lukethethird
unknown member
When you point your finger, three are pointing back at you.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Russian chest thumping - Chinese incursions
- Thread starter sun rise
- Start date
When you point your finger, three are pointing back at you.
Libya is an open book to me.
Gaddafi used to fight radicalism, because he was an enlightened leader.
Radicals who wanted to take Libya back to the Middle Ages (and they succeeded, after overthrowing him).
Whom did Obama support? The radicals.
I don't know much about Syria but I guess it was the same recipe. Signed: Obama & Hillary
Gaddafi was an unelected tyrant who held on to power for decades and preferred killing protesters to stepping down. You don't seem to have as much insight into Arabs' opinions on this as you might think.
Okay, assume the US is not even talking right now. It's just me, a guy from elsewhere.
Should the US stand by and watch as Putin invades and annexes Ukraine? I'm not talking about past actions; I'm talking about what's happening right now.
Were these protesters radicals? Fundamentalists?
Because if they were fundamentalists who wanted to deny women rights, I guess this changes a lot.
Considering how Libya has changed, as for human rights, and women's rights since Gaddafi was killed.
lukethethird
unknown member
Your support of the US sending tens of billions worth of bombs and ammo to support a war in Ukraine and for that matter any random country in the world such as Italy, gave me the impression that you relish in this sort of thing. Condemning Putin for what the US does on a routine basis and asking what else is the US supposed to do gave me the impression that you have a vested interest in these invasions.
The majority of protesters were average Libyans who wanted better living conditions and democracy. The radical groups stepped in and hijacked the revolution, and Gaddafi's brutal crackdown on the protests helped give them momentum. He was far more responsible for the destruction of his own country than NATO were.
Such bizarre conclusions. I'm asking a simple question: when a country launches a war of aggression against another and wants to annex parts of its territory, commits war crimes there, and destroys its infrastructure, should other countries stand by and watch or send aid?
The question is straightforward.
It's all doublestandardism.
The US supported Saudi Arabia, the invaders, and not Yemen (the invaded country).
The credibility of the Pentagon is below zero, as for coherence and honesty.
Forget the Pentagon for now. You're talking to forum members who aren't in the Pentagon.
The same question stands:
So?
We are in the NATO, of course. If a NATO country were attacked, we would aid too.
But Ukraine is not in the NATO.
lukethethird
unknown member
Putin is not annexing Ukraine, he is securing the Russian border by taking in and securing the Russian speaking regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, the regions that opposed the CIA backed coup in 2014, when Ukraine's democratically elected president was overthrown. Crimea wanted nothing to do with the new government put into place either.
The US did not take kindly when the Soviet Union sent missiles to Cuba, Russia does not take kindly to Nato expanding into Ukraine for exactly and precisely the same reasons. Nato is a war pact, the world would be a safer place without it.
Back when NATO was founded, it was meant to prevent war. From breaking out.
Now it's an organization that promotes war and hates diplomacy and negotiations.
Putin's regime sowed discord and backed separatist movements in order to facilitate annexation and pass it off as granting independence to those regions. Judging by the support he has gotten from some who believe that narrative, it seems to have worked to an extent.
Putin is annexing Ukraine per what Ukrainians themselves are clearly telling the world. I'm not going to believe his propaganda over reports from the UN and other organizations about the war crimes and imperialistic plans of his regime.
lukethethird
unknown member
Who jumped in and aided Afghanistan when the US invaded it, and Iraq, and so on and so on?
US wanted this war, Nato, a war pact, provoked it, now they are prolonging it at the expense of Ukrainian lives and infrastructure, so don't pretend that you care about Ukrainians.
No one, because NATO is hypocritical and self-serving. This has no bearing on what we're talking about in this thread: the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
What should the US do in order not to "prolong" the war? Let Putin win faster?
And by the way...who will have to reconstruct Ukraine? Us Europeans.
If Zelensky had surrendered immediately, there wouldn't have been such a loss of human lives, and so much destruction.
He doesn't care. He stays safe and warm, while his people dies and is freezing to death.
lukethethird
unknown member
Excuse me, but it's not easy to keep track.
lukethethird
unknown member
There is no winning anything, Putin is securing Russia's border should Nato move into Ukraine, he is creating a buffer zone should missiles be aimed at Moscow which is close to the Ukraine boarder. I don't agree with Putin taking the bait and falling into the trap that Nato set, but right now they all have to sit at the table and talk to put an end to this.
Last edited:
My inability to name such things doesn't justify
Russia's invasion of Ukraine, & threats to do
the same in others, eg, Poland.
But if you like questions, ask how many of its
own people Russia murdered in various purges,
pogroms, & mass starvations.