You continue to respond to ppl who merely disagree on the need for this war or those who think we should stay out of it. You continue to post inflammatory one-sided “news articles” which are obviously coming out of the Ukraine Ministry of War or their PR Department. Then you gloat over how many Russians were killed thanks to weapons supplied by NATO and the West while Ukraine has refused to list their casualties since this war began.
You’re obviously posting Ukrainian propaganda and expect no dissenting opinions on such an important issue that ALL Americans have a stake in, especially if this war continues to escalate. The fact that you run to the moderators whenever you feel ganged up on is rather pathetic IMO.
Yep, starts out with calls to “ pray” , then it’s on to post the War Porn , snuff films.
Nailed it. 👍
I dissent on occasion and in some of my replies (public and private) to UMCRevMom@aol.com. I try to explain support for my view, or I just state my peace and leave it at that, without bashing and smashing.
If / when UMCRevMom@aol.com tells me to "Stop" making replies to her or sending her a message, I will stop.
Regarding original posts (OP) . . .
Jim Robinson has written that FreeRepublic.com is a:
site dedicated to the concerns of traditional grassroots conservative activists. We're here to discuss and advance our conservative causes in a more or less liberal-free environment
Some conservatives oppose U.S. involvement in the war between Russia and Ukraine; some conservatives oppose Russia's invasion of Ukraine. (And there are other points of view, re what is going on over there.)
Sometimes I am not satisfied with some information in an Original Post. That info may seem to me to be untruthful, or I know the info is not true, but I do not have an interest in employing bash and smash face writing - when I disagree.
Sometimes I may have knowledge of additional information of service to the OP, so I will spend hours trying to find a good reference and then reply.
I try to find info that may help my argument, or info that adds more details to the OP topic and shows that, sometimes, a different situation may indeed be the case - contrary to the apparent view of the OP.
Often, I feel that I cannot muster the skill to state my argument well -OR- I think that the info that I find in support of my argument, is not sufficient . . . and I save my text file for future reference.
You know a father's love by his restraint, and I prefer Jesus - his preference about, what I may write."
You continue to respond to ALL Freepers. However, I have been experienced to much from cyber-bullies: name-calling, taunting, trolling, stalking, flame-baiting, insults, religious insults, flames, threats, ill-wishes, harrassing & annoying, unwanted slander, gaslighting posts.
I treat all Freepers as I want to be treated.
I’m sorry if I didn’t respond to you comment quickly enough. I am currently out-of-sate & just arrived at my hotel. YEA:)
RUSSIA MISSPEAKS:
1. Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says “No”
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/
ARTICLE
Did NATO promise not to enlarge? Gorbachev says “no“
Steven Pifer
November 6, 2014
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/
It is abundantly evident that Russian president Vladimir Putin is no fan of NATO. Indeed, he displays a pronounced, almost obsessive, antipathy toward the alliance. He claims that NATO took advantage of Russian weakness after the collapse of the Soviet union to enlarge to its east, in violation of promises, allegedly made to Moscow by western leaders. But no such promises were made, a point now confirmed by someone who is DEFINATELY in a position to know: Mikhail Gorbachev, then president of Soviet union.
President Putin‘s NATO narrative
The West’s supposed violation of a pledge not to enlarge NATO, has long figured as a key element in Putin‘s narrative about, and against, the alliance. In his bombastic February 27 speech to the Munich security conference, he said:
And we have the right to ask: against whom is this NATO expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? I would like to quote the speech of NATO general secretary, Mr. Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at that time that: “the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory, gives the Soviet union a firm, security guarantee. “Where are these guarantees?
The Russian president returned to the subject in his March 18, 2014 Kremlin speech justifying Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea: “they, western leaders, have lied to us many times, made decisions behind our backs, placed before us an accomplished fact. This happened with NATO’s expansion to the east, as well as the deployment of military infrastructure at our borders.“ although it has been clear for several years that the alliance has no appetite for putting Ukraine on a membership track, Putin went on to express horror at the prospect of NATO forces in Crimea: Russian, inaction, “would have meant that NATO‘s navy would be right there in the city of Russia’s military glory, Sevastopol, and this would create not an illusory, but a perfectly real threat to the whole of southern Russia.“
Western leaders, NEVER PLEDGED, NOT TO ENLARGE NATO, a point that several analysts have demonstrated. Mark Kramer explored the question in detail in a 2009 article in the Washington quarterly. He drew on declassified American German and Soviet records to make his case and noted that, in discussions on German reunification in the 2+4 format, the two Germany’s, plus the United States, Soviet union, Britain, and France, the SOVIETS NEVER raised the question of NATO enlargement, other than how it might apply in the former German democratic republic, GDR.
[Excerpted]
I express my opinion, which may differ from yours. However, our different point of views is not an excuse to allow rudeness, insults, shaming, etc.
Thank you for your thoughtful concern. I have been called names & continuously mocked by just a couple or four. However I have been a part of Free Republic & find it a great wealth of information. That being said, I have greatly appreciated your thoughtful comments. BTW, no one has all the historic, political, or economic answers. So, that is why we enter into discussion with other Freepers. Sharing view points and information with others is what Free Republic is all about, not abuse.
I do try not to react. I have tried to defend myself. However, I do not choose to run to moderators or take abuse any longer
Freepers do encourage and share their support. So I will continue to move on.
I have repeatedly stated:
I firmly believe everyone is entitled to freedom of thought and expression. I am not here to be responsible to dictate a viewpoint. The responsibility for each individual is to weigh information and develop their own point of view.
I have a sense of obligation to share information that others may not have access.