Kim Dotcom Fends Off Arrest Before Conspiracy Theories and Reality Collide (torrentfreak.com) 119
TorrentFreak's Andy Maxwell reports: In August, New Zealand's Justice Minister authorized Kim Dotcom's immediate arrest and extradition. Dotcom's response to his followers on X was simple: "I'm not leaving." Another post mid-September -- "we are very close to disaster" -- led to Dotcom disappearing for three weeks. On his return, Dotcom said X had suspended his account, based on an extremely serious allegation. After accusing Elon Musk of failing to help, yesterday Dotcom warned that a Trump loss would see Musk indicted and "fighting for his life." Dotcom has a plan to avoid extradition; chaos like this provides the fuel.
The details of Dotcom's "plan" to stay in New Zealand are yet to be revealed. Given Dotcom's history, exhausting the judiciary with every possible avenue of appeal is pretty much guaranteed, no matter how unlikely the prospects of success. At the same time, it's likely that Dotcom will use social media to preach to the existing choir. He will also try to appeal to those who loathe him, and those who merely hate him, by focusing on a common grievance. "People keep suggesting that I should leave this corrupt US colony like a fugitive on the run. Hell no," he told 1.7 million X followers recently. "Corrupt US colony" and the interchangeable "obedient" variant are clearly derogatory, catering to theories of joint complicity and sniveling weakness. This rhetoric has been visible on Dotcom's social media accounts for some time, but the main theme is Dotcom's belligerent, out-of-the-blue support for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. [...]
Some people believe that Dotcom genuinely supports Russia and, with his quotes regularly appearing on state-run news channels, arguing otherwise is a pretty tough ask. A different assessment starts with the things Dotcom values most -- his family, his wealth, and his freedom -- and applies that to a reputation of doing whatever it takes to protect and maintain those three, non-negotiable aspects of his life. Right now, his best chance is to tilt the chess board via a change at the White House, and then carefully exploit a change in policy. Dotcom's colleagues took a plea deal from the U.S. and New Zealand that Dotcom insists he would never accept; certainly not if Biden was in power. A Donald Trump win, on the other hand, would introduce an administration Dotcom could be seen to negotiate with, on previously unthinkable terms, without losing face. Previous reluctance to admit any wrongdoing could suddenly seem trivial after the prevention of World War 3.
[Since 2022, Dotcom supported narratives more closely aligned with those of the Kremlin, in particular the claim that United States policy is the root cause of the current conflict. The amplification of anti-Ukraine rumors in the United States, strategically links alleged U.S. policy failures to billions of dollars in military aid, all at taxpayers' expense. This toxic mix, Dotcom insists, heralds the collapse of the dollar, the dismantling of the "US Empire," and ultimately a global human catastrophe; World War 3, no holds barred.]
The details of Dotcom's "plan" to stay in New Zealand are yet to be revealed. Given Dotcom's history, exhausting the judiciary with every possible avenue of appeal is pretty much guaranteed, no matter how unlikely the prospects of success. At the same time, it's likely that Dotcom will use social media to preach to the existing choir. He will also try to appeal to those who loathe him, and those who merely hate him, by focusing on a common grievance. "People keep suggesting that I should leave this corrupt US colony like a fugitive on the run. Hell no," he told 1.7 million X followers recently. "Corrupt US colony" and the interchangeable "obedient" variant are clearly derogatory, catering to theories of joint complicity and sniveling weakness. This rhetoric has been visible on Dotcom's social media accounts for some time, but the main theme is Dotcom's belligerent, out-of-the-blue support for Russia's invasion of Ukraine. [...]
Some people believe that Dotcom genuinely supports Russia and, with his quotes regularly appearing on state-run news channels, arguing otherwise is a pretty tough ask. A different assessment starts with the things Dotcom values most -- his family, his wealth, and his freedom -- and applies that to a reputation of doing whatever it takes to protect and maintain those three, non-negotiable aspects of his life. Right now, his best chance is to tilt the chess board via a change at the White House, and then carefully exploit a change in policy. Dotcom's colleagues took a plea deal from the U.S. and New Zealand that Dotcom insists he would never accept; certainly not if Biden was in power. A Donald Trump win, on the other hand, would introduce an administration Dotcom could be seen to negotiate with, on previously unthinkable terms, without losing face. Previous reluctance to admit any wrongdoing could suddenly seem trivial after the prevention of World War 3.
[Since 2022, Dotcom supported narratives more closely aligned with those of the Kremlin, in particular the claim that United States policy is the root cause of the current conflict. The amplification of anti-Ukraine rumors in the United States, strategically links alleged U.S. policy failures to billions of dollars in military aid, all at taxpayers' expense. This toxic mix, Dotcom insists, heralds the collapse of the dollar, the dismantling of the "US Empire," and ultimately a global human catastrophe; World War 3, no holds barred.]
What a tool (Score:5, Insightful)
I actually thought he was cool once, sticking it to MAFIAA and the man.
But now as a right wing nut job he can rot in jail for all I care.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:What a tool (Score:5, Insightful)
Two (well actually three) things are true at the same time.
Truth #1: "Copyright Law" is in an incredibly fucked-up state.
Truth #2: The USA believing it gets to just do whatever it wants far outside its borders to people who have never lived in the USA and aren't citizens of the USA is some really fucked-up imperialist shit.
Truth #3: Kim Dotcom is a fucking unsympathetic grifter with delusions of grandeur, and quite possibly the worst possible person to try to advocate and/or fight in any nation's courts against #1 and #2.
Re:What a tool (Score:4, Informative)
Truth #2: The USA believing it gets to just do whatever it wants far outside its borders to people who have never lived in the USA and aren't citizens of the USA is some really fucked-up imperialist shit.
Actually it's not, there's a reason extradition treaties exist, to prevent committing crimes against someone while using the "I'm standing on the other side of this arbitrary line on the map so you can't touch me" defense. Countries extradite people to other countries the world over all the time. There's nothing USA or imperialist about this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What a tool (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As far as I can tell, the USA does have extradition treaties with various countries but its own implementation is particularly slow, difficult, & full of loopholes to the point where it seems obstructive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Truth #2: The USA believing it gets to just do whatever it wants far outside its borders to people who have never lived in the USA and aren't citizens of the USA is some really fucked-up imperialist shit.
Actually it's not, there's a reason extradition treaties exist, to prevent committing crimes against someone while using the "I'm standing on the other side of this arbitrary line on the map so you can't touch me" defense. Countries extradite people to other countries the world over all the time. There's nothing USA or imperialist about this.
Yes and no. Extradition treaties exist for good reasons, but this is not a good reason. It's the US abusing the extradition treaty for it's own aims... after the US abused it's position as a dominant trade partner to get US laws literally written onto NZ books, particularly US copyright laws via trade agreements and completely bypassing the democratically elected New Zealand government. NZ is by far, very far, not the only country the US has done this to.
It should also be noted that the US doesn't consid
Re: (Score:2)
Extradition treaties exist for good reasons, but this is not a good reason.
The reason is up to the courts and the legal system of the land. Both countries need to agree to it. You don't get to arbitrarily decide how the law applies. Being a Slashdotter is not qualification enough, if you want to play that game, get a law degree and spend your life becoming a judge.
to get US laws literally written onto NZ books, particularly US copyright laws via trade agreements and completely bypassing the democratically elected New Zealand government
Nope. You can't bypass the democratically elected government. The NZ government was required to ratify all aspects of a treaty. They are a sovereign nation. Maybe you should be complaining to the New Zealand government i
Re: (Score:1)
While I think it's BS that America can extradite him over internet crimes in the first place, I don't think he's going to be able to amount a real defense here. Not when the Hollywood cartel runs the legal system. Only now are they even getting investigated, and it's prob
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Well now you have some idiot committing crimes against a country, but because it's on the internet people think it shouldn't count? They have every right to take action, same as they would if you took pot-shots at their citizens from across the border.
Not
Re: (Score:3)
Let's review.
"These things are already illegal, it's not different just because it happened on the internet!" - If he committed crimes in New Zealand, he should be prosecuted in New Zealand. The defects in the extradition case were amazing, and it's clear that he would have won his New Zealand supreme court argument had he had proper legal representation.
Unfortunately, the US used highly unethical tactics,
Re: What a tool (Score:2)
Uh, regarding point #2.
The USA does throw its weight around a bit, but:
China -- https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada... [www.cbc.ca]
So... unlike the US, which has extradition treaties, China just does what they want in other countries with a covert police force.
Other countries do this, too. For example, India:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/03... [cnn.com]
and
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politi... [www.cbc.ca]
The USA's hands are similarly stained; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
But I think it's worth noting that a lot of countries do hig
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Or Julian Assange, who had to plea guilty, on charges of conspiracy to commit espionage, for publishing the collateral murder tapes of American helicopters murdering civilians, provided to him by Manning.
Re: What a tool (Score:2)
Oh, and they also don't like to be reminded that he published a huge pile of information he got from Manni
Re: What a tool (Score:2)
Re: What a tool (Score:4, Informative)
Snoop "giving up smoke" was promo for a propane grill or something.
Re: (Score:3)
You're not wrong.
The trouble it is tends to be arseholes who really want to stick it to the man enough to follow through.
It's that the world isn't black and white. There aren't nice narratives about good vs evil with the good guys vs the bad guys. People want to see the little guy fighting the man and have the little guy be the good guy. The MAFIAA were/are the bad guys. Utter massive money grubbing arseholes and in some (many) cases outright thieves.
Kim Dotcom is also a galloping thundercunt, and was doing
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
I actually thought he was cool once, sticking it to MAFIAA and the man.
But now as a right wing nut job he can rot in jail for all I care.
So ... you're the principled one, because you think that whether he should rot in jail or not depends on his political views?
Re: (Score:2)
I actually thought he was cool once, sticking it to MAFIAA and the man.
But now as a right wing nut job he can rot in jail for all I care.
Coming from Australia I always knew he was an utter bell end. He fits a type we antipodians know very well.
I'm all in favour of copyright reform and locking up "speculative invoicers" but Kim Dotcom cares absolutely not for it.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually thought he was cool once, sticking it to MAFIAA and the man.
But now as a right wing nut job he can rot in jail for all I care.
This comment is possibly the definition of cognitive dissonance.
1) I agree with what this guy did!
2) He roots for the other team? Fuck him, he can rot in jail!
Re: (Score:2)
The technology people were cool once, being libertarian and all and sticking it to the man. Now too many have turned into free-speech hating lefties. I don't know how it happened, but it did.
Re: What a tool (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
How is that any different than google drive or dropbox? (its not)
So what sort of utopia does this "means justifies the ends" tyranny actually support?
Is it merely that Kim Dot Com didn't pay enough tribute to the US protection cartel?
Re: What a tool (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The only difference in Google Drive, Dropbox, and Mega is that the first two are able to pre-scan content that is uploaded to their platforms because it's not encrypted. This is a huge privacy violation, all in the name of protecting children. The truth is, the children are the ones creating the CP nowadays. Stop them, and it there wont be
What crime did he commit? (Score:3)
Re: What crime did he commit? (Score:2)
He should've moved to a country with section 230...oh, wait...
Re:What crime did he commit? (Score:5, Informative)
Then we should examine Google and Apple with the same level of criticism.
We do, the issue is that Google and Apple responded to take down requests as required, while Megaupload gave the middle finger to people while Kim said "come at me bro". And then he got upset when someone did in fact come at him.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh and that's before we fact the reality that Google and Apple's primary business is not piracy while Mega's most definitely was.
TwitX (Score:5, Funny)
Dotcom said X had suspended his account, based on an extremely serious allegation.
As we've come to expect, Twitter is the true defender of free speech! Huzzah for Twitter, and three cheers for X!
Re: (Score:3)
Yep, Elon is a man of principle and he won't let money or self-interest get in the way of his crusade to protect free speech
He'd never become a hypocrite [bbc.com], would he?
A "Complicit" state (Score:3)
Well, it _is_ one of the Five Eyes, so the claim is not without evidence of NZ being complicit, or at least compliant (in the sense of being bendable, not of complying with orders)
He can hide among hobbits and sheep (Score:2)
Just look at Lord of the Rings.
You wouldn't notice Kim if he were hiding among the hobbits in New Zealand.
Musk has nothing to fear (Score:1)
Conservative and Liberal politicians alike both love the smell of Elon's money. On top of that cynical but probably accurate take on human nature.
He can say literal Nazi shit and it isn't hard to find a liberal or two that will buy his cars and defend him on online for free. Maybe they hoping to volunteer for a Mars trip, I'm not sure what angle the fanbois have.
Re:Musk has nothing to fear (Score:4, Insightful)
No idea what that obsession with this obvious asshole is. If you bow to money, you are just deeply corrupt yourself.
Re: (Score:3)
What "literal Nazi shit" did Trump ever say?
You have no idea how unhinged you sound when you say shit like this, do you? You people have already inspired two nutters to assassination. I guess you won't stop till you get the blood you want.
Trump is big on detention camps. I know another big detention camp enthusiast. https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]
I have a serious question for you. Do you think the guy who bankrupted several casinos and shits in a gold toilet has your best interest at hand? Don't forget his tendency to never pay bills and his tacky looking building in Manhattan with his name on the front. But he'll totally lower your taxes on the double wide.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
immigrants are ‘poisoning the blood of our country.’
“illegal immigration is poisoning the blood of our nation.
Chris Christie, one of Trump’s rivals for the Republican presidential nomination, called Trump’s remarks “disgusting” on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
At a recent rally, former President Donald Trump used language in a speech that echoed Adolf Hitler, comparing his political opponents to "vermin."
That's enough, I think.
So yes, Trump said "Lite
Very Unhinged (Score:2)
I was talking about Musk, not Trump. So I'm not sure how to answer your question. Was it a typo/thinko on your part? You need examples of one or the other saying these sorts of things? Perhaps you need a history lesson to know what the Nazis were about? I'm not sure how deep you need us to go.
You have no idea how unhinged you sound when you say shit like this, do you?
I'm have trouble understanding the first part of post. So yes. I don't see how I could possibly sound "unhinged".
It's a little unhinged sounding for you to switch topics so suddenly with no context.
Please remember, non
Sad (Score:2)
This place has become a ghetto.
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:4, Informative)
Fucking Russian Orcs. FUCK OFF. The "root cause" of the invasion was Russian expansionism. And the "root cause" of it continuing is Putin not wanting to give up. We stop helping them defend themselves, and how does that give Russia incentive to give up?
Never mind, you'll just repeat some Tru- ... Putin propaganda.
Re: (Score:1)
Only thing we learn from nonsense like yours is it's better to friends with America than expect Russia to no be Russia.
American values are much better than Russian ones. And given the choice any sensible person or country should choose America. Since no matter how bad they are, Russians are worse.
Only when we understand the roots of our problems
Putin and people like him.
we act in ways to minimise them & become better people & more peaceful & prosperous nations.
Not let people like Putin control too much power.
The entire world would be more prosperous and peaceful without Putin. Even Russia would be more prosperous and peaceful.
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:4, Insightful)
The "root cause of the war" has at least as much to do with economics and politics as anyone's overgrown ego.
That's always true. War is always about economics and politics. In this case, Putin decided that Russia needed Ukraine's resources, and that they should just go take them.
What keeps the war going, isn't just about Putin being a dickhead, there's also the West being ruled by war-pigs.
This is completely false. Not that the west isn't run by war pigs, that much is true, but that's not at all what keeps the war going.
What keeps the war going is that Putin will die rapidly for his failure if he gives up.
A part of this war-pig activity, is to hurl abuse at the Untermensch thought-crime of suggesting any kind of negotiated solution.
Suggesting a negotiated solution is fucking stupid because it's been tried and Putin doesn't want one. Any such solution he would accept would be utterly unacceptable to everyone else, because he's going to be seeking approval for his actions so far and also to keep any territory he's currently holding. The one and only thing Putin has to end the war is withdraw. That will conclude the misadventure for everyone but him. But since his life is on the line, that's not going to happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Putin does not want a negotiated solution. Ukraine will be wiped off the map, which is why they call it "404", meaning 'not a country'.
The Western belief that there is an anti-Putin backlash or that the Russian people are just misled on this issue is just wrong. This is an existential war for Russians. They aren't going to stop until they win. All the peace plans in the world aren't going to change that. Lavrov coming out and citing unacceptable (to the West) peace plan parameters is just for the benef
Re: (Score:1)
What keeps the war going, isn't just about Putin being a dickhead, there's also the West being ruled by war-pigs.
This is completely false. Not that the west isn't run by war pigs, that much is true, but that's not at all what keeps the war going.
Without all those weapons that the West has been flooding into Ukraine, they'd never have been able to keep fighting for so long. They'd have to negotiate something long ago.
As for this desperation to have Putin be more eeeeeevil than Satan and Hitler combined, that's propaganda. Those war-pigs own our propaganda networks that masquerade as news channels.
And before anyone starts to -again!- fap to that "Putler" effigy of theirs, remember this: "Putin does not get to have ALL the blame" is NOT somehow m
Re: (Score:1)
Nothing to add except insults? Retard.
Re: It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I still dont understand why biden insists on Ukraine fighting with one hand tied behind its back. Russia is on the ropes. Its had to buy shit from Iran and N Korea. I say let Russia use up all the weapon stockpiles of Russia, Iran, and N Korea, then we go in and kick all 3 of their unarned asses. Maybe then we can have some peace. Without Iran arming every inbred dirt farmer and nerf herder out there, we might go a few days without another disaster headline.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Reposting for better format - hate the default "HTML Format":
I'm not sure I would do anything differently in Biden's shoes. Not a fan of the guy, but his admin seems to be doing what they can. It is a hard situation.
Lets say Ukraine is given the go ahead to attack Russia with US weapons. Russia could say it is more than defensive at that point and convince China of the same. Then what happens? Worst case scenario is things get very bad - and is that worth it to support a country that is not even an ally and
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:4, Insightful)
Nobody wants Ukrainians to die. But they are willing to do so to defend their own freedom. And the US is willing to fund them as long as they are willing to fight. It is, after all, how the US was formed as well. With funding from France.
If giving up your own freedom is so preferable to fighting for it, perhaps you are living in the wrong country. There are many tyrants who would be happy with such a docile populace.
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:5, Insightful)
Real question here.
How are Democrats "so motherfucking evil" relative to Trump, the one candidate that is actively undermining our democracy with outright lies? Two thirds of one of our two political parties STILL believe the 2020 election was rigged despite zero supporting evidence. That's horrible news for a democracy.
Vote how you want mind you, I'm just wondering what is leading you to such conclusions as they don't seem to match what I'm looking at at all.
Re: (Score:2)
In Hillary's mind the 2016 election was rigged because she seemed to believe that Trump would be the same kind of token candidate that they made Lincoln Chaffee during the primaries and that practically nobody would vote for him.
I know that there was another candidate, but he sold out the first day of the convention.
She and a lot of other people still can't believe how stupid some American citizens are. As for Trump, his message has not significantly changed, and he's still batshit crazy as usual.
Re: (Score:2)
Did she though? I hear so many claims similar to this that dont hold water I'd like a source cited for this. Particularly since I cant find one myself.
As for Trump moderating his denialism message, that's news to me. I know Vance wouldnt even answer a simple question in regards to whether Trump won or lost the election in 2020 during the VP debate and that wasnt very long ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry for the second post but I should also ad, I've never seen anything to suggest that anywhere close to 2/3rds of Democratic voters think the 2016 election was rigged so if she has been spreading denialism she hasnt been anywhere near as effective at it as Trump.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Removed? So when all those democrats were begging him to quit and he took several weeks to decide that was all just for show?
Re: (Score:2)
Removed? So when all those democrats were begging him to quit and he took several weeks to decide that was all just for show?
He was definitely removed, he had literally just done that embarrassing sit-down with George Stephanopoulos where he was quite defiant about staying in. He is an old man who was manipulated into quitting after it became apparent they could no longer animate his corpse sufficiently to continue the ruse.
They then crowned his successor, a candidate who received exactly zero primary votes for this election and was in fact among the first candidates to drop out of her own primary race because she proved so unpop
Re: (Score:2)
I love these Trump defenders always talking about "his tendency to shoot off at the mouth" or stupid shit like that. Like this is the only problem with Trump. When the reality is that there is only problems with Trump, there is literally no reasons to vote for this sorry excuse for a human being. There is only one thing Trump cares about, and it's himself. And add to that his record stupidity and his alliance with americans talibans that actually want to ban not just abortion, but also contraception. They don't even dare to tell people what they plan for the US because they know nobody would vote for it. But don't worry, you'll all be rich, because Trump knows where free money is: tariff for everything, China will pay for everything, just like Mexico paid for the wall.
Daddy why do we live in a dictatorship ? well son, I didn't like the competent black woman and your dad is a stupid pigeon that couldn't recognize the most obvious con man ever, and stupid conspiracy theories are so fun, did you know that all this shit is not Trump's fault, but birds are actually mind controlling him in preparation for handing over earth to the Martians Vampires ? See, it's not actually my fault, they would have done the same to Kamala. Ain't you proud of your dad ?
Kamala Harris is in no way competent, and had she been forced to run in a Democratic party primary for this election she would have lost, the same as she did the last time. She is completely unlikeable and comes off as really dumb, even for a politician.
As for Trump, it is pretty easy to vote for him since we've already had 4 years of Trump and they were pretty good years, so yeah, I'd like that back, thanks. He wasn't a dictator and democracy didn't magically dissipate during his presidency. I am constantl
Re: (Score:2)
He was definitely removed, he had literally just done that embarrassing sit-down with George Stephanopoulos where he was quite defiant about staying in. He is an old man who was manipulated into quitting after it became apparent they could no longer animate his corpse sufficiently to continue the ruse.
THAT'S your evidence? Of course he was going to say he was staying in no matter what while he was considering whether to stay in or not. If he said he was "thinking about leaving the race" when he was that would have projected weakness and confirmed his lack of fitness for the roll to many folks and thus sunk his entire campaign before he had decided whether he was leaving or not. The only sensible thing for someone in that position to do is to continue claiming they're 100% in until they've made a decision
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see:
1. Russia invades Ukraine in an attempt to reassemble their empire. Check.
2. Ukraine defends itself. Check.
3. It's all Biden's fault. Che- Wait a minute? WTFF?
Re: (Score:1)
Biden probably could have stepped in to halt the invasion. We used Stare Department officials during the Bush years to keep Russia out of Tbilisi for at least a few weeks. We could have bought the Ukrainians some time and started arms shipments before the invasion. Woulda coulda shoulda. At the same time, it is undoubtedly Putin who started the war.
Re: (Score:2)
Biden probably could have stepped in to halt the invasion. We used Stare Department officials during the Bush years to keep Russia out of Tbilisi for at least a few weeks. We could have bought the Ukrainians some time and started arms shipments before the invasion. Woulda coulda shoulda. At the same time, it is undoubtedly Putin who started the war.
Zelensky was warned about the Russians planning to invade and brushed it off. As you point out, that no longer matters now; what counts is helping Ukraine win.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting take on Zelensky, though one must wonder how much his attitude mirrored other world leaders and how that would have changed had NATO powers been more strident in defending Ukraine prior to invasion. Consider it a lesson for future leaders.
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, you know, Russia could just cut their losses and pull out of Ukraine.
Re: (Score:2)
No they aren't. Hamas and Hezbollah should surrender immediately. They won't but they should.
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:5, Insightful)
It's an extremely pro-Ukraine position as only a madman would have wanted to see as many Ukrainians die in this war as have over the past few years when it could have already been settled!
Whatever happened to live free or die?
Ukrainians die in this war as have over the past few years when it could have already been settled!
That already happened in 2014. Remind me how "settled" it actually was. Oh that's right, Putin reneged on it and invaded again. Your version of "settled" is giving Putin dominion over anyone he likes.
Shame on you all from someone who has truly been anti-war
Claiming to be "anti war" is an utterly facile position. No one except for a few psychopaths is in favour of war for war's sake and just killing people for the hell of it. You're "anti-war" stance is actually a pro-war stance in that it means Putin gets to start wars and then win them.
Anti-war means pro-war but only for expansionist dictators. They don't give a shit about your stance and they'll start any war they think they can win.
Anyway I'd like to see how "anti war" you'd be if it was your country and your family being attacked. How "anti war" you would be if the choice was to fight or live under the yoke of a brutal dictator. How "anti war" you'd be people you know are shipped to the new gulags for speaking their minds.
You with your opinionated nature would last about 5 minutes under Putins regime. But it's very very easy to be "anti war" when you don't personally face the prospect of losing your freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
It's an extremely pro-Ukraine position as only a madman would have wanted to see as many Ukrainians die in this war as have over the past few years when it could have already been settled!
Whatever happened to live free or die?
Ukrainians die in this war as have over the past few years when it could have already been settled!
That already happened in 2014. Remind me how "settled" it actually was. Oh that's right, Putin reneged on it and invaded again. Your version of "settled" is giving Putin dominion over anyone he likes.
Shame on you all from someone who has truly been anti-war
Claiming to be "anti war" is an utterly facile position. No one except for a few psychopaths is in favour of war for war's sake and just killing people for the hell of it. You're "anti-war" stance is actually a pro-war stance in that it means Putin gets to start wars and then win them.
Anti-war means pro-war but only for expansionist dictators. They don't give a shit about your stance and they'll start any war they think they can win.
Anyway I'd like to see how "anti war" you'd be if it was your country and your family being attacked. How "anti war" you would be if the choice was to fight or live under the yoke of a brutal dictator. How "anti war" you'd be people you know are shipped to the new gulags for speaking their minds.
You with your opinionated nature would last about 5 minutes under Putins regime. But it's very very easy to be "anti war" when you don't personally face the prospect of losing your freedom.
One thing that I am hopeful for in the Russia-Ukraine debacle is I hope that it will finally illustrate to world leaders why you never, EVER allow another country to talk you into giving up your nuclear arsenal. Had we (United States) not talked them into giving up their nukes this could have been prevented entirely.
Re: (Score:1)
Whatever happened to live free or die?
That would be great, but they aren't living free:
1) They are receiving hundreds of billions from the U.S., so they are not "free" at all.
2) Most Ukranian citizens fled and many. many men are conscripted into the Ukraine army against their will. How is that being "free" to go fight when you do not want to.
Re:It's not pro-Russia to point out root cause of (Score:4, Insightful)
They are receiving hundreds of billions from the U.S., so they are not "free" at all.
So you aren't free because the French provided massive amounts of money, troops, materiel and a navy to the Americans during the war of independence?
many men are conscripted into the Ukraine army against their will
Men were conscripted in the American revolution too.
Do you not consider yourself free?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Well thanks for letting me know. Sometimes I wonder, but I just don't feel such things should go unchallenged. Glad you appreciated it
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
KDC is 100% right the root cause of the Ukraine conflict is the U.S.
It was Russia who invaded Ukraine in 2014 and violated the Budapet Memorandu [harvard.edu], something Russia signed and agreed to in 1994. The first two items state:
1. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE [Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe] Final Act, to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
2. The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
Now tell us, which part of this agreement did the U.S. violate? Conversely, which part of the agreement has Russia ignored and violated?
If it were not for the money the U.S. pushes into that war continuously, it would have been over LONG ago with some settlement negotiated out of need.
The
Re: (Score:2)