It’s not wise to underestimate the enemy. We need to stop this them as soon as possible. Time only helps them. Even with their ratshit military they can still hurt a lot of innocent people.
NATO havent even turned up yet
Maybe that’s that problem.
Even he isn’t dumb enough to intentionally fire a bullet at a NATO member, as it would not go well in his favor.
Yet. That’s the problem with his behaviour and the reason why we need to see this as a lead up. He’s pushing boundaries, testing our resolve, finding cracks and stoking divisions. He’s not going to attack a NATO member yet, but sooner or later he will find the right time, the right member, to strike and expose our weakness.
the uprising in DPR and LPR where people rebelled against the regime.
You mean these people, right? The ones Russia sent in?
The fact that the west ran a coup in Ukraine is well documented,
It most certainly is not. If it were you’d have provided a source.
and it’s very clear that the fascist regime there does not represent the majority o the people.
Citation needed. The events of 2005, 2013/2014, 2022-present beg to differ.
The very fact that Ukraine no longer has elections underscores just how unpopular this regime is.
Oh you got me, I definitely can’t think of ANY other reasons why elections would be challenging in Ukraine right now.
Go spread your propaganda elsewhere.
Pot, meet kettle.
This perspective is just the casual erasure of the free agency of people living in the democracies of central and Eastern Europe, Ukraine, Georgia, the Baltic states.
Instead of seeing it as NATO expanding, why can’t you see it that many countries are afraid of Russia and are voluntarily joining? Why would they be afraid of Russia? Sweden and Finland held out for a long time, and when they joined it was not because NATO “expanded into” them, it’s because they wanted to join! Aren’t you capable of seeing all these people as making their own choices?
Ukraine has a long yet alternating history of good relations with Russia alongside the desire for greater integration with the west. You are just absolutely incapable of acknowledging that they made their own choice for themselves to move away from Russia. They expressed their collective will with Yushchenko in 2005, with Maidan in 2013-2014, and still to this day. Russia was perfectly fine with a neutral Ukraine as long as the Ukrainians only do what Russia wants them to do, and when they don’t (or when Georgia didn’t), they get the tanks.
Citation needed. Don’t worry, I already found one for you: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-as-a-ukrainian-im-not-surprised-by-volodymyr-zelenskys-declining/
According to KIIS, his approval rating has declined sharply, to 60%. Hardly “in the gutter”.
But wait, isn’t KIIS a biased regime source?! They were the same whose survey showed that the majority of Ukrainians support the fight against the Russian invasion. Hmm, I guess regime polls and stats agencies are only biased when they demonstrate facts that don’t support your narrative. As long as they support your pro-Russian message then you can use their data freely.
Of course it is challenging to conduct polls during wartime. Countries tend toward authoritarianism when they are at war. But unlike the invaders, Zelensky’s government was elected in free and fair elections in 2019. This election, as well as the Maidan protests in 2013, make it pretty obvious to me that Ukrainians support their independence from Russia.
The sources are Gallup and KIIS.
Let me know when you can find a source that shows the majority of Ukrainians do not support the war against Russian invasion. I’ll wait.
The source is unbiased and objective in terms of demonstrating that the majority of Ukrainians support the fight against the Russian invasion.
I don’t expect moral perfection from a country that is fighting for its survival against a more powerful aggressor. Yes, conscription is awful. Ukraine has allowed many exceptions but the alternative is to surrender their country to the real ghouls here, which is the Moscow regime that has raped and murdered innocent civilians from Bucha to Mariupol.
There would be no need for conscription if Russia had not invaded Ukraine, and conscription would end tomorrow if Russia would turn around and go home.
And here: https://news.gallup.com/poll/512258/ukrainians-stand-behind-war-effort-despite-fatigue.aspx
As a matter of fact, your article shows the conscription is unpopular, particularly among people being conscripted. It does not show that the majority of people in Ukraine do not support the fight against the Russian invasion. It was disingenuous of you to provide that article to infer otherwise.
It seems to me that the Ukrainians themselves want to fight this invasion as well.
The one thing I kinda thought the boomers who predominantly run shit would be good at was to remember what level of economic commitment is required to win a real, serious military conflict (and Afghanistan and Iraq don’t count - they were fully asymmetric conflicts). But it seems they can’t even do that.
Well Afghanistan and Iraq are really the only two wars which the boomers can be said to have “fought” in the sense of being the largest voting bloc, well represented in the administration - basically running things.
They were post-WW2 children so they weren’t really running things during Korea and Vietnam, or the Cold War generally. The two conflicts you mentioned are just about the two best examples of “Boomers’ Wars” you can find, so to say “they don’t count” is funny because it should at least illustrate why the current situation is not so surprising. They don’t know how to fight a war - they were born when their parents just won a fucking big one.
it might be Ukraine or their associates
Gotta stop you right there. Ukraine orchestrating this attack is not in the realm of possibility.
I agree with your other points, but given Putin’s track record with things like this I think it’s absolutely relevant to mention the very real likelihood that this was orchestrated by Russia and will be used to escalate. Of course you are right that time will tell. But I for one appreciate the reminder of Putin’s history in this regard and to be on guard for how this awful event and the tragic lost lives of innocent victims will be used by the Putin regime for his own nefarious purposes.
Don’t other jurisdictions like EU and USA already have passenger rights rules? Are the ones being pushed for in Canada any more stringent than theirs?
I doubt it. I think the passenger rights rules we are asking for in Canada are more or less in line with other parts of the world. So it begs the question - how are those pilots able to ensure safety without this supposed financial pressure?
Lol thanks, you got it. I’ll wear the downvotes as a badge of shame, and a reminder to take the time to think before I shoot off a stupid comment.
Bah, who am I kidding. It’s not the first time this happened and it won’t be the last. I once got downvotes in a newiran subreddit because the OP compared the Iran govt to neanderthals - I felt that homo sapiens neanderthalensis is a bit misunderstood and didn’t deserve to be insulted by the comparison.
Hey is this the part where we ask for proof?
Cuz all I’ve been hearing is that Canada’s allegations are totally baseless until we provide proof. Isn’t that how it works? Or is proof only required when India is being accused?
I understand, it sounds like you are concerned for India’s international reputation in light of these allegations, and rightfully so. It’s unfair from the perspective of a common citizen that your country gets flamed like this without proof, and insulting that people just say “well it’s Canada, they aren’t lying”.
It’s just that I trust my government and institutions and I believe them. Biden and Trudeau both spoke to Modi before this was released. Journalists in Canada were going to release this if the government didn’t. I truly believe that handling it this way was bad for Canada too, so I don’t see an incentive for Canada to lie which I do see for the Indian govt. Don’t forget that other countries have their own relationships with India and will make their own decisions about supporting the allegations, not necessarily in light of the quality of proof but rather for pragmatic reasons. I think this whole affair will be painful for normal people in both countries, so in that sense you’re absolutely right that diplomacy failed.
Still I’m curious: what do you think would be the reaction if the allegations turn out to be true?
Fair enough, I see where you’re coming from and fully expect some proof. I do however have doubts that any proof will ever be conclusive enough to convince people and certainly not enough to get Modi to admit the truth if his govt is truly behind it. So what will providing proof accomplish anyway? Not providing proof might be a tactic to elicit lies that can be demonstrated as such through a trickle release of proof, enough to prove that the deniers are liars.
At the end of the day, Canada is a sovereign country and they are free to level a number of consequences against a foreign government if they so desire, including sanctions, visa restrictions, and so on. The only proof they need is for themselves, and to take action that will protect Canadians from foreign assassinations in the future. Canada really does not have to prove anything to India, especially if they do not believe the Indian govt is acting in good faith.
But it’s not exactly a threat is it? It’s a very reasonable observation about how Ukrainian refugees might feel and behave.
Wouldn’t you feel the same way? Your country gets invaded, you flee to a generous supporting friendly country. That country stops being supporting, and your chances to return home start to vanish. You didn’t choose to be here. Now you’re stuck in a foreign country that you feel could be doing more to fight injustice and give you a chance to return home.
He’s the president of a democracy, not a mind controller. People will feel a certain way. He’s simply observing this potential situation, as a warning to the allies not to slide into complacency.
Yes this is true. But what do you think is the reason? Like is it because there’s heavy metals in the dye, so the plate is kinda toxic? Or maybe because it’s just too fragile, chips easily, etc?
As the consumer I don’t know what regulatory loopholes they are exploiting when they state “decorative use”. I doubt the average consumer has the time to do this research. Because a plate is a plate and people will use it to put food on when it’s sold in that way, the intended usage is obvious regardless of the tiny disclaimer.
To the great surprise of no one.
Remember this is the man who, during the Covid pandemic, was handed a softball question from a reporter “What do you say to Americans who are scared… millions who are scared right now?” Basically set him up to provide a reassuring, caring response, to sound presidential for once in his life.
Except his response was: “I say that you’re a terrible reporter,” Trump snapped aggressively. “That’s what I say. I think that’s a very nasty question. You’re doing sensationalism.”
He’s a hateful, divisive, incompetent person who consistently reminds us how terrible humans being can be.