are an American. You are not Ukrainian, nor are you A
Almost all Americans are of genealogical descent from some other country >>> But there are a few notable exceptions, such as Elizabeth Warren.
Ukrainian. I am Australian. My ancestry is Irish/Scottish, but I am
completely Australian.
Just as you are an American, albeit with a rather poor grasp of your own
language.
**It is stupid. Much like you.
and Scott gives a shit about me. Well, "at leased"
a little bit.**"at leased"? What does that mean? Is English your second language? I >>>> believe you meant to say: 'at least'. See if you can manage that next
time, so I don't have to correct you.
I have explained that to you before, several times over the years.
It's 'homage' to a gaffe once posted by Scott,'
It us purposeful.
**YOU SUPPORT TRUMP! Therefore, you support the destruction of Ukraine.
David Suchet is of Russian and Lithuanian descent (Russians and Lithuanians look similar to
Ukrainians) and successfully portrayed a Belgian. If push came to shove, Scott could
pass himself off as Ukrainian.
**Irrelevant. Scott and you don't give a shit about Ukrainians. If you >>>> did, you would not support Putin's good friend, Trump.
I clearly do not support Trump's Ukrainian policy.
I don't have to agree with him 100%on everything to support him.**A logical thinking person would consider that something so fundamental
as the destruction of Ukraine would rule Trump out of any consideration.
You are not a logical thinking person. You are an uncaring arsehole.
If I applied that standard, I could not support any candidate.**We are talking not only about the destruction of a nation of more than
I don't agree 100% with any candidate.
40 million people, but the destruction of a nation that you claim some
historical links to. Then, of course, are the other nations that Putin
wishes to subjugate, after he succeeds (which, under Biden's leadership,
seems remote) in destroying Ukraine. This is VERY serious stuff. Trump
has already tried to cripple NATO. If he is allowed to become POTUS
again, he will try again, since that is what his mater, Putin, wishes.
Fortunately, NATO appears to be re-energised and Trump is headed for
prison.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
The Ukraine situation is serious stuff. But not the most serious stuff.
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing. conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions
trumps the Ukraine.
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the destruction of Ukraine.
to the Ukrainian people, first and foremost, to the wider European
community, generally and to the rest of the planet.
as stating that he will end the war by removing support for Ukraine.
This will embolden Putin (Trump's good buddy)
invade other nations, after he subjugates Ukraine.
It is VERY, VERY serious stuff indeed. The peace and security of Europe depends on NATO's support of Ukraine.
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing. conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.**Why? It seems that the Democrats are the ones supporting Ukraine (the nation you CLAIM you are part of), whereas many Republicans do not
(including Trump).
rights of women over their own bodies and they have also weakened gun
laws in various jurisdictions. This will lead to the deaths of more Americans.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions trumps the Ukraine.
**Why? Why do you have no care for 40 million Ukrainians? After all, you claim to be Ukrainian, yet you don't care about them.
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the
destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy
The destruction of Ukraine is VERY serious stuff
to the Ukrainian people, first and foremost, to the wider European
community, generally and to the rest of the planet.
True
Trump is on record
as stating that he will end the war by removing support for Ukraine.
This will embolden Putin (Trump's good buddy)
True
and he will attempt to
invade other nations, after he subjugates Ukraine.
Possible, but I don't think his military s very capable of that.
It is VERY, VERY serious stuff indeed. The peace and security of Europe
depends on NATO's support of Ukraine.
It is advantgeous
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing.**Why? It seems that the Democrats are the ones supporting Ukraine (the
conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.
nation you CLAIM you are part of), whereas many Republicans do not
(including Trump).
I am not a oe issue person
The Supreme Court has caused immense damage to the
rights of women over their own bodies and they have also weakened gun
laws in various jurisdictions. This will lead to the deaths of more
Americans.
Women do not have the right to exterminate the life of the fetus residing in the body.
The gun laws we have need to be enforced. Violent criminals need to be incarcerated
with long sentences.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions
trumps the Ukraine.
**Why? Why do you have no care for 40 million Ukrainians? After all, you
claim to be Ukrainian, yet you don't care about them.
I never said that. I only say that it is not the most important issue facing the US.
It is not my litmus test.
Compare US aid to Australia aid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
US monetary aid to Ukraine
$20 billion
Australia monetary aid to NATO for Ukraine
3 million. yes, million, not billion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
On 17/07/2023 7:58 am, Art Sackman wrote:
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the >> destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy**Then you clearly don't care about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
The destruction of Ukraine is VERY serious stuff
to the Ukrainian people, first and foremost, to the wider European
community, generally and to the rest of the planet.
True**Then ALL possible support must be provided to Ukraine. Which means the Republicans and specifically, Trump, are a very bad choice.
Trump is on record
as stating that he will end the war by removing support for Ukraine.
This will embolden Putin (Trump's good buddy)
True
and he will attempt to
invade other nations, after he subjugates Ukraine.
Possible, but I don't think his military s very capable of that.**"Possible". IOW: Not impossible.
It is VERY, VERY serious stuff indeed. The peace and security of Europe >> depends on NATO's support of Ukraine.
It is advantgeous**Vital, is the word you are grasping for.
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing. >>> conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.**Why? It seems that the Democrats are the ones supporting Ukraine (the >> nation you CLAIM you are part of), whereas many Republicans do not
(including Trump).
I am not a oe issue person**When the issue is as important as the future of 40 million people
(plus the wider population of Europe), plus those people are allegedly people that you claim some kind of kin-ship with, nothing else much
matters right now.
The Supreme Court has caused immense damage to the
rights of women over their own bodies and they have also weakened gun
laws in various jurisdictions. This will lead to the deaths of more
Americans.
Women do not have the right to exterminate the life of the fetus residing in**According to Roe v. Wade, they do. It's their body. They have the
the body.
right to do what they wish with it.
The gun laws we have need to be enforced. Violent criminals need to be incarcerated**America needs MUCH tougher gun laws. The ones you have now are
with long sentences.
hopelessly inadequate.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions >>> trumps the Ukraine.
**Why? Why do you have no care for 40 million Ukrainians? After all, you >> claim to be Ukrainian, yet you don't care about them.
I never said that. I only say that it is not the most important issue facing the US.**I would argue that global warming is the most important issue. 54
degrees C in Death Valley is predicted.
It is not my litmus test.
Compare US aid to Australia aid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
US monetary aid to Ukraine**Here are the ACTUAL number from Australia:
$20 billion
Australia monetary aid to NATO for Ukraine
3 million. yes, million, not billion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pledges-further-support-ukraine
"These commitments announced today bring Australia's total contribution
in support of Ukraine to $790 million, including $610 million in
military assistance."
I will also point out several things:
On 17/07/2023 7:58 am, Art Sackman wrote:
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the >> destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy**Then you clearly don't care about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
The destruction of Ukraine is VERY serious stuff
to the Ukrainian people, first and foremost, to the wider European
community, generally and to the rest of the planet.
True**Then ALL possible support must be provided to Ukraine. Which means the Republicans and specifically, Trump, are a very bad choice.
Trump is on record
as stating that he will end the war by removing support for Ukraine.
This will embolden Putin (Trump's good buddy)
True
and he will attempt to
invade other nations, after he subjugates Ukraine.
Possible, but I don't think his military s very capable of that.**"Possible". IOW: Not impossible.
It is VERY, VERY serious stuff indeed. The peace and security of Europe >> depends on NATO's support of Ukraine.
It is advantgeous**Vital, is the word you are grasping for.
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing. >>> conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.**Why? It seems that the Democrats are the ones supporting Ukraine (the >> nation you CLAIM you are part of), whereas many Republicans do not
(including Trump).
I am not a oe issue person**When the issue is as important as the future of 40 million people
(plus the wider population of Europe), plus those people are allegedly people that you claim some kind of kin-ship with, nothing else much
matters right now.
The Supreme Court has caused immense damage to the
rights of women over their own bodies and they have also weakened gun
laws in various jurisdictions. This will lead to the deaths of more
Americans.
Women do not have the right to exterminate the life of the fetus residing in
the body.
**According to Roe v. Wade, they do. It's their body. They have the
right to do what they wish with it.
The gun laws we have need to be enforced. Violent criminals need to be incarcerated**America needs MUCH tougher gun laws. The ones you have now are
with long sentences.
hopelessly inadequate.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions >>> trumps the Ukraine.
**Why? Why do you have no care for 40 million Ukrainians? After all, you >> claim to be Ukrainian, yet you don't care about them.
I never said that. I only say that it is not the most important issue facing the US.**I would argue that global warming is the most important issue. 54
degrees C in Death Valley is predicted.
It is not my litmus test.
Compare US aid to Australia aid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
US monetary aid to Ukraine**Here are the ACTUAL number from Australia:
$20 billion
Australia monetary aid to NATO for Ukraine
3 million. yes, million, not billion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pledges-further-support-ukraine
"These commitments announced today bring Australia's total contribution
in support of Ukraine to $790 million, including $610 million in
military assistance."
I will also point out several things:
* Australia is in a different hemisphere to Ukraine.
* Australia is not part of NATO.
Our support of Ukraine is generous. Personally, I would be happy to see
more support from my government.
On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 3:21:51 PM UTC-7, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 17/07/2023 7:58 am, Art Sackman wrote:
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the
destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy**Then you clearly don't care about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
The destruction of Ukraine is VERY serious stuff
to the Ukrainian people, first and foremost, to the wider European
community, generally and to the rest of the planet.
True**Then ALL possible support must be provided to Ukraine. Which means the Republicans and specifically, Trump, are a very bad choice.
Trump is on record
as stating that he will end the war by removing support for Ukraine.
This will embolden Putin (Trump's good buddy)
True
and he will attempt to
invade other nations, after he subjugates Ukraine.
Possible, but I don't think his military s very capable of that.**"Possible". IOW: Not impossible.
It is VERY, VERY serious stuff indeed. The peace and security of Europe >> depends on NATO's support of Ukraine.
It is advantgeous**Vital, is the word you are grasping for.
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing.**Why? It seems that the Democrats are the ones supporting Ukraine (the >> nation you CLAIM you are part of), whereas many Republicans do not
conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.
(including Trump).
I am not a oe issue person**When the issue is as important as the future of 40 million people
(plus the wider population of Europe), plus those people are allegedly people that you claim some kind of kin-ship with, nothing else much matters right now.
The Supreme Court has caused immense damage to the
rights of women over their own bodies and they have also weakened gun >> laws in various jurisdictions. This will lead to the deaths of more
Americans.
Women do not have the right to exterminate the life of the fetus residing in**According to Roe v. Wade, they do. It's their body. They have the
the body.
right to do what they wish with it.
The gun laws we have need to be enforced. Violent criminals need to be incarcerated**America needs MUCH tougher gun laws. The ones you have now are hopelessly inadequate.
with long sentences.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions >>> trumps the Ukraine.
**Why? Why do you have no care for 40 million Ukrainians? After all, you
claim to be Ukrainian, yet you don't care about them.
I never said that. I only say that it is not the most important issue facing the US.**I would argue that global warming is the most important issue. 54 degrees C in Death Valley is predicted.
It is not my litmus test.
Compare US aid to Australia aid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
US monetary aid to Ukraine**Here are the ACTUAL number from Australia:
$20 billion
Australia monetary aid to NATO for Ukraine
3 million. yes, million, not billion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pledges-further-support-ukraine
"These commitments announced today bring Australia's total contribution
in support of Ukraine to $790 million, including $610 million in
military assistance."
I will also point out several things:Defence is expected to fund the new package from within existing resources. Guardian Australia has been told some of the stocks are surplus to current Australian defence force requirements while some were capabilities that were due to be replaced.
A source said the 105mm ammunition was no longer used by Australia but was highly suitable for use by Ukrainian armed forces.
But hey...the "book" value looks nice on a spreadsheet to Trevor.
No cluster munitions. No long range precision weapons.
You need to do more and quit blathering about book value of shit you were gonna write-off anyway.
ScottW
On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 6:21:51 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 17/07/2023 7:58 am, Art Sackman wrote:
**Then you clearly don't care about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the >>>> destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy
WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
**Then ALL possible support must be provided to Ukraine. Which means the
The destruction of Ukraine is VERY serious stuff
to the Ukrainian people, first and foremost, to the wider European
community, generally and to the rest of the planet.
True
Republicans and specifically, Trump, are a very bad choice.
TO REPEAT MYSELF, IT IS JUST ONE OF MANY ISSUES
Trump is on record
as stating that he will end the war by removing support for Ukraine.
This will embolden Putin (Trump's good buddy)
True
and he will attempt to
invade other nations, after he subjugates Ukraine.
With what army?
**"Possible". IOW: Not impossible.
Possible, but I don't think his military s very capable of that.
Unlikey
**Vital, is the word you are grasping for.
It is VERY, VERY serious stuff indeed. The peace and security of Europe >>>> depends on NATO's support of Ukraine.
It is advantgeous
No. I'm growing tired of your dramatic and emotional hyperboles.
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing. >>>>> conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.**Why? It seems that the Democrats are the ones supporting Ukraine (the >>>> nation you CLAIM you are part of), whereas many Republicans do not
(including Trump).
there are other issues more important to me
**When the issue is as important as the future of 40 million people
I am not a oe issue person
(plus the wider population of Europe), plus those people are allegedly
people that you claim some kind of kin-ship with, nothing else much
matters right now.
Good, then you can drop all your gun nonsense!
The Supreme Court has caused immense damage to the
rights of women over their own bodies and they have also weakened gun
laws in various jurisdictions. This will lead to the deaths of more
Americans.
Women do not have the right to exterminate the life of the fetus residing in
the body.
**According to Roe v. Wade, they do. It's their body. They have the
right to do what they wish with it.
Wrong. It did not confer any right. It ALLOWED abortion under certain limitations
The gun laws we have need to be enforced. Violent criminals need to be incarcerated**America needs MUCH tougher gun laws. The ones you have now are
with long sentences.
hopelessly inadequate.
The inadequacy is enforcement
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions >>>>> trumps the Ukraine.
**Why? Why do you have no care for 40 million Ukrainians? After all, you >>>> claim to be Ukrainian, yet you don't care about them.
I care about them, but I am not about getting into a war over this.
I care more about them than I care about 26 million Australians.
**I would argue that global warming is the most important issue. 54
I never said that. I only say that it is not the most important issue facing the US.
degrees C in Death Valley is predicted.
It is not my litmus test.**Here are the ACTUAL number from Australia:
Compare US aid to Australia aid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
US monetary aid to Ukraine
$20 billion
Australia monetary aid to NATO for Ukraine
3 million. yes, million, not billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pledges-further-support-ukraine
"These commitments announced today bring Australia's total contribution
in support of Ukraine to $790 million, including $610 million in
military assistance."
based on overblown valuations and a mere fractionof US aid.
I will also point out several things:
* Australia is in a different hemisphere to Ukraine.
Absolutely wrong.
you are in the SAME hemisphere
The US is in a different hemisphere
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Hemisphere
* Australia is not part of NATO.
Nor is the Ukraine
Our support of Ukraine is generous. Personally, I would be happy to see
more support from my government.
And so would I.
On 17/07/2023 1:44 pm, Art Sackman wrote:
On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 6:21:51 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 17/07/2023 7:58 am, Art Sackman wrote:
**Then you clearly don't care about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the
destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy
WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?**You support Trump and you support the Republican party. Trump and many other Republicans want to withdraw support for Ukraine and they also
want to dissolve NATO.
**Then why would you vote for Trump?
All of the above is repetitive.
Nothing new here.
I've answered it many times before.
On 17/07/2023 1:44 pm, Art Sackman wrote:
On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 6:21:51 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 17/07/2023 7:58 am, Art Sackman wrote:
**Then you clearly don't care about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the
destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy
WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?**You support Trump and you support the Republican party. Trump and many other Republicans want to withdraw support for Ukraine and they also
want to dissolve NATO.
If you REALLY cared about Ukrainians, you would not vote for Trump nor
the Republican Party.
**Then ALL possible support must be provided to Ukraine. Which means the >> Republicans and specifically, Trump, are a very bad choice.
The destruction of Ukraine is VERY serious stuff
to the Ukrainian people, first and foremost, to the wider European
community, generally and to the rest of the planet.
True
TO REPEAT MYSELF, IT IS JUST ONE OF MANY ISSUES**The subjugation of 40 million Ukrainians by Trump's good buddy, Putin,
is hardly a minor issue. It is a big one. Particularly for someone who claims to be Ukrainian.
Trump is on record
as stating that he will end the war by removing support for Ukraine. >>>> This will embolden Putin (Trump's good buddy)
True
and he will attempt to
invade other nations, after he subjugates Ukraine.
With what army?**I will remind you that Putin has more nukes at his disposal than
anyone else.
**"Possible". IOW: Not impossible.
Possible, but I don't think his military s very capable of that.
Unlikey**Sure, provided he doesn't use any of his nukes.
**Vital, is the word you are grasping for.
It is VERY, VERY serious stuff indeed. The peace and security of Europe >>>> depends on NATO's support of Ukraine.
It is advantgeous
No. I'm growing tired of your dramatic and emotional hyperboles.**The word you meant to use is: "facts".
That would be keeping liberal Dems out if the White House and bringing.**Why? It seems that the Democrats are the ones supporting Ukraine (the >>>> nation you CLAIM you are part of), whereas many Republicans do not
conservative justices onto the Supreme Court.
(including Trump).
there are other issues more important to me**And you call yourself Ukrainian. Clearly, you don't give a shit about
the subjugation of 40 million Ukrainians.
**When the issue is as important as the future of 40 million people
I am not a oe issue person
(plus the wider population of Europe), plus those people are allegedly
people that you claim some kind of kin-ship with, nothing else much
matters right now.
Good, then you can drop all your gun nonsense!**Why?
The Supreme Court has caused immense damage to the
rights of women over their own bodies and they have also weakened gun >>>> laws in various jurisdictions. This will lead to the deaths of more >>>> Americans.
Women do not have the right to exterminate the life of the fetus residing in
the body.
**According to Roe v. Wade, they do. It's their body. They have the
right to do what they wish with it.
Wrong. It did not confer any right. It ALLOWED abortion under certain limitations**That's right. As well it should.
The gun laws we have need to be enforced. Violent criminals need to be incarcerated**America needs MUCH tougher gun laws. The ones you have now are
with long sentences.
hopelessly inadequate.
The inadequacy is enforcement**NO, it's not. It's MUCH more than that. Criminals can easily buy guns
from legal gun owners, no questions asked.
Nominating three justices and tanking Hillary's presidential ambitions >>>>> trumps the Ukraine.
**Why? Why do you have no care for 40 million Ukrainians? After all, you
claim to be Ukrainian, yet you don't care about them.
I care about them, but I am not about getting into a war over this.**You're not in a war you idiot. The US is merely supplying weapons to Ukraine.
I care more about them than I care about 26 million Australians.**You don't care about ANYONE else. If you did, you would not vote Republican.
**I would argue that global warming is the most important issue. 54
I never said that. I only say that it is not the most important issue facing the US.
degrees C in Death Valley is predicted.
It is not my litmus test.**Here are the ACTUAL number from Australia:
Compare US aid to Australia aid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
US monetary aid to Ukraine
$20 billion
Australia monetary aid to NATO for Ukraine
3 million. yes, million, not billion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australia-pledges-further-support-ukraine
"These commitments announced today bring Australia's total contribution >> in support of Ukraine to $790 million, including $610 million in
military assistance."
based on overblown valuations and a mere fractionof US aid.**You claimed $3 million. I just proved you wrong. As usual. I will also remind you:
* Australia is on the opposite side of the planet.
* Australia is not part of NATO.
I will also point out several things:
* Australia is in a different hemisphere to Ukraine.
Absolutely wrong.**Huh? You're an idiot. Australia is in the Southern hemisphere. Ukraine
you are in the SAME hemisphere
The US is in a different hemisphere
is in the Northern hemisphere.
You're getting stupider with age.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Hemisphere
* Australia is not part of NATO.
Nor is the Ukraine**Irrelevant. NATO is providing the most assistance to Ukraine.
Our support of Ukraine is generous. Personally, I would be happy to see >> more support from my government.
And so would I.**Then why would you vote for Trump?
--
On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 1:24:46 AM UTC-7, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 17/07/2023 1:44 pm, Art Sackman wrote:
On Sunday, July 16, 2023 at 6:21:51 PM UTC-4, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 17/07/2023 7:58 am, Art Sackman wrote:
**Then you clearly don't care about Ukraine or Ukrainians.
**Hang on a sec. You CLAIM to be Ukrainian, yet you are happy to see the
destruction of Ukraine.
I'm NOT happy
That's BS. They want a strong and effective NATO.WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?**You support Trump and you support the Republican party. Trump and many other Republicans want to withdraw support for Ukraine and they also
want to dissolve NATO.
They want NATA countries to bear their fair share of the defense cost.
NATO has apparently agreed now changing their rules making 2% of GDP the minimum.
Now the question is...when will all of Nato comply?
Meanwhile, you keep trashing Trump and I recently heard a Biden campaign shithole
claiming Trump was laughed at at the UN as if being laughed at is too horrible to bear.
It's true... he was. By the German delegates when he claimed they were on course to become
totally dependent upon Russian gas.
Now I routinely read that Putin's calculus on invasion of Ukraine included that the EU couldn't
afford to oppose them due to their energy dependence on Russia.
If you cared about Ukraine you would have supported Trump's warnings that German
and other NATO countries dependence on Russian gas was a threat to peace.
But you're a psycho twit with no brains.
ScottW
That's BS. They want a strong and effective NATO.
On 7/17/23 11:50 AM, ScottW wrote:
That's BS. They want a strong and effective NATO.https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/04/bolton-says-trump-might-have-pulled-us-out-nato-if-he-had-been-reelected/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html
On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 2:45:09 PM UTC-4, mINE109 wrote:
On 7/17/23 11:50 AM, ScottW wrote:
That's BS. They want a strong and effective NATO.https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/04/bolton-says-trump-might-have-pulled-us-out-nato-if-he-had-been-reelected/
just an opinion from another asshole, though a lesser asshole than you.
And one with an anti-Trump bias.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html
I would believe that withdrawing was discussed, but in the context of European nations
not adequately supporting it .
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/04/bolton-says-trump-might-have-pulled-us-out-nato-if-he-had-been-reelected/just an opinion from another asshole, though a lesser asshole than you.
And one with an anti-Trump bias.
Bolton's one of yours. While I agree with your characterization, the
question is if he's telling the truth.
mINE109 wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/04/bolton-says-trump-might-have-pulled-us-out-nato-if-he-had-been-reelected/just an opinion from another asshole, though a lesser asshole than you. And one with an anti-Trump bias.
Shmoos have a disgusting tendency to constantly mischaracterize reality
in order to pump up their victimhood balloon.
Bolton's one of yours. While I agree with your characterization, the question is if he's telling the truth.
Bolton, like all the other MAGA-frauds who enabled Dumpster from within,
is trying feebly to sail on a new wind. They are rats and termites who have zero morality, filthy opportunists who will wallow in any pile of feces if it
gains them a few minutes of glory.
Now that Bolton, Bilbo, Pence, et al have tiptoed away from the stinking dung-heap
of MAGA-stan, the infinitely moronic Shmoos declare them "never Dumpers"
and pretend they didn't adore them in the past.
I once liked Bolton
On 7/17/23 11:50 AM, ScottW wrote:
That's BS. They want a strong and effective NATO.https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/04/bolton-says-trump-might-have-pulled-us-out-nato-if-he-had-been-reelected/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html
On 7/17/23 11:14 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
I once liked Bolton
Of course. You were both compared to Yosemite Sam.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 53:20:02 |
| Calls: | 10,397 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 14,067 |
| Messages: | 6,417,394 |
| Posted today: | 1 |