MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
Of course they will unless Dear Leader removes his support for the poo tin
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Quote from article: "Especially striking on Wednesday night was the sight of members of both the Republican and Democratic parties rising to enthusiastically cheer the Ukrainian president as he spoke in confident, assertive English."
Now what will be disturbing to see is if some of these same then vote to try to cut support as they have been threatening to do.
Of course they will unless Dear Leader removes his support for the poo tin
And the Chinese are making them, to RussiaOnly masters can make demands.
Things like this make me wish for a real James Bond to rendition that Lt. Col. to The Hague.Caught on Camera, Traced by Phone: The Russian Military Unit That Killed Dozens in Bucha (Published 2022)
Exclusive evidence obtained in a monthslong investigation identifies the Russian regiment — and commander — behind one of the worst atrocities in Ukraine.www.nytimes.com
There has been no violation of the no politics rule. There is a specific type of political talk we do not allow. Everything about the war is political, should we also stop talking about WW2 too? It has politics written all over it.
Let's also be honest. If the "offending posts" were about people on the other side of the aisle, the people complaining would either "agree" or be quiet. And that is 100% fact. Let's not kid ourselves here. It works both ways.
The posts I assume that are offending, were not political, but rather about the specific act they were doing during a speech by a world leader directly related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. That is what we are discussing in this thread right?
There were also some posts about the people that think Putin is just in his war. Some say its because they are naive and young (Maybe). Those particular people also tend to watch a lot of Comrade Carlson (Thats not political either, he is simply a douche).
None of the posts were about a political party or its ideology, or about any policy and its merit. Nor where they attacking a party or its policies. The politics being discussed, however, do pertain directly to the war. Since we stated over and over we have EASED the no-politics rule so that this conflict can be discussed, what is the big deal?
Now having said that…
EVERYONE SHOULD BE FULLY AWARE OF THE TYPE OF POLITICAL DISCUSSION THAT IS NOT ALLOWED. AND THIS TYPE OF POLITICAL DISCUSSION IS NOT AND WILL NOT BE ALLOWED BY ANYONE. MODERATING STAFF INCLUDED.
(The All Caps was not me yelling at anyone, just emphasizing the intent of the No Politics Rule.)
As long as that political discussion is not taking place, what is the problem? It's too easy just to scroll past posts you don't like anyhow (Hint to one member who keeps reporting every single post he does not like. Even ones in the Joke thread. You know who you are.) That's the problem with this world today, you can't say anything without fear of someone being offended. And that goes for everyone.
Lighten up, and lets enjoy conversing different views without being overly political and insulting. Life's too short my friends.
Edit: I did comment on the type of people that would elect a child molester and sex trafficker. I guess that was pretty close to being to political. I'll refrain from that going forward, however, the point still stands character wise.
Hi Der Adler,
Despite my recent outburst several days back (I'm still trying to figure what I thought I'd accomplish), I think we're on the same page, though still separated on a few points.
Your opening sentence noted that there had been no violation of the politics rule, but your closing sentence cautioned against being overly insulting. Your edit reflected on an earlier comment, and I can appreciate that.
There were several recent insulting comments which drew my response. Notes that loyalty will be rewarded by Russian friends, that congressmen can be loyal subjects of Russia, who should be pole dancing in a nudie bar. Or perhaps the recent comment that calls a Fox news commentator "comrade" and a douche...
My final point (before I'm banned?) is that those comments are highly insulting. I doubt anyone here would accept those descriptions if they were leveled at anyone we cared about. I just get my undies twisted when those comments are tossed about folks on my side of the isle, even if I don't agree with those folks. I'm just being honest because - as I see it - that's 100% fact.
So, with that in mind, regardless of our sides of the isle, best wishes for Christmas and the new year and every other holiday we can celebrate.
Dana
And the Chinese are making them, to Russia
There has been no violation of the no politics rule. There is a specific type of political talk we do not allow. Everything about the war is political, should we also stop talking about WW2 too? It has politics written all over it.
Let's also be honest. If the "offending posts" were about people on the other side of the aisle, the people complaining would either "agree" or be quiet. And that is 100% fact. Let's not kid ourselves here. It works both ways.
The posts I assume that are offending, were not political, but rather about the specific act they were doing during a speech by a world leader directly related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. That is what we are discussing in this thread right?
There were also some posts about the people that think Putin is just in his war. Some say its because they are naive and young (Maybe). Those particular people also tend to watch a lot of Comrade Carlson (Thats not political either, he is simply a douche).
None of the posts were about a political party or its ideology, or about any policy and its merit. Nor where they attacking a party or its policies. The politics being discussed, however, do pertain directly to the war. Since we stated over and over we have EASED the no-politics rule so that this conflict can be discussed, what is the big deal?
Now having said that…
EVERYONE SHOULD BE FULLY AWARE OF THE TYPE OF POLITICAL DISCUSSION THAT IS NOT ALLOWED. AND THIS TYPE OF POLITICAL DISCUSSION IS NOT AND WILL NOT BE ALLOWED BY ANYONE. MODERATING STAFF INCLUDED.
(The All Caps was not me yelling at anyone, just emphasizing the intent of the No Politics Rule.)
As long as that political discussion is not taking place, what is the problem? It's too easy just to scroll past posts you don't like anyhow (Hint to one member who keeps reporting every single post he does not like. Even ones in the Joke thread. You know who you are.) That's the problem with this world today, you can't say anything without fear of someone being offended. And that goes for everyone.
Lighten up, and lets enjoy conversing different views without being overly political and insulting. Life's too short my friends.
Edit: I did comment on the type of people that would elect a child molester and sex trafficker. I guess that was pretty close to being to political. I'll refrain from that going forward, however, the point still stands character wise.
Well yeah, Comrade Carlson is a douche and Putin's employee of the month. Gaetz is a child sex trafficker (That's the lowest of the lowest). And Boebert and Green are fake news conspiracy nuts. It is what it is.
Let's be honest here, if I insulted number 47 (and I can think of a lot) would you really care? I doubt it.
And why would I ban you? You have done nothing wrong. Am I that much of an asshole that you think I will ban you?
People do not get banned for speaking their mind in a civil manner. We all have differences of opinions. We will not see eye to eye from time to time. And thankfully so, life, let alone this forum would be boring if we all agreed 100% of the time.
I think its funny that you say we are on the opposite side of the aisle. Tell me what side I'm on? I can tell you I sit on neither one, but I think my voting record would surprise you.
Merry Christmas, and Happy not Banning you.
As much as I enjoy my periodic visits to this site, I'm going to skip out over a fundimental disagreement about what's acceptable here.
Dana
Well yeah, Comrade Carlson is a douche... I should have realized you would know.
I don't care which side you're on - I only care how you treat the other side.
As much as I enjoy my periodic visits to this site, I'm going to skip out over a fundimental disagreement about what's acceptable here.
Dana
I don't see that as needed myself. First, you bring a lot to the table. Second, and more to the point, when I want to vent politically, I have other sites that I go to where that is permitted.
Each site has its own rules, and I just design my surfing around that so that when I want to discuss one topic I've got one site, when I want to discuss another I go elsewhere, and so on. It'd be a shame to lose your knowledge over something this menial, it seems to me.
I think what's being said here is that as Clausewitz noted, war is an extension of politics, but there's a difference between politics and partisanship. Politics is being tolerated in this thread, because it is driving this war; but partisanship is different in that it brings up internal divides that tend to devolve into a mess.
That is not aimed at you, just so you know. I'm pretty sure we don't agree politically, but who cares? There are forums to hash out political arguments, and I take my own to those spots.