Very, very , dumb question :)

[bomb2022]

But I ask anyway.
Are all the administrators of this site rooting for Ukraine?

well i just got a thread ban and a warning point
for telling a "russian" to write in english soo... no

are you by any cance friends with: jester89G or/and LoganTodd

also why is this not in the off topic section?
the general discussion is not for "free/save" political talk
the mods are watching me...

and here is just a fact for you:
putin is not trump's friend.. "russians" are good at manipulating/lying

You have done a little bit of a self report, why are you looking at mods profiles for flags to try create a narrative? As you said, its a free space, people can express themselves as they want.

not quide if you get too direct or "Inappropriate" you will be banned
even in the of topic threads...

and im too messed up for all the subtle insults i'm more of an honest/direct man

I don't concern, it makes me laugh.

Draim you're not funny... just very very dumb

i thought you want to "master-debate" about people's political opinion
but all you do is complain/cry that the mods are/being mean to you

"peoples" like you're just all the same..
i guess i better just follow my new "rule" and ignore you and your thread
besides we already have this one for political talk/fun

 

[suprisedcrankyface]

Maybe I exaggerated a lot. But it's still clear that the majority is for Ukraine.

You have done a little bit of a self report, why are you looking at mods profiles for flags to try create a narrative? As you said, its a free space, people can express themselves as they want.

 

[Draim]

As you said, its a free space

Conditionally free.

 

[suprisedcrankyface]

Conditionally free.

So why is it your concern if they do or do not have certain flags?

 

[Draim]

So why is it your concern if they do or do not have certain flags?

I don't concern, it makes me laugh.

 

[HPZAT]

And, as History shows, they wouldn't have had to ally with Germany if Sweden and, more importantly, England, haven't refused to ally with them in 1940.
They were also ready to keep that alliance purely defensive, and German's troops located in Finland had a strict interdiction to attack Russia until Finland officially joined the war. What happened the 25 June 1941, 4 days after the starts of Barbarossa, when Russia attacked Finland; bombing towns, not even the position of the German's troops.

So, your point is?

Well, your point is obviously to distort history. It's enough to say that Finland had other options even before the Winter War 1939-40 (the negotiations lead by Stalin were serious and had many stages). And when my country was losing that war but managed to prevent Soviet occupation of the whole country (which wasn't Stalin's original plan) Nazi-Germany gave a better option in the secret negotiations in 1940, than UK and others.

That was to take back the lost areas and a lot more. Greater Finland was a real project and racist one to the core with concentration camps and all (the extermination camps existed here only after the civil war of 1918 and there's a disputation if these were the first ones in history or those during Boer War...).

Ethically speaking Stalin had no right for his demands, but when Finland in the so called Continuation War pursued to grab large areas that had never been part of any kind of Finland, it de facto accepted that land can be taken by force (which historically has been a normal view before our times that now because of Putain and Trump et al. seem to been just a short moment in history).

 

[HPZAT]

Fun fact: Before joining, Finland had the same status in NATO that Ukraine... and Russia...
The only difference with those two countries being that they actively participated, while Ukraine voluntarily limited its participation to not annoy Russia, and Russia haven't participated since Putin first election.

So, your point is?

You of course get to see lots of stupid and ignorant arguments on Internet forums, but this.

Just check " The War in Afghanistan" and "F-35" regarding my country for a start and then come back to tell your views.

 

[HPZAT]

Funny fact: the Soviet troops attacking my country in 1939-40 were mostly Ukrainians. And Stalin was a Georgian. Such is world.

 

[Draim]

Funny fact: the Soviet troops attacking my country in 1939-40 were mostly Ukrainians. And Stalin was a Georgian. Such is world.

Yes, and Putin has Jewish roots. Such world.

 

[anne O'nymous]

You of course get to see lots of stupid and ignorant arguments on Internet forums, but this.

And yet, in January 2022, so before the invasion of Ukraine changed a lot of thing, Finland, Russia and Ukraine relation with NATO were the same.

You must be registered to see the links

of the NATO

You must be registered to see the links

. What, to quote the NATO site itself, "allows [them] to build an individual relationship with NATO, choosing their own priorities for cooperation." Emphasis is mine.

The fact that Finland choose to cooperate more closely do not mean that they had a different status, just that they had different views regarding what being part of this program meant.


Before sharing your thoughts on Internet forums, you should check them first. Just in case they would make you looks like a fool who don't even know shit about his own country.

 

[Zakharova]

I believe it's no surprise to anyone that Putin sees the fall of the Soviet Union as a geopolitical tragedy, and that his wet dream is to recover all the territories that achieved 'independence,' even if it means rehabilitating Stalin, mixing Soviet nostalgia with tsarist/Orthodox aesthetics.

He replaced the Vory v Zakone with his own plutocratic elite with the goal of becoming a new tsar... and unfortunately, he has the support of many Russians who resent the dark period that was the 1990s.

But in today's world, where free speech is punished and monitored, defending Putin is no longer a matter of nationalism—it's pure stupidity or personal interest.

 

[HPZAT]

And yet, in January 2022, so before the invasion of Ukraine changed a lot of thing, Finland, Russia and Ukraine relation with NATO were the same.

You must be registered to see the links

of the NATO

You must be registered to see the links

. What, to quote the NATO site itself, "allows [them] to build an individual relationship with NATO, choosing their own priorities for cooperation." Emphasis is mine.

The fact that Finland choose to cooperate more closely do not mean that they had a different status, just that they had different views regarding what being part of this program meant.


Before sharing your thoughts on Internet forums, you should check them first. Just in case they would make you looks like a fool who don't even know shit about his own country.

Your argument here is that every country that was not a member of NATO had the same status, which is utterly ridiculous. And you totally ignored my hints on Afghanistan and F35.

This is so stupid that as a former teacher I have to say that I will continue this only if you pay me.

 

[HPZAT]

Just to point out: we have here a person that thinks that Finland, Ukraine and Russia had the same chance to join NATO before the Russian invasion in 2022.

Yes, I will call such person stupid and ignorant. And now I will go back to porn games. Bye.

 

[anne O'nymous]

Your argument here is that every country that was not a member of NATO had the same status, which is utterly ridiculous.

No, my point is that every countries that was member of NATO PfP program had the same status. And it's not even a question of being a fact, it's a question of purely basic logic...

What is stupid is to explicitly pretend, like you did, that the more than 130 countries that are neither NATO members, nor NATO partners, have the same status than the 35 countries that were, or still are, members of the NATO Partnership for Peace program.
At this level it's not even a question of ignorance. It's pure hypocrisy in hope to save the face.

And you totally ignored my hints on Afghanistan and F35.

I explicitly answered them... twice!

Firstly when putting emphasis on the fact that NATO partners chose by themselves their level of cooperation. Secondly when writing this: "The fact that Finland choose to cooperate more closely do not mean that they had a different status, just that they had different views regarding what being part of this program meant."

It happen that Finland chose a closer cooperation than Russia or Ukraine, it's all. Assuming that this imply a different status is just ignorance of what NATO became post USSR era, what the PfP program was, and what it was created for.

For a former teacher, you have a strange lack of the most basic cognitive abilities...


Edit:

Just to point out: we have here a person that thinks that Finland, Ukraine and Russia had the same chance to join NATO before the Russian invasion in 2022.

Be honest, you are a former teacher because you've been fired due to your deep stupidity, right?

I said, and proved through links pointing to NATO site, that Finland, Ukraine and Russia had the same status in NATO. This status being partners through the Partnership for Peace program.

At no time in this universe, did this mean that they have a chance to join NATO as full time member and, therefore, even less that they have the same chances to do it.

 

[Count Morado]

Note: this thread is not in off-topic sub forum.

 

[bomb2022]

Note: this thread is not in off-topic sub forum.

just play nice and we'll be fine

No, my point is that every countries that was member of NATO PfP program had the same status. And it's not even a question of being a fact, it's a question of purely basic logic...

What is stupid is to explicitly pretend, like you did, that the more than 130 countries that are neither NATO members, nor NATO partners, have the same status than the 35 countries that were, or still are, members of the NATO Partnership for Peace program.
At this level it's not even a question of ignorance. It's pure hypocrisy in hope to save the face.




I explicitly answered them... twice!

Firstly when putting emphasis on the fact that NATO partners chose by themselves their level of cooperation. Secondly when writing this: "The fact that Finland choose to cooperate more closely do not mean that they had a different status, just that they had different views regarding what being part of this program meant."

It happen that Finland chose a closer cooperation than Russia or Ukraine, it's all. Assuming that this imply a different status is just ignorance of what NATO became post USSR era, what the PfP program was, and what it was created for.

For a former teacher, you have a strange lack of the most basic cognitive abilities...


Edit:


Be honest, you are a former teacher because you've been fired due to your deep stupidity, right?

I said, and proved through links pointing to NATO site, that Finland, Ukraine and Russia had the same status in NATO. This status being partners through the Partnership for Peace program.

At no time in this universe, did this mean that they have a chance to join NATO as full time member and, therefore, even less that they have the same chances to do it.

wait a minute you actually believe putin wants to be in the nato or even live in peace?
and you do know nato only exist because of russia right?
12k nukes

You must be registered to see the links

i hope youre just trolling bro... or have you been talking to "russians" to mutch
they really know how to manipulate "people's"

I believe it's no surprise to anyone that Putin sees the fall of the Soviet Union as a geopolitical tragedy, and that his wet dream is to recover all the territories that achieved 'independence,' even if it means rehabilitating Stalin, mixing Soviet nostalgia with tsarist/Orthodox aesthetics.

He replaced the Vory v Zakone with his own plutocratic elite with the goal of becoming a new tsar... and unfortunately, he has the support of many Russians who resent the dark period that was the 1990s.

But in today's world, where free speech is punished and monitored, defending Putin is no longer a matter of nationalism—it's pure stupidity or personal interest.

dont try to fool me i know you support putin's "new world order"
you "russians" are all the same

 

[anne O'nymous]

wait a minute you actually believe putin wants to be in the nato or even live in peace?

*sigh*

Not only at no fucking time did I said, nor even implied, this. But in 1994, when Russia joined the Partnership for Peace NATO program, it's Boris Yeltsin who was the Russian president.

So, do like the other guy, learn to read, then come back commenting again.

Oh and by the way, there were nothing political in this discussion (only history) before you jumped in...

 

[Count Morado]

just play nice and we'll be fine

I'm not talking about Rule 1.1. Read Rule 1.2.

Again, this thread is not in the off-topic sub forum.

there were nothing political in this discussion (only history) before you jumped in...

Naw, political tête-à-tête started in first page.

 

[Draim]

Hint, Don't argue with Anne Onamomus. About history and France. You will never win this argument. Even if you're right.

 

[bomb2022]

*sigh*

Not only at no fucking time did I said, nor even implied, this. But in 1994, when Russia joined the Partnership for Peace NATO program, it's Boris Yeltsin who was the Russian president.

So, do like the other guy, learn to read, then come back commenting again.

Oh and by the way, there were nothing political in this discussion (only history) before you jumped in...

why are you living in 1994 bro?
i mean the 90s where a cool time but they are over.. we're now back in the 20s-30s
and it was

You must be registered to see the links

who gave putin power so i stay correct

and its just one of my many talents to turn threads political

i also think that you mistakenly wrote your account name with an "O" instead of a "Q"
you realy do sound like a "Q"