Putin Threatens The West

[Delayed]

2 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Well we're either selling or giving weapons to the Ukraine. We should know which because we aren't told, which in itself is undemocratic. The first is immoral, the second is costing us millions we don't have, or are told we don't have. The magic money tree it seems is only available for wars.

 

Are we helping Ukraine or prolonging the war?

 

America is always keen to wage war by proxy, but never on their home turf, we seem to have joined in. We have no moral high ground to stand on, we should always always sue for negotiation rather than war. We have entered this war as a show of UK's strength (which considering our financial position we don't have.) We need to stop posturing and sort out our own affairs and leave Russia / Ukraine to sort out theirs.

 

It will end round a table, so why not start there?

And you expect to be told of all of this when the Tories were elected? So you could decide whether to vote them in or not? 

 

Several years before the war started? 

[Anna B]

4 minutes ago, Delayed said:

And you expect to be told of all of this when the Tories were elected? So you could decide whether to vote them in or not? 

 

Several years before the war started? 

We have the technology these days to ask the people whether we want to get involved or not. That would be a real democratic decision.

[Delayed]

A time travelling Delorian?

[Dromedary]

42 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Tony Blair took us into a major war against the wishes of millions of UK citizens.

I can't remember the result of any vote the people took.

7 minutes ago, Anna B said:

We have the technology these days to ask the people whether we want to get involved or not. That would be a real democratic decision.

I thought you made out that modern technology and computers was bad and that the internet could go down, or get hacked!

 

Having said that, we should not get involved in other people's wars by supplying arms or money as it up to the people in those places to decide and sort out.

 

[L00b]

52 minutes ago, Anna B said:

We have the technology these days to ask the people whether we want to get involved or not. That would be a real democratic decision.

Direct democracy is a stupid notion.
 

Public policy and statecraft by Facebook and red tops headlines.
 

This forum is evidence enough, if any was even required, of the principle.

 

But hey, if that’s what you want…as I posted: campaign for change in that direction 👍🏻

[RollingJ]

And another thought -how many responses do you wait for before deciding on the course of action??

[Kidorry]

1 hour ago, Dromedary said:

I can't remember the result of any vote the people took.

I thought you made out that modern technology and computers was bad and that the internet could go down, or get hacked!

 

Having said that, we should not get involved in other people's wars by supplying arms or money as it up to the people in those places to decide and sort out.

 

Going on your statement, then the U.S.A. should not have helped Britain in WW2. 

[harvey19]

6 hours ago, Magilla said:

Really, so... if you're not well enough informed to give an answer... how come you originally made the claim that Russia isn't a terrorist state?

 

What was that based on?

I never made a claim one way or another.

[harvey19]

5 hours ago, L00b said:

Hardly.

 

You asked questions of me, when your answer to my earlier question was, and still is, outstanding.

 

I’m simply asking you to answer that question first, before answering your follow-up questions, i.e. I’m asking you to respect and follow basic forum etiquette. And I’m being patient, out of civility.

 

“I don’t know enough to answer” is a decision to not answer the question. It’s a refusal to answer the question, any which way you put it, whatever the voices in your head and some pillocks may tell you.

 

Considering earlier arguments with multiple links about the topic, plus an invitation to inform yourself further if that is still not enough (seemingly ignored so far) in the meantime…referring me back to your “I don’t know enough so I’m not answering” as an ‘answer’, with some fake outrage on top, is worse than a refusal to answer the question. It’s downright rude.

 

Why do you expect me to accept your rudeness and just carry on with this debate, and answer your questions as if all was well? Why would anyone do that?

Your attempt at diversion tactics is becoming boring.

You have had an honest answer, but it does not suit your agenda .

I suggest you start to respect others answers.

 

 

[Dromedary]

2 hours ago, Kidorry said:

Going on your statement, then the U.S.A. should not have helped Britain in WW2. 

No because if you go by my statement we would never have entered the war in the first place, but this is now not then. Looking back you will also see that the USA were paid handsomely to help and that is how they became a rich powerful nation. 

 

Zelensky wants help and aid from the EU members and the EU are happy to give that and also with promises it can join the EU in the future. If Ukraine win (very doubtful) they have vast untapped resources of natural gas and other stuff to help the EU out of the mess they are now in.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Dromedary