Ukraine Ready for Peace Talks with Russia

[SargeMaximus]

Yeah they want peace because they are losing

 

[Serenity]

Hopefully the rest of eastern europe will realize that the giants supporting them are paper ones and act accordingly.

The difference is that many of those other countries in eastern Europe are NATO members. Had Ukraine also been a full NATO member I seriously doubt Russia would have touched it, but they're not and Russia trusted that NATO would remain what it is, a defence alliance for its members. As for the other countries not under NATO protection, well, NATO won't get involved, that's proven now.

 

[samspade]

I laugh whenever I hear people calling Russia evil, like they're watching another Disney or Marvel movie with good guys and bad guys. The hilarity comes when you clearly reveal how robotic their anti-russia vision is. It gives similar vibes to the anti-nazi mentality.

You don't consider the Nazis evil?

 

[Who Dares Win]

The difference is that many of those other countries in eastern Europe are NATO members. Had Ukraine also been a full NATO member I seriously doubt Russia would have touched it, but they're not and Russia trusted that NATO would remain what it is, a defence alliance for its members. As for the other countries not under NATO protection, well, NATO won't get involved, that's proven now.

Few years ago I would have totally agree with your line but nowadays not that sure for two reasons.

China knows that if Russia falls or becomes a vassal state, they get surrounded and run out of gas basically so in this case the ratio of strenght of nato/russia which is probably 5:1 in military terms, gets to 1:1 if China steps in...they wont do it out of niceness but convenience.

Now regarding the natoalliance, most european governments are losing population support by the day for economical reasons, mass migration and lastly those damn lockdowns....wait till life gets more expensive you will see hostile parties scoring more voting power (and it's not gonna be women, retireds and nice guys).

I'm not really sure that europeans would accept to be dragged in a war despite the nato agreements especially if the attacks to one of their nations comes after a provocation from them to a third party.

I believe and it's my opinion that most europeans get along only cause they have too much to lose to disobey but that feeling of union we had last decade is slowly fading away.

You probably recall the gilets jaunes in France recently? I see them as a good benchmark.

 

[Serenity]

@Who Dares Win
I don't see how there's a choice if Russia invaded a NATO country. If article 5 is not followed through on then it's effectively the end of NATO, it's just not going to happen, especially now.

 

[Who Dares Win]

@Who Dares Win
I don't see how there's a choice if Russia invaded a NATO country. If article 5 is not followed through on then it's effectively the end of NATO, it's just not going to happen, especially now.

Again 2 years ago I would have agreed 100% with you, right now I'm not that sure.

I stop taking for granted assurances and deals no matter how safe they look.

Would you have imagine in 2019 that the following years they would have freeze the whole western world over a low mortality virus and lock citizens within their houses spitting on local constitutions while printing their currency into oblivion pretending not to know the conseguences?

I may be right, I may be wrong, one thing for sure is not to take for granted the word of those in power.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I laugh whenever I hear people calling Russia evil, like they're watching another Disney or Marvel movie with good guys and bad guys. The hilarity comes when you clearly reveal how robotic their anti-russia vision is. It gives similar vibes to the anti-nazi mentality.

Russia is an adversary of “the West” that is engaging in genocidal behavior. Why you nakedly defend such behavior is the bigger question.

 

[HaleyBaron]

You don't consider the Nazis evil?

I think all societies in human history will be considered good or evil based on the perspective of the beholder.

 

[HaleyBaron]

Russia is an adversary of “the West” that is engaging in genocidal behavior. Why you nakedly defend such behavior is the bigger question.

I don't defend anyone. I'm just not going to contradict myself and think all governments are innocent of anything. But I'm also not a judge of what is right or wrong. If you're worried about what someone else is doing all the time, that means there's nothing else going on in your life. That or you're using another moral crisis to try to compensate for whatever insecurity you harbor within you [this is a trait common for moral chasers, including religious people].

 

[samspade]

I think all societies in human history will be considered good or evil based on the perspective of the beholder.

What's your perspective of the Nazis? Good or evil?

 

[HaleyBaron]

What's your perspective of the Nazis? Good or evil?

I dont think of societies myself as good or evil. The Nazis wanted a way of life and fought for it. They aren't anymore bad or good for that than other regimes.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I think all societies in human history will be considered good or evil based on the perspective of the beholder.

Bruh. How hard is it to say the Nazis were evil?

I dont think of societies myself as good or evil. The Nazis wanted a way of life and fought for it. They aren't anymore bad or good for that than other regimes.

Bullshvt. Genocide is not a “way of life.”

 

[Grounded eagle]

I dont think of societies myself as good or evil. The Nazis wanted a way of life and fought for it. They aren't anymore bad or good for that than other regimes.

Yep.The mods have officially forgotten how to do their jobs.

 

[samspade]

Yep.The mods have officially forgotten how to do their jobs.

Better to have this stuff out in the open than censored. If someone else sees a moral equivalence between the Holocaust and modern-day Costa Rica, let him say it. To quote Office Space, yeah, I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree on that...

 

[Serenity]

low mortality virus

I wouldn't call it low mortality. Imagine no restrictions, no vaccine and hospitals filled to the brim by the first few lucky ones, mortality would surely have been higher.

Right now there are no restrictions in Norway though, it's lifted as is natural when the vaccination rate is good and hospitals can keep up with treating the fewer unvaccinated people who are left. I doubt we'll see covid restrictions again in this country.

Lockdowns and quarantines isn't new, the last time it happened on a large scale there were exactly the same complaints. No doubt there will be a bunch of whiners in some decades when covid is forgotten and some other disease turns up. History is forgotten and then it repeats itself.

 

[Who Dares Win]

I wouldn't call it low mortality. Imagine no restrictions, no vaccine and hospitals filled to the brim by the first few lucky ones, mortality would surely have been higher.

Right now there are no restrictions in Norway though, it's lifted as is natural when the vaccination rate is good and hospitals can keep up with treating the fewer unvaccinated people who are left. I doubt we'll see covid restrictions again in this country.

Lockdowns and quarantines isn't new, the last time it happened on a large scale there were exactly the same complaints. No doubt there will be a bunch of whiners in some decades when covid is forgotten and some other disease turns up. History is forgotten and then it repeats itself.

How do you explain the same deaths between ultra restrictive areas and areas that removed restrictions and vaccine mandate?

Why do we have england that basically has no restriction now and italy that still has a passive vaccine mandate and restrictions?

Is it england to be reckless or italy to be paranoid?

Same question about red states and blue states in the us.

Not trying to be provocative, I sincerly dont see this stuff working.

Also why did this terrible virus disappeared the same week Putin sent the tanks?

We can also discuss how its oldies and sick people to pump the death numbers yet the restrictions were general.

Dont get me wrong Im not one of those that denies the existance of covid19, Im simply saying that looking at numbers and facts is far from being that plague that they tried to convince of.

I got it myself and found out only cause I did a test before a wedding.

I strongly believe that a minor health problems was transformed in an amazing political opportunity.

 

[Serenity]

How do you explain the same deaths between ultra restrictive areas and areas that removed restrictions and vaccine mandate?

What's the vaccination rates in each respective area? That would matter a lot. You wouldn't need to slow infection rates if the infected don't get so sick they require hospitalization as is the case for most vaccinated. The restrictions can't stop the virus, but it can slow it down some so hospitals can keep up. At least that's what the restrictions in Norway was based upon, everyone seems to have covid here nowadays, but very very few need professional healthcare, few enough that we don't need restrictions.

Also why did this terrible virus disappeared the same week Putin sent the tanks?

It didn't, unless your entire reality is based on the tabloid news. Covid is old news, media found something else big and currently happening to write about. It didn't disappear, the news about it just got displaced, that's how news works, it's in the name, NEWS.

We can also discuss how its oldies and sick people to pump the death numbers yet the restrictions were general.

Because visiting parents/grandparents is a thing people do and do you think they won't if the government softly asks them not to visit relatives? I sure don't think so. Also, hospitalization rates, slowing it down to maintain capacity.

Dont get me wrong Im not one of those that denies the existance of covid19, Im simply saying that looking at numbers and facts is far from being that plague that they tried to convince of.

I guess my point is that it doesn't seem so bad and I can agree on that, but I question why that is. What would it look like if absolutely nothing was done to attempt to slow it down? A lot has been done and that's the numbers we have, but imagine nothing done. No masks, no vaccine, no lockdowns, no distancing, no hand sanitizer, no more room in hospitals and we continued business as it was before 2020.

Anecdotally, just the common cold (which transmits in practically the same way) is a decent indicator to me. I used to get a cold roughly 3 times every year, since the first lockdown I didn't even get a runny nose for 1.5 years. Restrictions got milder and I stopped giving as much of a fvck, back to the occasional cold roughly every 4 months. This is true for most people I know, getting sick became much rarer.

Last two months since they removed the restrictions is different though, covid is going around everywhere. Although, unlike previous waves when fewer were vaccinated, the hospitals have less covid patients despite a LOT more infected.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Anecdotally, just the common cold (which transmits in practically the same way) is a decent indicator to me. I used to get a cold roughly 3 times every year, since the first lockdown I didn't even get a runny nose for 1.5 years. Restrictions got milder and I stopped giving as much of a fvck, back to the occasional cold roughly every 4 months. This is true for most people I know, getting sick became much rarer.

This. I used to get sick once or twice a year with the common cold. I now have not been sick nor had so much as a sniffle since 2019. Three years. Coincidence?

 

[Who Dares Win]

What's the vaccination rates in each respective area? That would matter a lot. You wouldn't need to slow infection rates if the infected don't get so sick they require hospitalization as is the case for most vaccinated. The restrictions can't stop the virus, but it can slow it down some so hospitals can keep up. At least that's what the restrictions in Norway was based upon, everyone seems to have covid here nowadays, but very very few need professional healthcare, few enough that we don't need restrictions.

That would make sense, what doesnt make sense instead are countries (or part of the same country) that keep restrictions way after that point or worse yet force citizens to comply with vaccination in order to live their life...even young people that statistically experience mild to no symptoms.

It didn't, unless your entire reality is based on the tabloid news. Covid is old news, media found something else big and currently happening to write about. It didn't disappear, the news about it just got displaced, that's how news works, it's in the name, NEWS.

It's not me creating the reality (from a media pov), one day we had unvaxxed people putting everyone at risk, the following day we only had tanks.

I find it funny however that a "terrible lethal pandemic" requires a 24/7 coverage to make sure that citizens dont forget about it.

Because visiting parents/grandparents is a thing people do and do you think they won't if the government softly asks them not to visit relatives? I sure don't think so. Also, hospitalization rates, slowing it down to maintain capacity.

We already talked about that.

I guess my point is that it doesn't seem so bad and I can agree on that, but I question why that is. What would it look like if absolutely nothing was done to attempt to slow it down? A lot has been done and that's the numbers we have, but imagine nothing done. No masks, no vaccine, no lockdowns, no distancing, no hand sanitizer, no more room in hospitals and we continued business as it was before 2020.

I'm not a biologist as someone said recently so cant estimate correctly, there has been some studies however.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...kdowns-reduced-COVID-mortality-2-percent.html

Anecdotally, just the common cold (which transmits in practically the same way) is a decent indicator to me. I used to get a cold roughly 3 times every year, since the first lockdown I didn't even get a runny nose for 1.5 years. Restrictions got milder and I stopped giving as much of a fvck, back to the occasional cold roughly every 4 months. This is true for most people I know, getting sick became much rarer.

Nothing to say against it, yet is it worth to keep you at home for a flue like virus (for most sane adults)? the cold is a corona virus too for what I recall.

Last two months since they removed the restrictions is different though, covid is going around everywhere. Although, unlike previous waves when fewer were vaccinated, the hospitals have less covid patients despite a LOT more infected.

I believe the problems was simply that they didnt know how to cure sick people and that lead to a much worse outcome.

I understand your point about slowing down the process so hospitals can keep pace and it makes perfect sense, what I totally wrong is creating a superstructure above this not any different than a new patriot act where you need to get papers from the gov to get to your own workplace even if it's private or if you wanna hit a restaurant or a gym.

Now given that the vaccine DOES NOT stop you from being able to trasmit the virus but its supposed only to protect you from the effects, why does those who decide to take the risk (given the stats for their group) needs to be treated as pariah?

I dont wanna sound lame but in a car crash, the driver seat belt works even if the other drives doesnt have it.

The same moment you have a QR code scanned and connected to a gov app whenever you go somewhere it's your privacy gone..places, time and those with you are now in a data ledger....they say to track infected, I personally disagree.

Last thing, who improved his condition and who got it worse compared from pre-restriction and now?

Following the money/power never fails.

Again I'm not necessarily against your position which despite I dont 100% share, makes perfect sense and is well reasoned.

 

[Serenity]

That would make sense, what doesnt make sense instead are countries (or part of the same country) that keep restrictions way after that point or worse yet force citizens to comply with vaccination in order to live their life...even young people that statistically experience mild to no symptoms.

Yeah, we never mandated the vaccine and most people (politicians included) would rather protect the right to choose without legal coercion, most people were reasonable enough to get it voluntarily anyways, else we'd probably still have restrictions. Unvaccinated people can do the same things anyone else can (within Norway), we just figured we can handle the numbers now.

I think a vaccine mandate is fundamentally wrong, it's a step too far. Yeah, it will take longer if a large percentage don't want the vaccine, but I would rather have a couple more years of restrictions than to mandate vaccinations.

I find it funny however that a "terrible lethal pandemic" requires a 24/7 coverage to make sure that citizens dont forget about it.

Lockdowns everywhere, not much else happening, nothing to write about. I bet the journalists were desperate for something more interesting, but pandemic stuff was still the stuff people read/clicked the most, that's their bread and butter at the end of the day after all.

I'm not a biologist as someone said recently so cant estimate correctly, there has been some studies however.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...kdowns-reduced-COVID-mortality-2-percent.html

"The researchers — who deal in the field of economics, rather than medicine or public health — originally identified 18,590 global studies into lockdowns, which they claim had to be whittled down to just 24 to answer their research question."

Uh oh! I don't have the time or energy to dig deep into it, but that's a big red flag.

the cold is a corona virus too for what I recall.

Nope, it's not. The common cold is typically rhinovirus. A few steps up it shares the same class as coronavirus. So does hepatitis A, polio, norovirus and some other less known ones. So the common cold is by definition not a coronavirus, it's a different order.

Now given that the vaccine DOES NOT stop you from being able to trasmit the virus but its supposed only to protect you from the effects, why does those who decide to take the risk (given the stats for their group) needs to be treated as pariah?

I do not disagree to this point, as I said above, I believe it is fundamentally wrong. The government in my country recognized that and never legalized this form of discrimination. They just kept track of hospitalization rates and adjusted restrictions accordingly. As you said, vaccinated people also transmit and so the restrictions applied to everyone equally.

Naturally it still wasn't popular to be unvaccinated because we all knew it meant the restrictions would last longer, but besides the unpreventable social shame, they had every right as anyone else to go to work, restaurants, gyms, whatever within those restrictions when they applied. Even a chunk of healthcare workers were and still are unvaccinated, they literally can't be fired over it.

Again I'm not necessarily against your position which despite I dont 100% share, makes perfect sense and is well reasoned.

Reading this post of yours I don't think we stand that far apart. I have never and will never advocate for legal vaccine discrimination, it seems that's the part you dislike the most and I can totally understand that.