Free Republic

Right.
Group identity dynamics is a marketing phenomenon, particularly political marketing. It is stupid to fall for it, and people are plenty stupid enough.

You will remember how Muslims around the world danced in the streets in celebration of their great “victory” over the great satan on 9/11/2001.
You should also remember that our side was very reluctant, even negligent about recognizing that we were at war. The major news outlets immediately stopped showing that footage.

Now our leftist enemies are celebrating and we wonder if our side will see that we are at war.

The left is using moral rhetoric. When the assassin called Kirk a fascist, he never actually believed him to hold the views of the Italian collectivist totalitarians of 1935. That is ridiculous. He intended to invoke the moral justification used by the Allies in WWII, or even more appropriately, the justification of Stalinists over destroying Germany and Italy in 1944 and ‘45.

This is a good answer mostly, although the logic of the argument does not apply to the god of the Calvinists who is more than capable of preventing anything from happening.

Malicious compliance. I concur.
And possible “outrage bait”.
MAGA has never had any problem with legal immigrants, but must be made to look unreasonable in the media. And commenters here, suckers, fell for it.

Three ongoing offenses: DEI, Decor ambiance, Food.
1) The woke DEI employee stuff stays in place.
Only the symbolic sign gets changed.
2) They are still gonna serve frozen biscuits, except on Saturdays and Sundays when there is somebody there doing the baking. Biscuits are done ahead of time and frozen. On Saturday morning do you even get fresh then? Bacon is precooked frozen ahead and heated in the oven.
3) The sterile dining room look also stays.
Do they even do the turnip greens in a pot on the stove anymore?
Don’t trouble yourself over another corporate death.

Thanks for your comment!
If you wonder, the people there make sharp between those in Northern Ireland, who are English by country and Ullish by heritage, and those in the country of Ireland who are not.

Not one penny for their defense.
Special relationship cancelled.
Recognize what these people really are and act accordingly.

You did exactly that using the trigger term “isolationism”, though it does nothing for me to say so because you will now define the term to be synonymous with your opposition.

I noticed you dropped the term in several substantive comments.

This has been a good thread with much to think about, so thanks everyone,
BrianD

/sarc
When the Patriots stood behind trees to snipe at marching redcoats, the warfare of history was gone.
When breech loading rifles came on the battlefield, the warfare of history was gone.
When biplanes flew over France, the warfare of history was gone.
When tanks rolled over the trenches,
When Nazis skirted the Maginot line,
When Gooks hid in caves and tunnels,
When terrorists hijacked airliners and flew them into buildings,
the warfare of history was gone.

The reason we lost WWII and the Nazis dominated Europe for a hundred years is because we put the weak Sherman tank up against their mighty Tiger Tank.

The reason the Japanese dominated the Pacific and completely humiliated the Allies in that theater is because of their advanced fighter plane, the Zero.

And finally today, the Ukrainians completely destroyed the Russian’s ballistic missile capability with a few cheap drones!

The history of warfare is gone again as the history of warfare has proved again and again.

Missiles, and drones, and satellites.
OH MY!

The premise of the article. that the justices somehow look to each other and seek approval from each other is unproved. That they would fear disapproval from one another is an emotional projection. Even if proved to apply to on or another of them, (preposterous!) this notion is in itself completely irrelevant.
_____________________________________

Freegards BobL!
Hope all is well over there,
BrianD

Thanks!
1) Do you believe that Zelensky can say or sign something that Parliament will agree to? What legal authority does he really have?
2) Regardless of the mechanical technicalities of diplomacy or who in fact has authority to make peace, how on earth are they ever going to agree to anything while Russians are on Ukrainian soil?

“…telling dispatchers…”
“ the driver and two passengers first said…”
—————————-
Commenting here as if people speak the truth?
Sometimes people shoot at others because they want to kill them.
Then afterwards they say whatever words are necessary to get off the hook.
“I was in fear for my life” you will say to the cops to the courts and to your cell mates for the rest of your life.
Remember also my friends, that when you go on trial, your words here will be recorded and read to the jury.
Here in North Carolina even if someone is actively kicking your door, you cannot shoot unless you can SEE them. Is there a window on your door? Can you wait until they actually breach? Just because you feel violated you do not get to kill someone!

You understand me I think. Why did he go to DC? Well, we heard him say after serious negotiations earlier that he would carry the message back. Please correct me anyone. I am asking if someone knows HOW he might actually end the war, Can he sign something, a paper that ends the war; is there some way to do this even though Russians are still on Ukrainian soil? Parliament has not given Zelensky that kind of authority, or have they? The OP says that people want a negotiated end. Did anybody ask them if those negotiations are supposed to involve the Russians staying? Any engagement and input is appreciated.

Again thanks for your engagement. I think these discussions are helpful.
So if I grant your point on those technicalities, you are still saying that Zelenskiy should or would veto any extension of martial law?
Brother there is NOBODY in the country who thinks that.
The people did vote for a government and president conciliatory to Russia.
The stupid Americans overthrew that government and we got Zelenskyy etc.
Now you suggest that the people would replace Zelensky while Russians are on Ukrainian soil!?
That Zelensky would or could sign something that surrenders Ukrainian soil?
That Parliament would go along and make that legally binding?
You are asking me to set aside what I know about the Slavic mind.
They do not think like we do.
They might say or write words that sound like something we want to hear, but the generational war goes on.
Freegards!
Yours is the last word if you wish..
BrianD

Thank you for your engagement here!
It is in their constitution. That is how my Ukrainian friends explained it to me.
Parliament extended martial law.
Poroshenko’s party overwhelmingly supported martial law .back in April and still do now.
He and all the leaders of his party said it was “both illegal and immoral to suspend martial law, while Russia, etc.”
I really do not know to what you are referring when you suggest Zelenskyy could hold elections. Even so Poroshenko still complains that Zelenskyy is “using martial law” to aggrandize more power for himself. Are you suggesting that Zelensky could suspend martial law and hold elections on his own authority? You must mean by resigning? Why even talk about such a thing as if it was even in the realm of remotest possibility?
If he had wheels he could be a bicycle.

Zelenskyy simply does not have the authority to end the war under Ukraine law.
Ukraine law forbids presidential elections during wartime!

Please do not get hung up on that word!
Surely you can see the point of the post?
Is there really some meaningful difference between what is happening to us and what YOU call a democracy.
Please include your terminology guidelines so that in future we only use your permitted words.
Anyway we do have a republic either.
We are under an all encompassing bureaucratic tyranny!

“American Interests” is codespeak for the neocon agenda.

Yours was quite the ironic comment. I try to laugh at you so as not to cry. You probably think "hearing the other side" is some great wise principle. Yet you completely missed the point: the subject was punished without his side being heard! The judge/bureaucracy did NOT hear his side! How could you miss something so obvious?

OK so old data.
Obvious question what is it now?
Please let us know what you find?
Thanks!