We support Ukraine

[Djmixxx]

I read this and freaked out. How brazenly now you can put anyone you want in the president's chair.

Just a small processing of the civilians by TV show.

[mmmPI]

How exactly russians supporting putin are relavant to Ukraine being democratic country?

As much as you need, so much interest will be drawn to you. Just do not confuse the president and the real authorities in the country.

English please.

Vladimir Alexandrovich Zelensky
He began his political career in 2019 and ran in the 2019 presidential elections in Ukraine. Based on the voting results, he was elected the 6th President of Ukraine.
Incredible political career, full of long years of work for the benefit of the Ukraina, before he became president. But he's a good comedian.

During 2015-2018, Volodymyr Zelenskyy played the role of Vasily Goloborodko, a history teacher who is elected President of Ukraine, in the TV series Servant of the People. The TV series was repeatedly accused of political advertising, and the first three episodes of the third season of the series aired immediately before the first round of the presidential elections in Ukraine in 2019, in which Volodymyr Zelensky took part as a nominee of the Servant of the People party of the same name as the TV series. and received the most votes. After winning the second round of elections, he was elected to the post of President of UkraineGo to the section "Presidential campaign (2019)"

You should look https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan He was very influential for people who are interested in history, he was a comedian too, and then president of the united stated during the cold war

I read this and freaked out. How brazenly now you can put anyone you want in the president's chair.

Just a small processing of the civilians by TV show.

Yeah waow, reading and learning new things, terrific experience isn't it ?

[enterisys]

Vladimir Alexandrovich Zelensky
He began his political career in 2019 and ran in the 2019 presidential elections in Ukraine. Based on the voting results, he was elected the 6th President of Ukraine.
Incredible political career, full of long years of work for the benefit of the Ukraina, before he became president. But he's a good comedian.

During 2015-2018, Volodymyr Zelenskyy played the role of Vasily Goloborodko, a history teacher who is elected President of Ukraine, in the TV series Servant of the People. The TV series was repeatedly accused of political advertising, and the first three episodes of the third season of the series aired immediately before the first round of the presidential elections in Ukraine in 2019, in which Volodymyr Zelensky took part as a nominee of the Servant of the People party of the same name as the TV series. and received the most votes. After winning the second round of elections, he was elected to the post of President of UkraineGo to the section "Presidential campaign (2019)"

Thank you for wikipedia extract for whatever reasons. As a democratic country Ukraine already had 6 presidents. If its the will of one country's citizens to elect comedian or another enjoy a tyrant - its their own business.

[Djmixxx]

Thank you for wikipedia extract for whatever reasons. As a democratic country Ukraine already had 6 presidents. If its the will of one country's citizens to elect comedian or another enjoy a tyrant - its their own business.

I wanted to write something, but if you write like that, then it's too late to write something.

But my respects to the curators of Zelinsky. This is probably the most unusual way to get people to choose the right president.

[enterisys]

You sounds an awful lot like djimixxx

Really? Lets take a good look at "opinions" of this guy if he has any proof or simple rant.

I would say, "countries feel threatened" and "NATO asked/offered". No proof yet, though.
But that doesn't answer the question

That's a one sided opinion/view as you don't have any proof for that, right?

"putin just wants new territories"
"NATO threat to russia is fake news"

Let's assume Russia, China, India, Brazil and so on, found a defensive alliance. Then they would ask Mexico to join.
What do you think will happen?

I don't think, they (russian gov.) are willing to use nuclar weapons or want to directly attack NATO. If Ukraine was already in NATO, then it would be too late without risking a world war. But I guess, nazis a greater enemy picture than NATO to explain the war.
At least, that's what I understand.

Are you aware, if US army or any NATO partner openly intervenes (also no fly zone), we have most likely have a world war?
And I don't like the perspective, that the battlefield will be europe or germany...

Who is shitposting here without any proofs?

[jodokus31]

Do you mean Cuban crysis? That was quite similar and was resolved without WW with a compromise. (to find or follow a way between extremes)

That's different, in Cuba there WAS nuclear missile, in Ukraine there is no nuke, like if the USA invade Mexico now because it claims maybe it will go in an alliance with someone else.

I mean the compromise was the removal of the missile right ? after a fail invasion attempt ? we got the failing invasion attempt, but one cannot remove missile if there is no missile !

Similar, that the threatened country would go to the uttermost. The missile itself could not be averted anymore, if NATO is already in Ukraine, without provoking the WW actively.

[enterisys]

I wanted to write something, but if you write like that, then it's too late to write something.

But my respects to the curators of Zelinsky. This is probably the most unusual way to get people to choose the right president.

Dont worry I totally understand why democracy is alien for your country and any evidence of it quickly dumped/killed.

[enterisys]

Do you mean Cuban crysis? That was quite similar and was resolved without WW with a compromise. (to find or follow a way between extremes)

That's different, in Cuba there WAS nuclear missile, in Ukraine there is no nuke, like if the USA invade Mexico now because it claims maybe it will go in an alliance with someone else.

I mean the compromise was the removal of the missile right ? after a fail invasion attempt ? we got the failing invasion attempt, but one cannot remove missile if there is no missile !

Similar, that the threatened country would go to the uttermost. The missile itself could not be averted anymore, if NATO is already in Ukraine, without provoking the WW actively.

No proof

[mmmPI]

You sounds an awful lot like djimixxx

Really? Lets take a good look at "opinions" of this guy if he has any proof or simple rant.

Claiming a proof is not a proof is not an opinion. You either provide facts or stop being annoying.

If you don't like what you're reading, answer with evidence or keep silent.

YES that sound similar to me.

Who is shitposting here without any proofs?

Mostly Djimixxx for the shitpost

without any proof, well that's pretty much everyone else, but not everyone i feel is dishonnest, i don't think jokodus has been contrary to djimixx who when he doesn't know what to say just go pull the most propagandesque thing he can find and post it there repeatdly

[Djmixxx]

Similar, that the threatened country would go to the uttermost. The missile itself could not be averted anymore, if NATO is already in Ukraine, without provoking the WW actively.

It's harder with you for mmmPI . I was called a liar and a disinformer because I registered on the forum after the start of the war . You are registered too long time ago.

[enterisys]

If you don't like what you're reading, answer with evidence or keep silent.

That's a one sided opinion/view as you don't have any proof for that, right?

No proof yet, though.

YES that sound similar to me.
Now what?

[mmmPI]

Similar, that the threatened country would go to the uttermost. The missile itself could not be averted anymore, if NATO is already in Ukraine, without provoking the WW actively.

That's an opinion that is consistent, that's one lane of explanation. NATO wasn't in Ukraine though. If this is your explanation, how come having the baltic country joining NATO wasn't as much as a threat to Russia ? there are already NATO country closer to Moscow than Ukraine but only Ukraine got the full scale invasion and is integrated in the narrative of the great russia, with belarus, and the ethnic rethoric from the kremlin that Ukraine is part of Russia.

That doesn't justify whatsover the war from a moral standpoint, but even from a rationnal one i'm not convinced.

[CSO]

I did not say the west is to blame - i pointed out that the speaker in the video suggests this. I'm not 'buying' into the bs undercurrents of 'Us vs Them'
in this forum which is abundantly obvious.

Fair enough -- but people suggest all sorts of things on this issue. Putting out a controversial/inflammatory view on this subject without qualifying which parts (if any) you feel are persuasive is imo not such a great basis for a discussion, especially when this topic has been endlessly bombarded by videos.

As I pointed out to mmmPI - I should have specified that the video came out around the 4th March 2022. I simply needed to make myself clear about where I stand. Right in the middle with humanity. I want to have a better understanding of why this has occurred. I take offence only when someone tries to force their views upon me or tries to tell me what I can and can't say. I'm not anti Russian or anti Ukrainian or anti US. We all bleed the same color blood! And no matter what happens in Ukraine, one way or the other, it is already a devastated land!
In what way was I inflammatory/controversial? I made no outrageous comments or suggestions - I simply offered it (video link) explaining what it was generally about, for another point of view, for you, and others, to make up your mind if you watch it and if it was of interest/relevant.
Why should I point out persuasive parts - that not for me to do , that's for you to work out.
Am I not right with my comment with the 'undercurrent' comment - I'm capable of seeing what has transpired throughout this forum if this is what you are referring to. I wasn't forcing anyone to watch it. If you took offence to this, I'm sorry, but that's on you, not me.

So you have found the middle ground between the country which is having its cities destroyed by bombs and the country which is dropping the bombs? How centrist! The same could have been said in 1943.

And no matter what happens in Ukraine, one way or the other, it is already a devastated land!

so..?

Yes - Centrist if you want to use labels. A person who holds moderate political views. You clearly don't like the fact that my response to your post was accurate. I don't agree with the bombs being dropped/the war. I don't have to justify to you my thoughts on the subject or take sides as I can guess what sort of response id get from you. Don't compare this to 1943 - different time, different players, different reasons - as I well know and you would to if you read my first post. That's it, point the finger - you've just proved my point of 'Us vs Them' mentality, good job, you must feel very happy with yourself.
And your response to my last sentence - so? W.T.F. You're clearly more interested in your online banter and scoring troll points than your concern for whats happening in Ukraine.
I'm done with this forum - have fun with your conspiracy theories, memes, biased pictures and award yourself a medal for being an expert on political explanations and all things war!

[mmmPI]

It's harder with you for mmmPI . I was called a liar and a disinformer because I registered on the forum after the start of the war . You are registered too long time ago.

Also because you posted video that call to murder the Ukrainian people, then remove them and edit your post with "wrong post" and then pretended to be just here to inform people neutraly on the "untold" story

And because your first post and all your post are on this tread about the same topic and you keep posting links and not responding to question and just being an obvious troll called out by at least 7 person on the thread.

[jodokus31]

You sounds an awful lot like djimixxx

Really? Lets take a good look at "opinions" of this guy if he has any proof or simple rant.

I would say, "countries feel threatened" and "NATO asked/offered". No proof yet, though.
But that doesn't answer the question

That's a one sided opinion/view as you don't have any proof for that, right?

"putin just wants new territories"
"NATO threat to russia is fake news"

Let's assume Russia, China, India, Brazil and so on, found a defensive alliance. Then they would ask Mexico to join.
What do you think will happen?

I don't think, they (russian gov.) are willing to use nuclar weapons or want to directly attack NATO. If Ukraine was already in NATO, then it would be too late without risking a world war. But I guess, nazis a greater enemy picture than NATO to explain the war.
At least, that's what I understand.

Are you aware, if US army or any NATO partner openly intervenes (also no fly zone), we have most likely have a world war?
And I don't like the perspective, that the battlefield will be europe or germany...

Who is shitposting here without any proofs?

You don't seem to get it.
My opinions are opinions or speculation, not more than that and I mark them as that, ready to be contested.
I also try to learn the reasons what is behind and hope for a honest discourse.
You post your opinions as facts.
If I ask for proofs of your "facts" I hear a lot reasonable arguments, but also a lot of narrative and propaganda, where I can't follow.
I don't say that my opinions and judgement of your opinions are the holy grail.

So, either we respect each other, or we just agree to disagree and I block you

[mmmPI]

If you don't like what you're reading, answer with evidence or keep silent.

That's a one sided opinion/view as you don't have any proof for that, right?

No proof yet, though.

YES that sound similar to me.
Now what?

It's different to me, I provided a .pdf about NATO from their own website with their "open door" policy clearly stated as a "proof" not of your opinion, but as a factual element that would serve as a basis to justify that one's opinion is not completly ignorant or just prepared speech.


I'm not accusing you of that, just that what jokodus is asking for is easily available, what makes you think what you say is true, are you saying this as your opinion because you learned the truth yesterday watching youtube ? i know it's not the case and you have documentation, so just provide some example so that jokodus can understand why you state things as fact.

That's where other people show that their opinion is based on a piece of newspaper they read the previous day and therefore is a bit different than when their belief is established because of readins tons of documents from different sources

[Djmixxx]

And because your first post and all your post are on this tread about the same topic and you keep posting links and not responding to question and just being an obvious troll called out by at least 7 person on the thread.

Again empty chatter with no evidence? But now I understand why you write this.
This was a duplicate post that I didn't notice right away.

[mmmPI]

Again empty chatter with no evidence? But now I understand why you write this.
This was a duplicate post that I didn't notice right away.

but now you did genius

[enterisys]

If I ask for proofs of your "facts" I hear a lot reasonable arguments, but also a lot of narrative and propaganda, where I can't follow.

See now we are talking.
Now elaborate with proofs why you think Germany or Europe can be a battlefield when 90% of russian army is in Ukraine or nearby airfields.

[mmmPI]

Seems like the kind of question djmixx would ask