Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[DramaFree11]

Well, I don't know Wyatt. Seeing HOW (with medieval brutality) and WHY (to wipe Ukraine off the map) they are waging this war, I honestly don't understand how any normal person of any creed and national origin can feel anything other than "some personal animosity towards Russia. " What do you feel towards Russia?

XMan, Ukraine should have been negotiating for months, instead they pressed there luck, now they are being wiped out. Pres. Z. Is drinking the same cool-aide you drink. This war should have never happened, and negotiations should have been going on from day one.

Now with the latest attack in Moscow, what did they think would happen.

By the way I was in MTY over the weekend, banging hot girls. I will be back in 8 days, with actual girls, join me. This is real world, not this fantasy world you live in. I do feel sorry for the Ukraine people, but I have zero compassion for there government. You conveniently forgot to talk about the corruption going on by he Ukraine government. , even the liberal media report this, but why bother bringing the corruption up.

All you do is complain and watch liberal news. Get a life.

[Xpartan]

Oh my JM, how brash and insolent o fme to suggest that perhaps you have some personal animosity towards Russia that goes beyond a distant observer. (By the way, anyone can appear to be winning an argument on social media by trying to reshape the discussion into something else. Excessive drama over an innocuous comment, turning posts into a question of morality.).

Well, I don't know Wyatt. Seeing HOW (with medieval brutality) and WHY (to wipe Ukraine off the map) they are waging this war, I honestly don't understand how any normal person of any creed and national origin can feel anything other than "some personal animosity towards Russia. " What do you feel towards Russia?

[Jmsuttr]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...ir-own-borders

One bomber, one fighter escort, two helicopters, and an estimated 9 aviators eliminated. And reportedly it all happened about 50 km INSIDE Russia.

3. All four aircraft were shot down by Ukraine. Possible methods include: a) Ukrainian Special Forces who successfully infiltrated Russian territory and used some type of MANPAD system; b) Pro-Ukraine partisans using MANPADs; c) Ukrainian forces using ground-based anti-aircraft systems, which would need to be brought close to the border, or into Russia, in order to be effective, or; d) Ukrainian fighters using air-to-air missiles.

With respect to the last option above (air-to-air), here's an opinion-analysis by someone who claims to have experience and knowledge of the equipment and issues discussed. I don't know the author and neither do I know whether his analysis is accurate. My reason for posting is simply as info, and because I haven't seen this analysis anywhere else. And, if it's a correct assessment, it could have significant implications for use of air assets in the war.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...815934014.html

The thread is in German, but Google translate worked well for me.

Also, one possible way to evaluate if this author is onto something will be to observe the behavior of Russian aircraft, going forward. Accident or malfunction shouldn't cause a general change in behavior, and neither should friendly fire (assuming the cause is found and corrected). But a new Ukrainian air-to-air attack capability would likely have an effect on when and where Russia decides to use its aircraft.

[Jmsuttr]

Morality, in its simplest sense, concerns itself with questions and judgments about right and wrong. While there are many moral issues about which there can be vigorous debate (ex: legalization of prostitution), there are many about which there is universal, or near-universal, agreement. I would submit that an example of the latter category is the calculated murder of an innocent child. I know of no country, society, or system of laws, in which that is not viewed as morally wrong (to put it mildly). So that fact provides a suitable foundation for this thought experiment:

1. On the other side of the world, an innocent child is murdered by a shot to the head. The murderer publicly admits committing the act and further states that he acted on orders from superiors. You don't personally know any of the individuals involved.

Q: What feelings, if any, does the above scenario generate within you?

2. On the other side of your country, an innocent child is murdered by a shot to the head. The murderer publicly admits committing the act and further states that he acted on orders from superiors. You don't personally know any of the individuals involved.

Q: Same as for #1.

3. On the other side of your city or town an innocent child is murdered by a shot to the head. The murderer publicly admits committing the act and further states that he acted on orders from superiors. You don't personally know any of the individuals involved, but you're familiar with the neighborhood.

Q: Same as for #1.

4. On the other side of your street, an innocent child is murdered by a shot to the head. The murderer publicly admits committing the act and further states that he acted on orders from superiors. You've personally seen the child playing in the neighborhood and you've exchanged pleasantries with the child's parents.

Q: Same as for #1.

5. In your own home, directly in front of you, an innocent child is murdered by a shot to the head. The murderer publicly admits committing the act and further states that he acted on orders from superiors. In this scenario, the child is your daughter or son, or perhaps a grandchild or other beloved family member.

Q: Same as #1.

Discussion: Every morally relevant element is the same in each scenario. The only variables are the proximity of the event and the level of personal knowledge of the area and victim. And, since the event is one that's generally acknowledged to be morally wrong (if not heinous, reprehensible, etc.), then one's reactions arguably provide a sort of barometer of moral sensitivity.

If scenarios 1 and 2 generate feelings like outrage, feelings of anger and hate against the perpetrator, desire for justice (or even revenge), then it's fair to say you tend to fall within the highly sensitive segment of the moral spectrum.

If you start to have similar feelings when events unfold as in scenario 3, I would argue that's the part of the spectrum in which a sizeable percentage (majority?) of people fall. After all, people live busy lives and understandably don't necessarily think much about (relatively) distant happenings.

Scenario 4 is where the rubber, morally speaking, really meets the road (or street). If you're not feeling outrage at this point, I'd suggest you'd be well advised (IMO) to examine the foundations and underpinnings of your personal moral sense.

Scenario 5, it's fair to say, is where 99.999% of people will absolutely have feelings of anger, outrage, grief, etc. However, if that's the ONLY scenario that moves you, and if every other scenario gets a "shit happens" (or similar) response from you, that's a hugely sad commentary on your moral sense, IMO.

BTW, in NONE of the above scenarios do I pretend to have the right to tell anyone how they SHOULD feel. An individual's feelings are entirely up to them. However, what the experiment illustrates is that there is a spectrum in the moral dimension, and also that there are ways in which you can assess, for yourself, approximately where you fall on that spectrum.

Also, while everyone is entitled to their own feelings, and entitled to NOT be lectured about how they SHOULD feel, it's perfectly fair to make assessments based on what people have said for themselves. As one example, for the PutinFanBoyz who exult and applaud events like the one described above, I would argue that the moral labels "evil" and "reprehensible" are appropriate. For those who feel nothing until scenario 4, I would argue that the moral labels "obtuse," or perhaps "blind," could be used. Finally, for someone who can't be bothered to have feelings until the events of scenario 5 splatter blood on their own shoes, I would argue that the moral label "cripple" applies.

Everyone can judge and evaluate for themselves. And, if anyone thinks the experiment is flawed, in either its premises or design, I'm happy to debate the topic.

[Jmsuttr]

After being rebuffed the Pope gives a celestial advice to a delusional clown, 'You have to hide'.

Definition: Putin FanBoy who believes his own propaganda.

Perfect example of delusion vs reality from last night's missile attack on Kyiv. Six supposedly "unstoppable" Kinzhal hypersonic missiles were successfully intercepted. Another nail in the coffin of the reputation of Russia's military hardware. And a huge nail in the coffin for the future of Russia's military export industry.

[VinDici]

'You have to hide'.

This is what every Muscovite has to do!

[Questner]

After being rebuffed the Pope gives a celestial advice to a delusional clown, 'You have to hide'.

[Jmsuttr]

You're way too deep into your own thoughts here to have a civil back and forth conversation with someone. This coming from someone who has generally who has been supportive and in agreement with you. I've tried to give you an off-ramp from these endless criticisms. So much for trying to get back to civil discourse.

I frankly don't give a fuck about anyone's support. It's fine if someone wants to debate facts and analyses, but the facts and evidence will always stand or fall on their own merits. You keep repeating this trope as though your support means anything. It doesn't. The fact you keep bringing it up says something about you. Do you crave the approval of others? I don't. Are "off-ramps" also something you crave? I don't.

As far as civil discourse, once you've made things personal, that possibility gets flushed down the toilet. As a pathetic faux-victim pussy, you've placed yourself in the same tranche as the Putin FanBoyz, worthy only of ridicule and scorn.

The affronting comment "No offense, but you seem to take the Ukraine War a bit too personally. One doesn't necessarily have to be Ukrainian to hold a personal animosity towards Russia." Oh my JM, how brash and insolent o fme to suggest that perhaps you have some personal animosity towards Russia that goes beyond a distant observer. (By the way, anyone can appear to be winning an argument on social media by trying to reshape the discussion into something else. Excessive drama over an innocuous comment, turning posts into a question of morality.).

So now, in addition to telling me how I SHOULD FEEL, you're trying to play fuckboard psychoanalyst? Wow, if anyone needs their head examined, it's YOU! Oh, BTW, a morally outraged reaction at the kinds of atrocities committed by Russia is an emotionally appropriate response. I have lots of good company on that score. But moral blindness, or worse, moral cowardice, is where you appear to pitching your tent.

You have been on the International Sex Guide for the last fifteen months almost exclusively and obsessively posting on the war in the Ukraine. You have not been present anyone else on ISG. I'm not sure how much credit one should receive for such a valiant and focused effort. Some might think being an armchair warrior on a sex site ranks just above posting a Ukrainian flag on their Facebook page.

ROTFLMAO! What a feeble attempt to insert a subtle ad hominem into your pseudo-victim-pussy-protests. I've been on USASG since the mid-2000's, and on SF Redbook forums before that. I think I have a couple of Asia-related posts on ISG, but I've never really needed to use it for mongering purposes. My reason for posting in this forum is specifically because of my strong feelings about the war in Ukraine.

And yet you, with your relatively few (and lame) posts about Canada and Brazil, are somehow trying to imply that those insipid postings give you 'gravitas' to ANY degree? Abso-fucking-lutely HILARIOUS! Clearly, the mere fact that you have to stoop to such bullshit tactics is PROOF-POSITIVE that you're a pathetic piece of excrement, truly the lowest of the low.

Being more emotional and going batshit crazy on people doesn't give you any moral superiority here. More than likely it confirms the view that you have a personal angle in this war. It actually might be better if you said your family was persecuted by the Russians or your significant other is Ukrainian. I can't be the only one here who really hopes that is the case. Otherwise, you are expending far too much time, energy and anger trying to combat anyone who has different take on the war than you. (All the while in the Stupid Shit in Kyiv of the International Sex Guide. Sorry the gravitas of the thread or the lack thereof never changes).

Once again you concoct a piteous straw-man scenario in your own tortured imagination. What does it say about you that you can't comprehend legitimate feelings of moral outrage in the face of unspeakable atrocities? If you can only conceive of being outraged when the atrocity happens to you, or someone close to you, what kind of a moral cripple you must be!

FYI: Your silly bar scene analogy was a not so clever way to try to intimidate and display aggression. You should be careful that you don't cross a line with the moderators. They don't take kindly to members threatening other members even if it is just abstract sparring in a Stupid Shit thread.

Oh, poor, pathetic, faux-victim pussy! Your whiney-beeyotch reactions don't change the fact that the analogy was SUPREMELY accurate and on point. Once again, try telling the outraged stranger at the bar that your comment about how he SHOULD FEEL was meant innocuously. I would refer you back to the original analogy for the likely response. And what you consistently try to obfuscate is that this was ENTIRELY started by YOU! Yet, in the face of that incontrovertible fact, you contemptibly try to portray yourself as the wronged party. And you, even MORE contemptibly, try to disparage my legitimately-held feelings of moral outrage as I see prisoners beheaded, little girls shot in the head, and other unspeakable acts perpetrated in calculated and systematic ways.

In the immortal words of Will Smith (in MIB) "Don't start nuthin, won't be nuthin". Of course, faux-victim pussies will always try to claim that they never start anything. You're truly the Bill Laimbeer of ISG!

If you find Stupid Shit in Kyiv inhospitable, why don't you stick to telling mongers where to find the best feijoada in Brazil? Or the best poutine in Canada? You can always throw in a little geopolitics with your culinary recommendations. That would be right up your alley and wouldn't put to much strain on your limited intellectual and argumentative capacity. I almost included "moral" in that list, but that capacity appears to be non-existent in your case.

[Jmsuttr]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65594540

Making the rounds of the major European capitals (and the UK), Zelenskyy came away with major arms commitments AND a show of solidarity and support that would have been hard to imagine even a few months ago (esp from Germany).

In addition to pledges of significant military assistance (tanks, armored vehicles, missiles, drones, etc.), it almost appeared as if leaders were competing with each other to show how much they support Ukraine. In Italy, Zelenskyy was greeted by a military horse-mounted honor guard. In Germany, Chancellor Scholz gave a speech in which he declared "Ukraine is Europe," and then followed by saying "Slava Ukraini" (Glory to Ukraine). Finally, in the UK the PM gave Zelenskyy the kind of bro-hug usually reserved for the closest of personal friends.

Whether one believes the displays were 100% genuine, 100% for show, or something in between, what's relevant is that each government thought it important to publicly express OVERWHELMING commitment to, and support for, Ukraine.

It's also worth noting that the timing was impeccable, as it shores up support just before the anticipated counteroffensive by Ukraine. It puts to rest, at least for the near future, any talk of "Ukraine fatigue" in Europe. And it can't help but be a morale boost for both the Ukrainian military and a hopeful population.

Irrespective of your position on the war, any intellectually honest observer should acknowledge that this was extremely well-played by Zelenskyy.

Meanwhile, in a dreary bunker somewhere, Putin is likely crying in his borscht. At least he won't need to add salt!

[VinDici]

Muscovy Foreign Ministry tried to troll by saying that British taxes were being wasted in Ukraine, and got ratioed by Brits saying that it was the best use of taxes they could imagine, and would prefer the government spend more, rather than on stupid domestic programs.

What an own goal, by the losing cowardly, child kidnapping idiots.

[WyattEarp]

Actually, it's you who is trying to employ the straw man fallacy. That's because you've been thoroughly ass-dragged for having the audacity to tell me how I SHOULD FEEL. And now you're subtly trying to move the goalposts by adding the word "pejorative," as though it's somehow fine to tell others how they SHOULD feel as long as it's done in (however you choose to define it) a non-pejorative way.

Here's a thought experiment for you:

1. You're standing in a bar and the news is on TV. On the news there's a report of some horrifically evil atrocity, such as a young girl being shot in the head by a cold and calculating killer.

2. The guy next to you is visibly outraged at the news report. So much so that he expresses that outrage verbally. You, and others around, can clearly hear his outrage..

You're way too deep into your own thoughts here to have a civil back and forth conversation with someone. This coming from someone who has generally who has been supportive and in agreement with you. I've tried to give you an off-ramp from these endless criticisms. So much for trying to get back to civil discourse.

The affronting comment "No offense, but you seem to take the Ukraine War a bit too personally. One doesn't necessarily have to be Ukrainian to hold a personal animosity towards Russia." Oh my JM, how brash and insolent o fme to suggest that perhaps you have some personal animosity towards Russia that goes beyond a distant observer. (By the way, anyone can appear to be winning an argument on social media by trying to reshape the discussion into something else. Excessive drama over an innocuous comment, turning posts into a question of morality.).

You have been on the International Sex Guide for the last fifteen months almost exclusively and obsessively posting on the war in the Ukraine. You have not been present anyone else on ISG. I'm not sure how much credit one should receive for such a valiant and focused effort. Some might think being an armchair warrior on a sex site ranks just above posting a Ukrainian flag on their Facebook page. Being more emotional and going batshit crazy on people doesn't give you any moral superiority here. More than likely it confirms the view that you have a personal angle in this war.

It actually might be better if you said your family was persecuted by the Russians or your significant other is Ukrainian. I can't be the only one here who really hopes that is the case. Otherwise, you are expending far too much time, energy and anger trying to combat anyone who has different take on the war than you. (All the while in the Stupid Shit in Kyiv of the International Sex Guide. Sorry the gravitas of the thread or the lack thereof never changes).

FYI: Your silly bar scene analogy was a not so clever way to try to intimidate and display aggression. You should be careful that you don't cross a line with the moderators. They don't take kindly to members threatening other members even if it is just abstract sparring in a Stupid Shit thread.

[VinDici]

Today the spirit of the long gone monarch appeared and knocked the prize in his name off the jester's stand to the floor.

I heard that Kaydrovites have been seen in Bakhmut.

[Xpartan]

Since bots are designed to simulate real people, they can never be as stupid as someone who goes out of his way to post the same inane Putin-shit day after day.

Only a real idiot could pull that off.

Just like Putin he simply can't stop.

Putin used to rule the biggest country on the planet and enjoy the friendship of corrupt foreign leaders like Trump, Schroeder and Berlusconi.

Now he rules his bunker and talks to his cronies on Zoom. And drags his unwinnable war to postpone the inevitable.

Questner doesn't have a bunker, but he used to be capable of writing somewhat coherent, if duplicitous posts. That's gone now. He's reduced to pasting hateful, idiotic memes.

Good job!

[Jmsuttr]

As history tells us, Charlemagne died depressed and disillusioned: none of his plans came through. Today the spirit of the long gone monarch appeared on the scene in Germany and knocked the prize in his name off the jester's stand to the floor.

Berlin, Rome, Paris, and beyond, the free world welcomes Zelenskyy with open arms. Putin, meanwhile, slumps in deep depression in his Fuhrer-bunker, because he's pretty much a prisoner in his own country. As an indicted war criminal, he's at risk of arrest if he sticks his pathetic head out of his pathetic hole.

He can't even attend the upcoming BRICS conference in South Africa. He's been told he can attend via "Zoom call" so that he can avoid the risk of arrest. A Zoom call? How fucking humiliating is that? No wonder he's depressed.

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2023/05/...a-warns-putin/

I hear Minsk is nice this time of year. Or maybe he could plan a nice vacation at his master's house in Beijing?

BTW, the thumbs-down verdict of history is already being written about Putin. And even Russian historians will one day use papers about Putin to wipe their asses.

[Jmsuttr]

May 14,2023.

Dear Mr. Clayton:

Hereby I attest my account is a genuine one.

Best regards,

Questner.

Since bots are designed to simulate real people, they can never be as stupid as someone who goes out of his way to post the same inane Putin-shit day after day.

Only a real idiot could pull that off.