Thanks tim. So were agreed that there could be significant hardship for india, i notice you didn’t mention anything about famine in africa…so I’ll assume you’re either disingenuous in your response or dismissive of the notion that a famine is an issue worthy of disturbing your smug complacent notion that sanctions are are a simple matter, and that only a contrarian would dare imagine otherwise…
@carryharry, you meant to say the opposite of “anywhere bar russia”. With this in mind id patiently suggest ‘The Eastern Border’ podcast. Its generally extremely emotive and one sided, but youre aware of that when youre listening. When i heard him condoning kneecapping of pows i was reminded of what dan carlin called “the inevitable logic of violence”. I suppose the theme continues in the latest podcast…but you cant blame him.
But i don’t think i can point you to anywhere that deals in the sort of simplicities you, glas, balbec etc demand. What would be the point of these long form conversations with historians, generals, politicians etc if all they only contained the sort of banal nonsense you fellas are comfortable with?
Chuckle. If you want to see a lad who got it wrong check out your recently renamed putin appreciation thread. If yourself, balbec or anyone else want to show me where I’ve got it wrong please go ahead, or alternatively continue with your petty little circle jerk.
You’re being far from honest, as you know. Go ahead and show me what ive got wrong or what ive said that’s so offensive. Balbec, gman, stonecold, turrene, harry, glas, tracksuit etc…point me to where any of has addressed anything I’ve said. At least tim made the effort to misquote me. Otherwise why dont you and your cowardly buddies continue consoling yourselves with your pathetic little bitching session. If you were half way to being men i might be flattered that you have to huddle together like this.
Time to take a break from the INTERNET pal. This is eating you up inside. Maybe stop listening to the messers who are only egging you on for their own amusement. and go have yourself a lie down
You saw your opportunity and snuck in with your faux outrage and your moralising. Nothing to back it up, no basis for any of it, just a need to join the fun, strength in numbers etc
Like i said, if any of you ladies can address anything I’ve said then go ahead. Otherwise fuck off with your pretence. Gloating over death in order to shove guilt and blame onto another poster. Thats all it amounts to.
Go away and fuck yourself now, I have barely posted in this thread, as I said you are an awful softcock, crying like a baby now when some lads (not me) are giving you a bit of grief,
Go
Fuck
Yourself
I’m sick shit of replying to you, you’re nothing but a petty cunt,
I didn’t bold Africa did I? I simply addressed the inconsistency of your argument on India specifically.
I never said sanctions are easy. I called out how one of your specific arguments was inconsistent gibberish. In the round, I’d classify the part of your argument that has logical consistency as “simple”. If there weren’t sanctions it’s not as though things would be hunky dory for world food supply- Ukraine’s contribution to global wheat supply would be decimated (unless you were hoping that no sanctions would result in a quick takeover by Russia which wouldn’t be a surprise with you). No sanctions would have a longer term consequence as well for all these places- no reaction would give Putin carte blanche to fuck with all surrounding countries. And he’d suffer no economic consequences, meaning the fear factor he held over other countries would continue and the financial markets would be still pricing in the lack of security over supply. More broadly, China would see this and look at their options to fuck with Taiwan. They wouldn’t even need to escalate to military conflict as the West has said they won’t do jack shit. Again, how would international markets view any subsequent provocation of a simple speech from Xi. All he would have to do is issue an idle threat on Taiwan trade and togs would he shat everywhere.
I very much understand trade offs and that things aren’t “simple”.
Thats nice tim. Id almost thank you for a civil response except you deliberately try to sugest that i argued against sanctions. I didn’t, as youre aware. I did point to wider implications, i also pointed to the moral argument for sanctions while asking if its the poorest countries in the world who’ll sacrifice the most compared to western consumer disgruntlement. But you didn’t highlight this as it didn’t suit your purpose.
None o fthis is beyond your understanding. But none of this is allowed, fellas have to shriek and moralise…look at tracksuit, another great fella for faux ouyrage and moralising but an utter meltdown of a foul-mouthed tirade when challenged.
So i asked a question, stated a moral position and the little pile on continues. Its fascinating to watch
Here you go again, making shit up.
I have barely posted on this thread, about a fortnight ago I made a comment which was not aimed at you, just commenting how a couple of lads had entered the discussion in a very peaceful manner but quickly lost the run of themselves.
You mention me regularly, here and elsewhere, because you’re a very petty man and you’ve taken a set against me for whatever reason. It’s not a good look for an intelligent grown man. I have no interest in you,
But I do think you are a ferocious one armed waiter, and you’re taking this very very badly, but it’s nothing to do with me, no matter how much you want it to be or how often you bring me into it.
This topic is not something I have involved myself in
In fairness you did allude to taking in some Ukrainian refugees a few weeks back. I think you even posted a photo of the ensuite beside the room they would be going into.
A lovely gesture. How is that going now pal?
I know there are over 100 Ukrainian families in Limerick city centre hotels at present. It would be amazing if the likes of your generosity now could take shape.
Except you couched my argument as being either “disingenuous” or “not acknowledging the importance of a famine”.
Again my first post was highlighting you talking out of both sides of your both on India. I followed that on by pointing out with regards to famine that India had a wheat surplus and it was illogical how this ended up in the same bucket. You’ve emphasised “hardship” now to suit but this again doesn’t appear rational for India on the basis on your arguments. India buys the energy that the West wont buy and has excess wheat supply themselves, putting them alongside Africa is complete horseshit but you were just playing bingo with countries that others identity as “poor”.
Your style of argument initially was the “just asking questions” one where you’ll now claim it’s unfair that you are being called out on the real substance of your point. This is a childish form of debating but again the real point is in the bolded and also the below.
I’ve given you a response on this above. Allowing Ukraine to fight a bloody battle by themselves to eventually lose does not guarantee that “poor” countries won’t lose out or lose our more than with sanctions placed. You’ve said others are being “simple” for just asking for sanctions with no costs but you have ignored the consequences of no sanctions. Again, no sanctions might mean initial wheat supply or gas prices aren’t hit as hard but you are ignoring the accruing costs of allowing the likes of Putin and China to do what the fuck they want going forward.
