The problem with your question is that the graphic you chose allows doubt, you should have gone with this one:
Posted on 07/11/2023 12:58:21 PM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
“NATO thugs and criminals shouldn’t be surprised when they get a righteous punch in the nose. I realize Neocons like you love a fight, but when are you going to the front?”
Jon, Jon, Jon: You can’t help yourself. Then again, Neo(com)munists such as yourself never can.
And, as is also common with your type, you will eventually fall back on the old fallacy of asking when I — or anyone, I suppose, who thinks Ukraine has the right to defend itself — will “go to the front.” Well, back at you, Sparky: When are YOU going to the front to join your Russian comrades in their invasion of Ukraine? So, do you see how silly your comment is?
“Please refrain from the PERSONAL ATTACKS, at least when you’re posting on THIS SITE...”
Well, Bob; when you make ludicrous comments you can expect some pushback. That is not a “personal attack;” it is a refutation of an imbecilic statement.
“...as we had three pro-Ukrainians Zotted on Sunday...”
Ah, the crux of the matter: You have just admitted that you and yours (the “we” in your statement) have collaborated to have those with whom you disagree “zotted.”
It’s interesting that your side routinely disparage, attack, insult, and vilify those of us who have the temerity to voice the apparently offensive position that Ukraine has the right to defend itself against an unjustified invasion by the larger and stronger Russia, and that we hope it (Ukraine) prevails; and yet, you are all still here.
“...and thus I wouldn’t recommend testing JR’s patience with you.”
I could say the same as to you and yours.
But, it’s JR’s site; it’s not mine, and it’s not yours.
I think it’s only fair that someone have experience before they become a cheerleader for war like you. Agree?
“I think it’s only fair that someone have experience before they become a cheerleader for war like you. Agree?”
Jon, go back to school and take an elementary course in logic (especially deductive and inductive reasoning).
You see, Jon; one’s support of a country defending itself against an unjustified invasion by a larger and stronger neighbor is not being a cheerleader for war; in fact, one who holds that position wants the aggressor to stop its aggression and return home (the very opposite of war cheerleading).
But those who oppose a country defending itself against invasion very much ARE cheerleaders for war, because they embrace the concept of the end (taking part or all of another country) is justified by the means (war).
What does this nonsense post have to do with the notion that war cheerleaders 📣 should have personal experience before suggesting others fight for the globalist lie that is NATO? Agree??
There is no nonsense. Your premise (faulty) is that a war cheerleader (undefined) should have personal experience (of what?) before suggesting others fight for the “globalist lie that is NATO” (unexplained).
I have already explained to you that the real war cheerleader is one who condemns the attacked from defending itself, with that natural corollary that the attacker should not be opposed; or, should be defeated. The real war cheerleader subscribes to the end justifying the means.
And, what is this personal experience of which you speak? Does a man have to have his family threatened or even attacked and killed to conclude that an aggressor must be stopped? Does a woman have to be actually raped to take a position that rape is a heinous violation?
Finally, this “globalist lie that is NATO” is interesting. I mean, think of it: “globalist” means someone or something that subscribes to something beyond mere internationalism (which implies some degree of nationalism), and on to supranationalism (i.e., worldwide, sans borders); “lie” is a falsehood; “NATO” is, of course, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, currently comprised of 31 countries, and soon to be 32. So, in other words, you are saying that NATO is a supranational falsehood.
Yet, how can that be? NATO is not worldwide, or supranational; if it were, it would be all over the globe, and there would be no member states, just one big NATO comprised of all peoples everywhere (stateless, because states would have been abolished). And how has this vast, stateless and ubiquitous mass of people lied? And was it a little white lie, or an Everest-sized whopper?
So what.
My statement stands as truth.
Reagan never ordered nor knowingly allowed ANY military engagement connected to his negotiations on the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
And, Reagan accomplished the negotiated dissolution of the Soviet Union without firing a shot.
I don’t see him (Reagan) approving of the Ukrainians shelling the separatists etc.
I believe you are correct.
The problem with your question is that the graphic you chose allows doubt, you should have gone with this one:
“Ah, the crux of the matter: You have just admitted that you and yours (the “we” in your statement) have collaborated to have those with whom you disagree “zotted.””
They were Zotted because they BEHAVED LIKE YOU did earlier towards me. They happen to be Ukraine supporters, because they are the ones behaving that way.
I get it that you HATE having to deal with us, but if you’re not able to control your rage, you likely will join them and I’m through the warnings. There are RULES HERE, and if following them is too much for you, then, I will report you...and JR is not in a good mood, especially towards people like you.
“They were Zotted because they BEHAVED LIKE YOU did earlier towards me. They happen to be Ukraine supporters, because they are the ones behaving that way.”
Oh, spare me the drama. I spoke the truth and the truth offended you: That is YOUR problem; not mine.
“I get it that you HATE having to deal with us...”
Au contraire, mon ami; I find you entertaining. You guys are pure theater; the Masks of Comedy and Tragedy.
“...but if you’re not able to control your rage...”
You’re projecting, kid. Because, rather than being enraged, I am amused. You’re just not used to someone who pushes back.
“...you likely will join them and I’m through the warnings.”
Well, I assume I can include you in the cabal of those who have told me they intend to get me banned. You guys crack me up: You can dish it out, but you can’t take it. I and others here on FR who share positions similar to mine regarding the war in Ukraine have been reviled, defamed, threatened with doxxing, etc. by your ilk; and you have BOASTED about getting us banned!
“There are RULES HERE, and if following them is too much for you...”
Well, it’s up to JR as to who is or isn’t complying with the rules; it’s not up to you, or your amigos. And, to be frank, there are some FReepers who are utterly vile; yet, they are still here; there are posters who have openly threatened others with doxxing; yet, they are still here.
“...then, I will report you...and JR is not in a good mood, especially towards people like you.”
Well, if it pleases you, report me. Since you seem to know his moods “towards people like me” — as per your comment — perhaps you have an “in” that others don’t.
Do whatever you want.
I’ll report you, when you cross the line, as I reported the others on Sunday.
So just be careful, and try to discuss issues, rather than engage in personal attacks.
“I’ll report you, when you cross the line, as I reported the others on Sunday.”
Well, you are admitting you were behind that. So, at least you admitted it.
So, tell me: Have you reported those on YOUR side of the aisle who have vilified, libeled, harangued, and threatened to dox those who had the temerity to disagree with them?
You see, Bob; that question is not a personal insult; it is merely a question. And enquiring minds want to know.
Bob, do whatever you want.
“Well, you are admitting you were behind that. So, at least you admitted it.”
Nothing wrong with reporting people who choose to violate the rules. In one case it was a PUBLIC ping.
I’ve also seen people on my side get rather nasty...and no, I won’t report them, but you have every right, and if you don’t, that’s also your right.
But from JR’s view, the idea is to keep things CIVIL here, so no problem with me if you report them. In fact, I’ve told one person privately on my side to cool it.
Again, I’ll continue to report what I think are rules violations of the intent to keep things civil and not personal. If I think the rules are violated against me, then I’ll report those violations, and the mods can punish me, should they think I’m spamming them with bogus complaints (but they’re not bogus, of course).
“I’ve also seen people on my side get rather nasty...and no, I won’t report them...”
Just curious: Why not?
“Just curious: Why not?”
My choice...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.