The kid is asking the wrong question.

The question is Why is Russia invading Ukraine.

The answer is NATO creeping into buffer countries that was agreed on after the fall of Russia.

NATO has not stopped expanding since the fall of the Soviet Union, growing from 17 countries in 1990 to 30 today, several of which were once part of the Soviet-led Warsaw pact.


Finally Ukraine is not a NATO country----------- This is none of our business.


Biden failed Policies have done nothing but keeping pushing for war --

Ukraine is a lost war.

FJB

You leftest said if Trump was POTUS - He would bring us into war--- Never happened.
MEGA 2024 to end wars.

Your video, Jon’s Response To Ted Cruz’s PACT Act Lies, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Mark McCloskey, remember him? The terrified snowflake that pulled out guns and threatened peaceful marchers in the street walking past his house? Now running for senator, guess which party. Only one party thinks menacing peaceful protesters with death is something to applaud.
Well, he’s in trouble for claiming to be endorsed by Vanilla Ice and Yang Yang Twins (because of course he isn’t).

This you guy? This yor best? Thuggish violent liars prepared to say or do anything for power. It’s all the right has left.

How you liking Cruz showing off how anti military the right is by celebrating withholding earned medical benefits out of pure spite on the senate floor? Their “excuse” is utter nonsense lies, claiming that the bill was once discretionary spending (meaning at the whim of the current president) and has been CHANGED to mandatory spending. It’s a lie, not one word changed since they voted FOR it in June.
https://videosift.com/video/Jon-8482-s-Response-To-Ted-Cruz-8482-s-PACT-Act-Lies

How about Trump chumming up to the Saudi Royal family, now saying no one knows if they were involved in 9/11 (he had no doubts in 2016 whatsoever, but now they’ve invested hundreds of millions into Trump companies). He was outraged Obama didn’t release the classified 9/11 report, then when he had the secret report detailing their involvement Trump kept it secret (for favors and investments), Biden released it and Trump now pretends he’s never heard of it, doesn’t know if the Saudis are involved, protects them when they murder Americans, and is more than apply to help them try to destroy an American sports league miles from where the towers once stood. Must make you so proud as a patriot.

Fascism, theocracy, and anti Americanism has actually become the Republican Party platform. Only the TrueType totally insane could possibly see their actions, support them, and still think themselves as American patriots. History will judge you harshly, your families will too. Your legacy is treason.

Just to rub it in how much more competent Biden is, today ended the reign of al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri with no civilian casualties, something Trump promised and completely failed to do…so badly he gave up and agreed to surrender Afghanistan unconditionally.

Just to show how anti American and pro terrorist the right is, your talking heads like Carlson are trying to spin the killing of the mastermind of 9/11 as a bad thing that somehow makes us less safe, and are trying to blame Biden for Russia attacking Crimea and Ukraine.

Trump hosts the sponsors of 9/11 while Biden eliminates the perpetrators. Thanks Biden.

I don't believe this was ever about taking Ukraine with the Russian military. I believe this is about destroying Ukraine and squeezing Europe's energy-dependent balls until the EU cracks under the economic pressure caused by the sanctions. This is already happening with Germany whimpering to Daddy Vladdy for all that precious, precious oil and gas. "Oh, we gave Zelensky a billion euros!"; yeah, and you gave Putin 25x that in oil/gas purchases.

The mealy-mouthing and dissembling has already begun, most shamefully from the New York Times, who is calling for Ukraine to make "hard choices". "This isn't capitulation" -- fuck you NYT, yes it is.

I had honest hopes that the western powers would show some spine and resolve, but as soon at their economies started to feel a little pain, the number of fucks given for Ukrainian lives went to zero. Russian is going to rape and murder its way from Odessa to the Belarus border until the western powers figure out some way to make it all Zelensky's fault or force him to cede massive amounts of Ukrainian territory before any real economic pain felt.

The worst part is that Finland and Sweden are going to be granted NATO membership, but Ukraine still is denied. Why are these two the hills NATO is willing to die on and Ukraine not? If NATO isn't willing to risk nuclear war over Ukraine, what happens when the tip of a single Russian boot touches Finnish soil? What happens when Finland then calls for Article 5 and the rest of NATO suddenly realizes shit just got real? What happens when it's time to shit or get off the pot; put up or shut up? Either NATO charges into the teeth of a potential nuclear war, or NATO is shown to be a paper tiger. If someone sees a middle ground, I'm interested in hearing it.

(Incidentally, NATO's Article 5 is pretty porous. A-5 doesn't say every NATO nation commits whatever forces are deemed necessary by the whole to defend against an aggressor. Instead, it says that in the event of A-5 coming into play, each member will take "such action as [the member state] deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."

Notice the whole 'each member' and 'deems necessary'? Yeah, to quote a popular movie 'I don't think this mutual defense pact means what you think it does'.)

I don't know, but there's a few things that concern me:

1. Underestimating your advisory. We did this with Japan in the lead up to WW2. Great powers always fight the last war they won. In our case, that's WW2. China learned from the war they lost as well: WW2, and they're not going to make the same mistakes twice.

2. Ambiguous defense posture. This is how England got dragged into WW1 due to an uncertain position if Germany invaded France. Germany gambled that England wouldn't get involved because it had no spoken mutual defense agreement with France. Had the defense pact been made readily clear, it's possible Germany wouldn't have invaded.

2. Use it or lose it weapons. In WW1, one of the main issues with the initial invasion was train schedules. Things had to go perfectly to get men and material to the front line and any hiccup could delay a military victory. Once the very first German troop train left the station, there was no way to stop the invasion. Now we've got a situation where a war over Taiwan would be won or lost in about an hour of the first shot. China knows that should the US get involved, China's military assets are going to be blown up and fast. This puts China in a situation where they might choose the launch everything in a maximum impact first strike. Faced with overwhelming damage, the US would be forced to make some hard choices about how to respond. Would it go nuclear? It's according to how much Taiwan means to us.

"It won't happen". Go to Europe and see how many tombstones bear that inscription.

I'd say 50/50.

Clearly you cannot read. The article is clear. The objective of the bipartisan group was not to win votes for either side, only to ensure a free and fair election in the face of the Trump administration's efforts to interfere and illegally sway results through lies, lawsuits, disinformation, voter suppression, and simple denial of reality and fact.

"There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. "


You are both dumb to try this lie, and a bold faced liar. You actually pointed us to your source that clearly says the exact opposite of what you claim. I'm pretty certain you didn't read it, because it's clear, and it calls you a liar too.

Isn't it hilarious how Trump's best argument is "If you elect Biden, things could be almost as bad as they are now under me." I particularly like the one with the riots and Jack booted thugs of Trump's American nightmare claiming this could be Biden's America....BUT THAT IS TRUMP'S AMERICA YOU IJITS.

Trump didn't stand up for us against China, he stood up for Ivanka, then asked China to interfere in our election. He tossed out a trade pact for trade wars costing Americans untold billions or trillions and totally failed at trade talks.

Every other nation except Russia and Saudi Arabia want Biden over Trump, especially our allies but even most of our enemies would rather we be rational and sane than unpredictably weak and irrationally scared.

If you want to talk about family members profiting from their parent's public office, let's talk about Trump's kids @bobknight33, who actually did take gifts directly from China (not profits on investments they made, gifts) of tens of millions, one worth a reported $35 million by itself, or the hundreds of millions collected from the middle east by Jarred, or the tens of millions collected by Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb from Canada and elsewhere...all based on promises made by the president to those foreign powers to scratch their back if they scratch his.

🤦‍♂️

Face it, you cannot make a single accusation on any topic deriding Biden where there isn't direct evidence of Trump being exponentially worse than his usually false accusations about Biden. Not one. *fail is right, buddy, another failed Trump attempt to smear a good man.
BTW, another court has said Trump can no longer hide his tax frauds today. Never before has so much taxpayer money been spent to hide someone's taxes, constant court cases for years using government lawyers has likely cost taxpayers near $100000000 to hide his taxes if you count the cost of the lawyers and courts, of course never before has a president refused to release them before the election, but never before has a repeatedly convicted fraud, thief, and charity con man been president.

Edit : Aaaaaaaahahahahaaa!!!! Another Trump stooge, Steve Bannon (I don't know him, never met him, I've heard good things about him but no, I don't know Steve) and multiple other administration officials including the acting head of the DEA arrested on more fraud charges, this time for defrauding hundreds of thousands of donors out of >$25000000 they donated to Trump's "build the wall" campaign. The hits never stop coming with Trump. Tired of winning yet?

One of the ways in which Martin Luther broke from the Catholic church was by not seeing marriage as sacramental: he wanted to be able to acknowledge marriage between non-Christians rather than just marriage between Christians. Thus, from the perspective of Protestant theology, it's not clear that the church should have much to do with marriage. (This was most succinctly summarised for me thus: have a civil wedding, and then come back to the church for potato salad and a party.)

What about the civil arrangement, then? For me, the clearest argument for a non-paternalistic state granting some people preferable treatment (e.g. untaxed inheritance, etc.) is that those people are reducing the burden on the state somehow. In the 'traditional marriage', they do this partly by providing (on average) a more stable environment in which to raise children (thus, raising somehow more productive - on average - citizens for the state), and partly by caring for each other in their old age (thus, saving the state costs). From this point of view, whether or not they have sex, on whatever basis, with each other is irrelevant: an adult son living with and caring for his elderly mother is saving the state in the same way that an wife caring for her husband is. Thus, when France introduced its 'pacte civil', I thought that they missed the opportunity to get right out of the bedroom.

Pretty much interview scripted by Putin personally.

Why the drama about US - russian relations if the russians supposedly are not dangerous and Putin is not evil.

Building a case to sell Poland and the Baltic countries to Putin. Worked like a charm with Hitler and Czechoslovakia before WWII. Poland these days does not even have a border with Russia proper, only with what used to be Koenigsberg. Poland is part of NATO and if Abby and her friend the professor want to give that up then it is them who are pushing us all closer to a war (cold or not).

Ukraine has already exploded. Putin has already taken 1/3 of the country breaking bilateral treaties. Cant get much worse, hard to imagine how the US can get involved, Trump notwithstanding.

Syria - its basically over, except for the humanitarian and human rights catastrophe. Putins ally won - a slightly pyrrhic victory perhaps, but for the meantime Assad stays. Did they level cities or liberate them? Hard to tell the difference. Probably both. That said US involvement in the middle east is a grave shitstorm.

This awesome "analysis" somehow misses the biggest current problem of NATO - Turkey - possibly because Putin does not have a good handle on Turkey yet so its off-limits. Also Pakistan/India and North Korea does not get a mention for the same reason - no chance to push Putins agenda.

NATO might have reassured Gorby it had no intention to spread. It is important to understand that Warsaw pact countries generally accepted Russians as saviours from German occupation, by the 1970s this had changed firmly to perceiving Russians as occupants, political persecutors and economic idiots.

After the economic collapse of the USSR (supposedly somehow caused by Ronald Reagan :-) all these countries needed reassurance that the Russians were not coming back. The only possible reassurance was joining NATO. If that meant breaking a promise made to an ex-representative of a no longer existing country, that is fine by me. If NATO had promised not to spread to Mother Theresa I would be more concerned.

The problem with the Ukraine is that we (EU) made an offer that put them in danger (from Putin) and we could not back that up with real economic or military assistance. Dumb move. But also Ukrainian politics is an incredible mess and simply too many ethnic russians live there giving Putin a strong nationalist base.

This cat must be Hillary's familiar. A pact with Lucifer, I'd warrant!

Many people seem confused about our government's origins.
Wiki- Treaty Of Tripoli-unanimously ratified by congress and President John Adams 1797
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;

as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

"By their actions, the Founding Fathers made clear that their primary concern was religious freedom, not the advancement of a state religion. Individuals, not the government, would define religious faith and practice in the United States. Thus the Founders ensured that in no official sense would America be a Christian Republic. Ten years after the Constitutional Convention ended its work, the country assured the world that the United States was a secular state, and that its negotiations would adhere to the rule of law, not the dictates of the Christian faith. The assurances were contained in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797 and were intended to allay the fears of the Muslim state by insisting that religion would not govern how the treaty was interpreted and enforced. John Adams and the Senate made clear that the pact was between two sovereign states, not between two religious powers.[15]

The constitution and bill of rights were based on English Common Law, which existed long before the Romans brought the idea of Christianity to England....so if people insist our laws are based on religion, remind them the religion in power where/when they came from was Pagan religion, and they should be worshiping Odin.

The nation of Islam is not Muslims. Its a cult, they believe Elijah Mohammed is a messiah whose real name is Wallace D. Fard Muhammad who faked his death and came back as Elijah Mohammed.

They believe blacks are the lost tribe of Israel. That Arabs are not true Muslims. And white race was created by Lucifer.

They also have a suicide pact as well as they are organized crime lime mafia and have performed many assassinations.

Ice they assassinated Malcolm who was "2nd" they replaced him with Louis Farrakhan who has admitted he killed Malcolm.

He probably misspoke, but I found it interesting that Asange refers to the constitutional rights as 'obligations'. I like the idea that we should consider a right an obligation as well. That we should -all- defend the constitution by not simply 'exercising' our rights, like some sort of demented legal workout video, but as a duty much like a sworn military duty. I know for an unclouded fact that our government isn't upholding the constitution whatsoever these days, and they're just a self perpetuating behemoth that's likely to bring this country to its knees, so maybe the average citizen has to be a Manning in his own right. We don't have national secrets, but we do have a voice in every conversation we have with the rest of our friends and neighbors, and a lot can be done if we all just break the pact of silence the government and media have imposed upon our culture.

Epic bearded guy would be wearing Nordic Carved Armor. So, yeah, Ebonheart Pact.

I completely agree about Elder Scrolls being a single player experience. For me anyway. I've never enjoyed MMOs and there's no chance that this is going to sway me. About the only thing I'd like added to the TES games is a little more micromanagement of my companions. Dragon Age: Origins got that right.

Your link missed an important bit, and showed me ALL the TES factions, then I realized that it should point here:
http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Factions_%28Online%29

Anyhow, I bet you're correct and the 3-way faceoff was between:
Aldmeri Dominion (SW corner of map)
Daggerfall Covenant (NW corner)
Ebonhart Pact (NE corner)

...Presumably to allow for PvP control zones, etc. Interesting, thanks.

Still, the MMO nature will make it difficult or impossible to include many if not most of the key things that I enjoy in a TES game, so I still think that this is a long shot for me personally.