Russia's war in Ukraine

You are a well known conspiracy junkie. Sometimes a duck is just a duck. Get your head out of the propaganda farms and the conspiracy sites and maybe it will clear up for you.

My goodness. Your interpretation of my posts is bizarre. I don't care who you are, or what your misguided interpretation of my posts are. I assure you I do not troll you. I simply question your interpretation of events. To make the claim that I am an attack dog for any other member is silly and simply pouting, and avoiding challenges to your statements and position of U.S. and world affairs. You started a thread on a subject of interest to the world, and any posts that questions your reasoning and conclusions of the Conflict, are answered in confusing avoidance. I understand if you think you are being informative by posting news that is available on a daily basis via any media method. That is not enjoying discussions. It is quite the opposite. I hope you do not assume that members are completely oblivious to the Conflict, and you are simply educating members. That is arrogance, not an invitation to discuss.

As an example: member Tacoman responds to a member thus: " Or maybe you just oppose anything the President supports". You are silent.

You respond to member Vintage (paraphrasing) " you are missing the point... read such and such....".
 
You respond to my post/statement that we should not be supporting this Conflict, thus: "Would you have allowed NAZI Germany blahblahblah...". And you do not expect to be challenged?

I could list many other examples in this thread and other threads of your curious commentary, but that is not my purpose in life.

Are you fascinated by the death and destruction this Conflict is causing, at the expense of the world and the danger of world war, that you are dedicated to posting every article about it? Where in anything you posted is YOUR opinion on anything about the Conflict, other than answering in the negative of avoiding challenges?

 You reply to invitation to discussion and explaining your position si "I am going to ignore you and you don't want me  to think you are rude.  Fair enough. You are not rude. Why publicly post you are placing another member on ignore, as if it is a badge of honor and superiority to another member? After all, you could have simply ignored without the lookatme posturing, no?

Stating I am following you around with negative comments is silly and elementary school pouting.

Sillier is stating I am another member's attack dog. I don't know the member. I have never met the member. In fact,  have only met 2 members over the years that are associated with this forum and/or CGC. What I do know, is Vintage has always stated his position clearly without gobbledygobbledness and avoidance. He is a liitle hung up and paranoid about Walmart, and he says negative things about me because he thinks I like him (I don't), BUT, he doesn't avoid conversations.

Maybe you could emulate those traits, instead of thinking you are being targeted.
 Have you ever experienced armed Conflict? If so, I would be very surprised that you would avoid robust conversation.

I am not harmed by your ignoring me (a supposed punishment of some sort, in your mind). You are. Maybe you will understand that, in the future.

Suffice it to say,  am not a supporter of shootemup Rambo stuff that does not completely digest the dangerous consequences. You appear to thrive on the good guy bad guy aspect. That is usually, as history informs us, wrong.

He just told you he put you on ignore and your response is to write a tldr page of garbage. You are one confused little lap monkey.

Sigh...he read it, of course. Can you answer my question I posed to you? I am very interested.

True. It started on 2/27/14 with the Russian invasion of Crimea. The world did nothing, this emboldened Putin and led to the current invasion of Ukraine. This is how the real world works. There are consequences for weakness, real or perceived. Consult your history books for countless analogs. If we sat around and did nothing, Putin would invade other countries and become more entrenched and dangerous.

Conspiracy theories are just that, conspiracy theories. I'm sure someone out there is blaming "The Knights Templar" as well, but it doesn't mean I need to read their fevered ramblings.

The timeline is a little longer than that.
It starts in 17 March 91, and the reform Movement. The attempted Coup in Aug 91 followed, and the secession of the Baltic States in Sept. 91, which eventually led to The Orange Revolution of 2004 placing NATO SUPPORTER Yushenko in power, instead of the USSR Puppet Yanuckovych, followed by the promises and wooing of the West Euro NATO partnerships (WITH THE FULL SUPPORT OF THE U.S). However, these promises were not kept, and by 2010, Communist Hardliner Yanukovych defeated Yushenko, ending the possibility of a NATO alliance. The Kremlin and Ukriane then signed a Gas Deal, and by doing so, the Soviet Navy was given a lease (meaning the SOVIETS NOW OWNED IT FOR AS LONG AS THEY WANTED), and Yanukovych exited talks with the EU, and immediately entered economic talks with Moscow. This was the beginning of the Kiev protests. I could continue up until now, BUT, I simply wanted to clear up the real start of the issue: the Failure of the Euro NATO Alliance and the U.S. to vote in Ukraine as a member between 2004 and 2010.

Moscow has, since the Sept. 91 Secession, stated over and over and over, that it will eventually use Military Force to return Ukraine to its rightful owner: The Soviet Union.

The point: the weakness  AND CONSEQUENCES was and is the NATO Western Europe Alliance and the U.S. to consummate the partnership with Ukraine between 2004 and 2010, knowing that Moscow intended to invade.

Truth in editing: Removed last sentence, so members are not offended and Moderation has been acknowledged by me.