Topic: I think I've changed my mind on Trump
Erik !saAqdaazn2 started this discussion 1 year ago #123,368
Everything I've seen him do so far has been pretty amazing even if it is early days yet.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 14 minutes later[^] [v] #1,344,209
How can you say that? Invading allies, threatening to defund programs for the poor and hungry children, creating a concentration camp? Are you a monster?
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 40 minutes later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,214
Anonymous B replied with this 1 year ago, 4 minutes later, 59 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,216
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 22 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,218
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,221
@OP> Everything I've seen him do so far has been pretty amazing even if it is early days yet.
Agree.
Martthew Milsden joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,222
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 47 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,230
Green !!bO/s3MBcD joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,237
You didn't like him to begin with?
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 17 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,239
@previous (Green !!bO/s3MBcD)
> You didn't like him to begin with?
He was concerned that Trump was going to curtail Zelenskiy's money. Which, amusingly, he has.
> You didn't like him to begin with?
He was concerned that Trump was going to curtail Zelenskiy's money. Which, amusingly, he has.
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc double-posted this 1 year ago, 38 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,246
@1,344,230 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)> It looks like he's supporting Ukraine
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/28/world/europe/ukraine-trump-aid-freeze.html
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 13 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,250
@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
Is that the same new York Times you said to not believe because it's western propaganda?
Is that the same new York Times you said to not believe because it's western propaganda?
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,251
@previous (Erik !saAqdaazn2)> Is that the same new York Times you said to not believe because it's western propaganda?
Citation needed. But fine, here's the Washington Post if you prefer that, quoting named Ukrainian officials.
Anonymous E replied with this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,252
@1,344,250 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
Don't cite where he said it. He'll just delete it and say he never said it.
Don't cite where he said it. He'll just delete it and say he never said it.
Green !!bO/s3MBcD replied with this 1 year ago, 29 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,253
@1,344,239 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
Why would that be a bad thing though? Peace talks are the only way for the war to end.
Why would that be a bad thing though? Peace talks are the only way for the war to end.
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,256
@previous (Green !!bO/s3MBcD)
> Why would that be a bad thing though? Peace talks are the only way for the war to end.
Yes I know, I've been saying that for 3 years but various dipshits in the US, EU and UK decided to goad Action Man into fighting a war of attrition that they knew it was impossible for them to win. The idiot fell for their flattery and as a result Ukraine has been functionally destroyed as a state.
#slavaukraini
> Why would that be a bad thing though? Peace talks are the only way for the war to end.
Yes I know, I've been saying that for 3 years but various dipshits in the US, EU and UK decided to goad Action Man into fighting a war of attrition that they knew it was impossible for them to win. The idiot fell for their flattery and as a result Ukraine has been functionally destroyed as a state.
#slavaukraini
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 43 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,260
@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
I think part of the plan was to also cripple Russia economically and utterly humiliate Russisa milliary which seems to be working
I think part of the plan was to also cripple Russia economically and utterly humiliate Russisa milliary which seems to be working
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 8 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,261
@previous (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
> I think part of the plan was to also cripple Russia economically and utterly humiliate Russisa milliary which seems to be working
Still getting your information from the Daily Mail I see.
> I think part of the plan was to also cripple Russia economically and utterly humiliate Russisa milliary which seems to be working
Still getting your information from the Daily Mail I see.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 38 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,265
@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view. Where do you get your information?
Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view. Where do you get your information?
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,285
@previous (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
> Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view.
And despite this you seriously don't know that Ukraine is going to lose this war?
> Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view.
And despite this you seriously don't know that Ukraine is going to lose this war?
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 59 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,313
@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
> > Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view.
>
> And despite this you seriously don't know that Ukraine is going to lose this war?
Where do you get your information
> > Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view.
>
> And despite this you seriously don't know that Ukraine is going to lose this war?
Where do you get your information
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) double-posted this 1 year ago, 3 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,315
@1,344,285 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
Ukraine was never going to win. I never claimed they would but what winning and losing is, is subjective. I want Ukraine to be able to defend itself and salvage a furure from Russian aggression where they they can claim their own sovereignty.
Ukraine was never going to win. I never claimed they would but what winning and losing is, is subjective. I want Ukraine to be able to defend itself and salvage a furure from Russian aggression where they they can claim their own sovereignty.
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 35 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,322
@1,344,313 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
> > > Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view.
> >
> > And despite this you seriously don't know that Ukraine is going to lose this war?
>
> Where do you get your information
Primarily from Ukrainian military commanders and actual NATO analysts, such as this guy yesterday:
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/nato-war-with-russia/
> > > Not at all. I get my information from pod casts and also some news. I feel I have a balanced view.
> >
> > And despite this you seriously don't know that Ukraine is going to lose this war?
>
> Where do you get your information
Primarily from Ukrainian military commanders and actual NATO analysts, such as this guy yesterday:
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/nato-war-with-russia/
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc double-posted this 1 year ago, 4 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,323
@1,344,315 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
> Ukraine was never going to win. I never claimed they would
Yes you did.
> but what winning and losing is, is subjective. I want Ukraine to be able to defend itself and salvage a furure from Russian aggression where they they can claim their own sovereignty.
For the record I want this too and they could have had it in April 2022. Now they can't. The country has been functionally destroyed in ways your "podcasts" seemingly don't talk about, or else you wouldn't still be hoping for what you're hoping for. Ukraine no longer exists as a viable, independent sovereign state. Witness as one tiny example how CNN apparently sees no irony or contradiction whatsoever in their headline today: "Ukraine's independent media faces collapse as US funding is withdrawn".
> Ukraine was never going to win. I never claimed they would
Yes you did.
> but what winning and losing is, is subjective. I want Ukraine to be able to defend itself and salvage a furure from Russian aggression where they they can claim their own sovereignty.
For the record I want this too and they could have had it in April 2022. Now they can't. The country has been functionally destroyed in ways your "podcasts" seemingly don't talk about, or else you wouldn't still be hoping for what you're hoping for. Ukraine no longer exists as a viable, independent sovereign state. Witness as one tiny example how CNN apparently sees no irony or contradiction whatsoever in their headline today: "Ukraine's independent media faces collapse as US funding is withdrawn".
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,350
@previous (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
They couldn't have had it in 2022. Russia was always going to use its influence to interfere like they do in Georgia and Serbia. They would never let Ukraine move into the EU or nato. A war was the only way and to humiliate Russia. Ukraine can easily lose but it can also win in a way that it can break away from Russia completely.
They couldn't have had it in 2022. Russia was always going to use its influence to interfere like they do in Georgia and Serbia. They would never let Ukraine move into the EU or nato. A war was the only way and to humiliate Russia. Ukraine can easily lose but it can also win in a way that it can break away from Russia completely.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 8 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,359
@1,344,322 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
Not to knock on this guy's service but Russia is spending 33% of its budget on war and is inching forward on Ukrainian territory. To think that NATO would lose a war against an aggressor Russia (i.e. Russia instigates a war that extends from Finland to Poland to Ukraine to Turkey and makes a serious push along the whole front) seems not just wrong but insanely wrong.
Not to knock on this guy's service but Russia is spending 33% of its budget on war and is inching forward on Ukrainian territory. To think that NATO would lose a war against an aggressor Russia (i.e. Russia instigates a war that extends from Finland to Poland to Ukraine to Turkey and makes a serious push along the whole front) seems not just wrong but insanely wrong.
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,361
@1,344,350 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
> They couldn't have had it in 2022. Russia was always going to use its influence to interfere like they do in Georgia and Serbia. They would never let Ukraine move into the EU or nato.
Russia doesn't give a fuck if Ukraine joins the EU. It is Western Europe that will never, ever admit Ukraine into the EU.
> A war was the only way and to humiliate Russia.
Before the war Ukraine had one of the largest and THE most battle hardened military in Europe. It now has a military of 800,000 men, according to Action Man (the UK has 70,000 for comparison). For 3 years a 50 nation group of the world's most advanced economies has sent Ukraine everything they can afford to send to the point they have exhausted their own supplies. NATO has literally been running the Ukrainian army. The entire Western control of the global financial apparatus has been mobilised to cripple Russia's war machine.
And yet Russia is still going to win the war and inflict a defeat on NATO.
Good job with the "humiliation"!
> Ukraine can easily lose but it can also win in a way that it can break away from Russia completely.
Absolutely delusional. You have no idea the condition Ukraine is in now or the future it now faces. Whatever "podcasts" you're listening to are feeding you the same shit you've been swallowing for 3 years. What will it take for you to realise you've been conned?
> They couldn't have had it in 2022. Russia was always going to use its influence to interfere like they do in Georgia and Serbia. They would never let Ukraine move into the EU or nato.
Russia doesn't give a fuck if Ukraine joins the EU. It is Western Europe that will never, ever admit Ukraine into the EU.
> A war was the only way and to humiliate Russia.
Before the war Ukraine had one of the largest and THE most battle hardened military in Europe. It now has a military of 800,000 men, according to Action Man (the UK has 70,000 for comparison). For 3 years a 50 nation group of the world's most advanced economies has sent Ukraine everything they can afford to send to the point they have exhausted their own supplies. NATO has literally been running the Ukrainian army. The entire Western control of the global financial apparatus has been mobilised to cripple Russia's war machine.
And yet Russia is still going to win the war and inflict a defeat on NATO.
Good job with the "humiliation"!
> Ukraine can easily lose but it can also win in a way that it can break away from Russia completely.
Absolutely delusional. You have no idea the condition Ukraine is in now or the future it now faces. Whatever "podcasts" you're listening to are feeding you the same shit you've been swallowing for 3 years. What will it take for you to realise you've been conned?
(Edited 7 minutes later.)
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc double-posted this 1 year ago, 5 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,367
@1,344,359 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> Not to knock on this guy's service but Russia is spending 33% of its budget on war
It means it can do it. Ukraine and its "allies" can't.
> and is inching forward on Ukrainian territory.
Territory is not the measure of a war of attrition. Russian's aim is the destruction of the Ukrainian armed forces and the collapse of its economy and infrastructure. This is what is happening and is why Ukraine will lose. This has been obvious for years and yet still the mantra was "FOR AS LONG AS IT TAKES!"
> To think that NATO would lose a war against an aggressor Russia (i.e. Russia instigates a war that extends from Finland to Poland to Ukraine to Turkey and makes a serious push along the whole front) seems not just wrong but insanely wrong.
And hence it wasn't the point he was making.
> Not to knock on this guy's service but Russia is spending 33% of its budget on war
It means it can do it. Ukraine and its "allies" can't.
> and is inching forward on Ukrainian territory.
Territory is not the measure of a war of attrition. Russian's aim is the destruction of the Ukrainian armed forces and the collapse of its economy and infrastructure. This is what is happening and is why Ukraine will lose. This has been obvious for years and yet still the mantra was "FOR AS LONG AS IT TAKES!"
> To think that NATO would lose a war against an aggressor Russia (i.e. Russia instigates a war that extends from Finland to Poland to Ukraine to Turkey and makes a serious push along the whole front) seems not just wrong but insanely wrong.
And hence it wasn't the point he was making.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,399
Remember when father Merrin said Russia would never invade Ukraine and that Biden was an idiot liar fear monger and then Putin did invade Ukraine and Father Merrin was all weepy and earnest about how evil Putin was and then people called him out and he cried like a little baby and left vowing to never return? Funny
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 5 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,407
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 8 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,410
@1,344,399 (H)
> Remember when father Merrin said Russia would never invade Ukraine
I never said this.
> Remember when father Merrin said Russia would never invade Ukraine
I never said this.
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc double-posted this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,412
@1,344,407 (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
> Yes and his smugness now puzzles me
Stating facts is not being smug. I have been advocating for peace talks for 3 years. Idiots cheering on Ukraine in this war based on Biden and Blinken's lies about its chances of "victory" have led to its destruction. Which was their aim all along.
> Yes and his smugness now puzzles me
Stating facts is not being smug. I have been advocating for peace talks for 3 years. Idiots cheering on Ukraine in this war based on Biden and Blinken's lies about its chances of "victory" have led to its destruction. Which was their aim all along.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 6 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,414
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 1 year ago, 26 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,428
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,431
Anonymous H replied with this 1 year ago, 37 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,451
@1,344,410 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
You can conveniently deny it ever happened because TTEH or the crappy host let the server fail and we lost a whole two years worth of posts but Pepperidge Farm remembers
You can conveniently deny it ever happened because TTEH or the crappy host let the server fail and we lost a whole two years worth of posts but Pepperidge Farm remembers
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 2 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,453
@1,344,221 (Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc)
> > Everything I've seen him do so far has been pretty amazing even if it is early days yet.
>
> Agree.
> > Everything I've seen him do so far has been pretty amazing even if it is early days yet.
>
> Agree.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC replied with this 1 year ago, 14 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,456
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 5 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,457
@previous (Kook !!rcSrAtaAC)
You don't because it didn't. An idiot said Putin would invade on February 23rd, i.e dyen otchestvo, quoting Jake Sullivan. I said he wouldn't, and he didn't. It was an idiotic way to look at the early stages of the war.
You don't because it didn't. An idiot said Putin would invade on February 23rd, i.e dyen otchestvo, quoting Jake Sullivan. I said he wouldn't, and he didn't. It was an idiotic way to look at the early stages of the war.
dw !p9hU6ckyqw joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 12 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,566
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 14 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,738
Dead !Pool..v42s joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,739
dw !p9hU6ckyqw replied with this 1 year ago, 14 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,839
Anonymous M replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,850
Dead !Pool..v42s replied with this 1 year ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,851
@previous (M)
If you say posting on some obscure message board is an example of advocating in the broader sense, I'm gonna lose it
If you say posting on some obscure message board is an example of advocating in the broader sense, I'm gonna lose it
Anonymous M replied with this 1 year ago, 15 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,861
@previous (Dead !Pool..v42s)
It's the dictionary definition of the verb 'to advocate', as in "to support or argue for (a cause, policy, etc.); to plead in favor of".
'Advocacy', as used by Dave ITT, doesn't have the inflated meaning you're imagining. A few replies earlier Dave said "I've been saying that for 3 years", so the meaning of his later use of 'advocating' is clear. Taking issue with it is autism or poor English. Given that it's Dreamworks, probably both.
It's the dictionary definition of the verb 'to advocate', as in "to support or argue for (a cause, policy, etc.); to plead in favor of".
'Advocacy', as used by Dave ITT, doesn't have the inflated meaning you're imagining. A few replies earlier Dave said "I've been saying that for 3 years", so the meaning of his later use of 'advocating' is clear. Taking issue with it is autism or poor English. Given that it's Dreamworks, probably both.
Father Dave !RsSxeehGwc replied with this 1 year ago, 4 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,867
@previous (M)
> It's the dictionary definition of the verb 'to advocate', as in "to support or argue for (a cause, policy, etc.); to plead in favor of".
>
> 'Advocacy', as used by Dave ITT, doesn't have the inflated meaning you're imagining. A few replies earlier Dave said "I've been saying that for 3 years", so the meaning of his later use of 'advocating' is clear. Taking issue with it is autism or poor English. Given that it's Dreamworks, probably both.
Bless you for attempting to help the blind to see, friend!
> It's the dictionary definition of the verb 'to advocate', as in "to support or argue for (a cause, policy, etc.); to plead in favor of".
>
> 'Advocacy', as used by Dave ITT, doesn't have the inflated meaning you're imagining. A few replies earlier Dave said "I've been saying that for 3 years", so the meaning of his later use of 'advocating' is clear. Taking issue with it is autism or poor English. Given that it's Dreamworks, probably both.
Bless you for attempting to help the blind to see, friend!
Dead !Pool..v42s replied with this 1 year ago, 5 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,904
Anonymous M replied with this 1 year ago, 7 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,344,949
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 day later, 4 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,345,270
@1,344,214 (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
> Okay, i disagree with somethings but he hasn't done any of those you said.
I think they are trolling
> Okay, i disagree with somethings but he hasn't done any of those you said.
I think they are trolling
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 day later, 6 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,345,554
I don't like him