Russia fires missiles into Poland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why ar the right wing such surrender monkeys?

IKR? Reagan is definitely turning over in his grave. He might come down and haunt the GOP.

Anti war
Anti big pharma
Anti corporations
Pro working man.

[Anonymous]

I abandoned my New Year’s resolution to show more empathy for imperialist dictators who invaded neighboring sovereign nations for the purpose of annexing said nation by committing war crimes and genocide by February 24. Try as I might I just can’t get past the indiscriminate murder of men, women and children by targeting apartment buildings, schools, churches, daycares, and homes. Mass rape, torture and the abduction of children as an instrument of war is also a dealbreaker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What people need is EMPATHY with Russia. Not sympathy — empathy. Put yourself in their shoes. They are fighting a war on their border.

OK I put myself in Russia's shoes. They are fighting a war on their border because they invaded a neighboring country. If they withdraw back into their own territory, then they won't be fighting a war on their border.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can all of you people who want war with Russia just go over there and join the fight instead of trying to drag the rest of us into this?

For the tenth time, no one is going to be drafted to fight a NATO-Russia conflict.

It would take an act of Congress.

No one will be drafted because a NATO vs Russia war will quickly escalate to nuclear weapons and we will all be dead. And those that survive will envy the dead.

Why do countries have nuclear war? This board is full of people spouting “Putin is evil” and “Putin is hitler” rhetoric … um, if you believe that maybe DON’T let us blithely walk into war against him?

Or let me put it this way for the people who can’t seem to snap out of their WW2 fantasies …

If Hitler had access to thousands of thermonuclear weapons as he was surrounded and facing imminent defeat in his bunker in Berlin in 1945, what do you think he would have done?

Why risk this insanity?

ok so if Putin wants to take over the US I guess we should let him or else he'll nuke the US and we'd be dead. Better to live under Putin's regime than be dead, right?

If it’s that important push your kid to join the army. Otherwise you’re just talking out your butt.

so, you are saying that if Putin wants to take over the US you'd just let him cause you don't want your kids to possibly die? Yes?

I’d want the rich to send their kids first to prove solidarity and a chance to win. Otherwise forget it.

*prove solidarity* — keep beclowning yourself comrade.

Got it.

Poor kids to defend the borders?

I don’t think so.

It ain’t 1968, soul sister. Try selling this hippy-dippy boxed wine class warfare nonsense to a more credulous audience. Ya feel me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can all of you people who want war with Russia just go over there and join the fight instead of trying to drag the rest of us into this?

For the tenth time, no one is going to be drafted to fight a NATO-Russia conflict.

It would take an act of Congress.

No one will be drafted because a NATO vs Russia war will quickly escalate to nuclear weapons and we will all be dead. And those that survive will envy the dead.

Why do countries have nuclear war? This board is full of people spouting “Putin is evil” and “Putin is hitler” rhetoric … um, if you believe that maybe DON’T let us blithely walk into war against him?

Or let me put it this way for the people who can’t seem to snap out of their WW2 fantasies …

If Hitler had access to thousands of thermonuclear weapons as he was surrounded and facing imminent defeat in his bunker in Berlin in 1945, what do you think he would have done?

Why risk this insanity?

ok so if Putin wants to take over the US I guess we should let him or else he'll nuke the US and we'd be dead. Better to live under Putin's regime than be dead, right?

No - we save nuclear weapons ONLY for use as necessary to save the nation from an existential threat. So, if any country launched and invasion of the United States (laughably insane) AND if conventional forces couldn’t stop them, only then would use of nuclear weapons be on the table.

What people need is EMPATHY with Russia. Not sympathy — empathy. Put yourself in their shoes. They are fighting a war on their border. If we push their backs against the wall with overwhelming them by conventional forces — that’s an existential threat to them - that’s precisely when they would use nuclear weapons. The war is way, way, way more important for Russia - it’s existential for them. We should be doing all we can to DEESCALATE this.

Because I really don’t want my family to die for Donbass.

Again, all you people with the overwrought Putin-as-Hitler tropes don’t seem to be asking the obvious question: what would Hitler have done with thousands of thermonuclear weapons? What would he have done if the German state was collapsing and he knew he would soon be killed and all he had to do was push a button and bring the whole temple down like Samson?

Think, people.

That's not why we used them last time.

Do you know that?

Yes, I’m well aware of that. We used two nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 when neither the territorial integrity of the United States, or the survival of the U.S. government, were seriously threatened. We firebombed 67 Japanese cities and killed millions of Japanese civilians, in a war that was kicked off by losing about 3,000 U.S. military servicemen at Pearl Harbor (a territory of the USA at the time).

Should we have firebombed all those civilians to death? And then dropped nuclear weapons on them when we were no longer facing an existential threat (if indeed we ever were vis-a-vis Japan)? I don’t know. Here’s what the hippy peacenik Robert McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defense who also served in WW2 thought about it:

https://youtu.be/gekdt0QwFQw

In any case — we firebombed and nuked Japanese cities when we were under far less pressure and duress than one can easily see Russia will be under if NATO goes to war with them.

Remind me again why Putin is more saintly than Americans in 1945? Why wouldn’t he vaporize American cities as well? Especially if his back is against the wall or if he’s facing imminent defeat and death?

I don’t think there can be “victory” against a global nuclear power. Hence the need for diplomacy.

The kindergarten level of understanding being displayed by the war-mongers would be laughable if it didn’t risk getting us all killed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I abandoned my New Year’s resolution to show more empathy for imperialist dictators who invaded neighboring sovereign nations for the purpose of annexing said nation by committing war crimes and genocide by February 24. Try as I might I just can’t get past the indiscriminate murder of men, women and children by targeting apartment buildings, schools, churches, daycares, and homes. Mass rape, torture and the abduction of children as an instrument of war is also a dealbreaker.

I think that's what will happen after Russia withdraws from east Ukraine, with reprisals by the Nazi Ukraine battalion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why ar the right wing such surrender monkeys?

IKR? Reagan is definitely turning over in his grave. He might come down and haunt the GOP.

Anti war
Anti big pharma
Anti corporations
Pro working man.

pro stupid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can all of you people who want war with Russia just go over there and join the fight instead of trying to drag the rest of us into this?

For the tenth time, no one is going to be drafted to fight a NATO-Russia conflict.

It would take an act of Congress.

No one will be drafted because a NATO vs Russia war will quickly escalate to nuclear weapons and we will all be dead. And those that survive will envy the dead.

Why do countries have nuclear war? This board is full of people spouting “Putin is evil” and “Putin is hitler” rhetoric … um, if you believe that maybe DON’T let us blithely walk into war against him?

Or let me put it this way for the people who can’t seem to snap out of their WW2 fantasies …

If Hitler had access to thousands of thermonuclear weapons as he was surrounded and facing imminent defeat in his bunker in Berlin in 1945, what do you think he would have done?

Why risk this insanity?

ok so if Putin wants to take over the US I guess we should let him or else he'll nuke the US and we'd be dead. Better to live under Putin's regime than be dead, right?

No - we save nuclear weapons ONLY for use as necessary to save the nation from an existential threat. So, if any country launched and invasion of the United States (laughably insane) AND if conventional forces couldn’t stop them, only then would use of nuclear weapons be on the table.

What people need is EMPATHY with Russia. Not sympathy — empathy. Put yourself in their shoes. They are fighting a war on their border. If we push their backs against the wall with overwhelming them by conventional forces — that’s an existential threat to them - that’s precisely when they would use nuclear weapons. The war is way, way, way more important for Russia - it’s existential for them. We should be doing all we can to DEESCALATE this.

Because I really don’t want my family to die for Donbass.

Again, all you people with the overwrought Putin-as-Hitler tropes don’t seem to be asking the obvious question: what would Hitler have done with thousands of thermonuclear weapons? What would he have done if the German state was collapsing and he knew he would soon be killed and all he had to do was push a button and bring the whole temple down like Samson?

Think, people.

That's not why we used them last time.

Do you know that?

Yes, I’m well aware of that. We used two nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 when neither the territorial integrity of the United States, or the survival of the U.S. government, were seriously threatened. We firebombed 67 Japanese cities and killed millions of Japanese civilians, in a war that was kicked off by losing about 3,000 U.S. military servicemen at Pearl Harbor (a territory of the USA at the time).

Should we have firebombed all those civilians to death? And then dropped nuclear weapons on them when we were no longer facing an existential threat (if indeed we ever were vis-a-vis Japan)? I don’t know. Here’s what the hippy peacenik Robert McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defense who also served in WW2 thought about it:

https://youtu.be/gekdt0QwFQw

In any case — we firebombed and nuked Japanese cities when we were under far less pressure and duress than one can easily see Russia will be under if NATO goes to war with them.

Remind me again why Putin is more saintly than Americans in 1945? Why wouldn’t he vaporize American cities as well? Especially if his back is against the wall or if he’s facing imminent defeat and death?

I don’t think there can be “victory” against a global nuclear power. Hence the need for diplomacy.

The kindergarten level of understanding being displayed by the war-mongers would be laughable if it didn’t risk getting us all killed.

You probably don't even realize the irony of your post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I abandoned my New Year’s resolution to show more empathy for imperialist dictators who invaded neighboring sovereign nations for the purpose of annexing said nation by committing war crimes and genocide by February 24. Try as I might I just can’t get past the indiscriminate murder of men, women and children by targeting apartment buildings, schools, churches, daycares, and homes. Mass rape, torture and the abduction of children as an instrument of war is also a dealbreaker.

I think that's what will happen after Russia withdraws from east Ukraine, with reprisals by the Nazi Ukraine battalion.

you think Zelensky, a Jew, would be pro-Nazi Ukrainian battalion?

Wow, the pro-Russian stooges are on fire on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can all of you people who want war with Russia just go over there and join the fight instead of trying to drag the rest of us into this?

For the tenth time, no one is going to be drafted to fight a NATO-Russia conflict.

It would take an act of Congress.

No one will be drafted because a NATO vs Russia war will quickly escalate to nuclear weapons and we will all be dead. And those that survive will envy the dead.

Why do countries have nuclear war? This board is full of people spouting “Putin is evil” and “Putin is hitler” rhetoric … um, if you believe that maybe DON’T let us blithely walk into war against him?

Or let me put it this way for the people who can’t seem to snap out of their WW2 fantasies …

If Hitler had access to thousands of thermonuclear weapons as he was surrounded and facing imminent defeat in his bunker in Berlin in 1945, what do you think he would have done?

Why risk this insanity?

ok so if Putin wants to take over the US I guess we should let him or else he'll nuke the US and we'd be dead. Better to live under Putin's regime than be dead, right?

No - we save nuclear weapons ONLY for use as necessary to save the nation from an existential threat. So, if any country launched and invasion of the United States (laughably insane) AND if conventional forces couldn’t stop them, only then would use of nuclear weapons be on the table.

What people need is EMPATHY with Russia. Not sympathy — empathy. Put yourself in their shoes. They are fighting a war on their border. If we push their backs against the wall with overwhelming them by conventional forces — that’s an existential threat to them - that’s precisely when they would use nuclear weapons. The war is way, way, way more important for Russia - it’s existential for them. We should be doing all we can to DEESCALATE this.

Because I really don’t want my family to die for Donbass.

Again, all you people with the overwrought Putin-as-Hitler tropes don’t seem to be asking the obvious question: what would Hitler have done with thousands of thermonuclear weapons? What would he have done if the German state was collapsing and he knew he would soon be killed and all he had to do was push a button and bring the whole temple down like Samson?

Think, people.

That's not why we used them last time.

Do you know that?

Yes, I’m well aware of that. We used two nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 when neither the territorial integrity of the United States, or the survival of the U.S. government, were seriously threatened. We firebombed 67 Japanese cities and killed millions of Japanese civilians, in a war that was kicked off by losing about 3,000 U.S. military servicemen at Pearl Harbor (a territory of the USA at the time).

Should we have firebombed all those civilians to death? And then dropped nuclear weapons on them when we were no longer facing an existential threat (if indeed we ever were vis-a-vis Japan)? I don’t know. Here’s what the hippy peacenik Robert McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defense who also served in WW2 thought about it:

https://youtu.be/gekdt0QwFQw

In any case — we firebombed and nuked Japanese cities when we were under far less pressure and duress than one can easily see Russia will be under if NATO goes to war with them.

Remind me again why Putin is more saintly than Americans in 1945? Why wouldn’t he vaporize American cities as well? Especially if his back is against the wall or if he’s facing imminent defeat and death?

I don’t think there can be “victory” against a global nuclear power. Hence the need for diplomacy.

The kindergarten level of understanding being displayed by the war-mongers would be laughable if it didn’t risk getting us all killed.

You probably don't even realize the irony of your post.

I didn't see any irony, either. Care to point it out for us?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK darlings, remember you've heard it here first.

What fell down on the Polish border is a fragment of a Russian missile intercepted by Ukraine.

The West will not confirm this was a targeted shot by Russia. Pentagon will say it wants all the facts and it will peter out.

If this turns out to be true, it is shocking and shameful that Zelensky has been so quick to fabricate a Big Lie about “Russian missiles hitting Poland” and now willingly the Poles have gone along with the charade.

Almost as if Zelensky and Poland are simply rubbing their hands together in glee at the prospect of dragging us into World War 3.

Shame!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can all of you people who want war with Russia just go over there and join the fight instead of trying to drag the rest of us into this?

For the tenth time, no one is going to be drafted to fight a NATO-Russia conflict.

It would take an act of Congress.

No one will be drafted because a NATO vs Russia war will quickly escalate to nuclear weapons and we will all be dead. And those that survive will envy the dead.

Why do countries have nuclear war? This board is full of people spouting “Putin is evil” and “Putin is hitler” rhetoric … um, if you believe that maybe DON’T let us blithely walk into war against him?

Or let me put it this way for the people who can’t seem to snap out of their WW2 fantasies …

If Hitler had access to thousands of thermonuclear weapons as he was surrounded and facing imminent defeat in his bunker in Berlin in 1945, what do you think he would have done?

Why risk this insanity?

ok so if Putin wants to take over the US I guess we should let him or else he'll nuke the US and we'd be dead. Better to live under Putin's regime than be dead, right?

No - we save nuclear weapons ONLY for use as necessary to save the nation from an existential threat. So, if any country launched and invasion of the United States (laughably insane) AND if conventional forces couldn’t stop them, only then would use of nuclear weapons be on the table.

What people need is EMPATHY with Russia. Not sympathy — empathy. Put yourself in their shoes. They are fighting a war on their border. If we push their backs against the wall with overwhelming them by conventional forces — that’s an existential threat to them - that’s precisely when they would use nuclear weapons. The war is way, way, way more important for Russia - it’s existential for them. We should be doing all we can to DEESCALATE this.

Because I really don’t want my family to die for Donbass.

Again, all you people with the overwrought Putin-as-Hitler tropes don’t seem to be asking the obvious question: what would Hitler have done with thousands of thermonuclear weapons? What would he have done if the German state was collapsing and he knew he would soon be killed and all he had to do was push a button and bring the whole temple down like Samson?

Think, people.

That's not why we used them last time.

Do you know that?

Yes, I’m well aware of that. We used two nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 when neither the territorial integrity of the United States, or the survival of the U.S. government, were seriously threatened. We firebombed 67 Japanese cities and killed millions of Japanese civilians, in a war that was kicked off by losing about 3,000 U.S. military servicemen at Pearl Harbor (a territory of the USA at the time).

Should we have firebombed all those civilians to death? And then dropped nuclear weapons on them when we were no longer facing an existential threat (if indeed we ever were vis-a-vis Japan)? I don’t know. Here’s what the hippy peacenik Robert McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defense who also served in WW2 thought about it:

https://youtu.be/gekdt0QwFQw

In any case — we firebombed and nuked Japanese cities when we were under far less pressure and duress than one can easily see Russia will be under if NATO goes to war with them.

Remind me again why Putin is more saintly than Americans in 1945? Why wouldn’t he vaporize American cities as well? Especially if his back is against the wall or if he’s facing imminent defeat and death?

I don’t think there can be “victory” against a global nuclear power. Hence the need for diplomacy.

The kindergarten level of understanding being displayed by the war-mongers would be laughable if it didn’t risk getting us all killed.

That's the world we live in. There are no decisionmakers on this board, including you. So you may as well quit your feckless handwringing and whining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can all of you people who want war with Russia just go over there and join the fight instead of trying to drag the rest of us into this?

For the tenth time, no one is going to be drafted to fight a NATO-Russia conflict.

It would take an act of Congress.

No one will be drafted because a NATO vs Russia war will quickly escalate to nuclear weapons and we will all be dead. And those that survive will envy the dead.

Why do countries have nuclear war? This board is full of people spouting “Putin is evil” and “Putin is hitler” rhetoric … um, if you believe that maybe DON’T let us blithely walk into war against him?

Or let me put it this way for the people who can’t seem to snap out of their WW2 fantasies …

If Hitler had access to thousands of thermonuclear weapons as he was surrounded and facing imminent defeat in his bunker in Berlin in 1945, what do you think he would have done?

Why risk this insanity?

ok so if Putin wants to take over the US I guess we should let him or else he'll nuke the US and we'd be dead. Better to live under Putin's regime than be dead, right?

No - we save nuclear weapons ONLY for use as necessary to save the nation from an existential threat. So, if any country launched and invasion of the United States (laughably insane) AND if conventional forces couldn’t stop them, only then would use of nuclear weapons be on the table.

What people need is EMPATHY with Russia. Not sympathy — empathy. Put yourself in their shoes. They are fighting a war on their border. If we push their backs against the wall with overwhelming them by conventional forces — that’s an existential threat to them - that’s precisely when they would use nuclear weapons. The war is way, way, way more important for Russia - it’s existential for them. We should be doing all we can to DEESCALATE this.

Because I really don’t want my family to die for Donbass.

Again, all you people with the overwrought Putin-as-Hitler tropes don’t seem to be asking the obvious question: what would Hitler have done with thousands of thermonuclear weapons? What would he have done if the German state was collapsing and he knew he would soon be killed and all he had to do was push a button and bring the whole temple down like Samson?

Think, people.

That's not why we used them last time.

Do you know that?

Yes, I’m well aware of that. We used two nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 when neither the territorial integrity of the United States, or the survival of the U.S. government, were seriously threatened. We firebombed 67 Japanese cities and killed millions of Japanese civilians, in a war that was kicked off by losing about 3,000 U.S. military servicemen at Pearl Harbor (a territory of the USA at the time).

Should we have firebombed all those civilians to death? And then dropped nuclear weapons on them when we were no longer facing an existential threat (if indeed we ever were vis-a-vis Japan)? I don’t know. Here’s what the hippy peacenik Robert McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defense who also served in WW2 thought about it:

https://youtu.be/gekdt0QwFQw

In any case — we firebombed and nuked Japanese cities when we were under far less pressure and duress than one can easily see Russia will be under if NATO goes to war with them.

Remind me again why Putin is more saintly than Americans in 1945? Why wouldn’t he vaporize American cities as well? Especially if his back is against the wall or if he’s facing imminent defeat and death?

I don’t think there can be “victory” against a global nuclear power. Hence the need for diplomacy.

The kindergarten level of understanding being displayed by the war-mongers would be laughable if it didn’t risk getting us all killed.

That's the world we live in. There are no decisionmakers on this board, including you. So you may as well quit your feckless handwringing and whining.

This whole message board is feckless handwringing and whining, then.

Call your congressional representatives and tell them to push the State Dept to do it’s job and engage in diplomacy to end this conflict and—more importantly and above all—keep us out of a catastrophic war with Russia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can all of you people who want war with Russia just go over there and join the fight instead of trying to drag the rest of us into this?

For the tenth time, no one is going to be drafted to fight a NATO-Russia conflict.

It would take an act of Congress.

No one will be drafted because a NATO vs Russia war will quickly escalate to nuclear weapons and we will all be dead. And those that survive will envy the dead.

Why do countries have nuclear war? This board is full of people spouting “Putin is evil” and “Putin is hitler” rhetoric … um, if you believe that maybe DON’T let us blithely walk into war against him?

Or let me put it this way for the people who can’t seem to snap out of their WW2 fantasies …

If Hitler had access to thousands of thermonuclear weapons as he was surrounded and facing imminent defeat in his bunker in Berlin in 1945, what do you think he would have done?

Why risk this insanity?

ok so if Putin wants to take over the US I guess we should let him or else he'll nuke the US and we'd be dead. Better to live under Putin's regime than be dead, right?

No - we save nuclear weapons ONLY for use as necessary to save the nation from an existential threat. So, if any country launched and invasion of the United States (laughably insane) AND if conventional forces couldn’t stop them, only then would use of nuclear weapons be on the table.

What people need is EMPATHY with Russia. Not sympathy — empathy. Put yourself in their shoes. They are fighting a war on their border. If we push their backs against the wall with overwhelming them by conventional forces — that’s an existential threat to them - that’s precisely when they would use nuclear weapons. The war is way, way, way more important for Russia - it’s existential for them. We should be doing all we can to DEESCALATE this.

Because I really don’t want my family to die for Donbass.

Again, all you people with the overwrought Putin-as-Hitler tropes don’t seem to be asking the obvious question: what would Hitler have done with thousands of thermonuclear weapons? What would he have done if the German state was collapsing and he knew he would soon be killed and all he had to do was push a button and bring the whole temple down like Samson?

Think, people.

That's not why we used them last time.

Do you know that?

Yes, I’m well aware of that. We used two nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 when neither the territorial integrity of the United States, or the survival of the U.S. government, were seriously threatened. We firebombed 67 Japanese cities and killed millions of Japanese civilians, in a war that was kicked off by losing about 3,000 U.S. military servicemen at Pearl Harbor (a territory of the USA at the time).

Should we have firebombed all those civilians to death? And then dropped nuclear weapons on them when we were no longer facing an existential threat (if indeed we ever were vis-a-vis Japan)? I don’t know. Here’s what the hippy peacenik Robert McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defense who also served in WW2 thought about it:

https://youtu.be/gekdt0QwFQw

In any case — we firebombed and nuked Japanese cities when we were under far less pressure and duress than one can easily see Russia will be under if NATO goes to war with them.

Remind me again why Putin is more saintly than Americans in 1945? Why wouldn’t he vaporize American cities as well? Especially if his back is against the wall or if he’s facing imminent defeat and death?

I don’t think there can be “victory” against a global nuclear power. Hence the need for diplomacy.

The kindergarten level of understanding being displayed by the war-mongers would be laughable if it didn’t risk getting us all killed.

That's the world we live in. There are no decisionmakers on this board, including you. So you may as well quit your feckless handwringing and whining.

This whole message board is feckless handwringing and whining, then.

Call your congressional representatives and tell them to push the State Dept to do it’s job and engage in diplomacy to end this conflict and—more importantly and above all—keep us out of a catastrophic war with Russia.

Why? Russia has no interest in diplomacy.

[Anonymous]

Trolls are all over this thread Because it’s so consequential.

So just ignore or report them and keep discussing.

It is very likely that nothing will come of this: because no one wants to invoke article 5 over a mistake.

However: this bolsters Ukraine’s case significantly and hardens nations against Russia.