Russia on brink of ... NOPE! Russia INVADES Ukraine!

[senseamp]

So you mean an expanded invasion from the current ongoing invasion?

Considering Russia is currently invading Ukraine it is rational to take threats of an expanded invasion seriously. Everyone here hopes Russia doesn’t engage in further aggression but as sane actors it makes sense to prepare for it, given Russia’s history of extreme aggression towards its neighbors. Agree?

Sure, prepare, but this hysteria is not helping. Even Zelensky is telling Biden to knock it off, it's unnecessarily scaring Ukrainians and hurting the economy.

 

[senseamp]

My favorite part is he argues 'Russia is justified in its actions by the German invasion in 1941' and then when you mention the Russian invasion of 2014 he's like 'stop living in the past'.

Justified to do what? Move troops within Russia as it sees fit? I don't think they need a justification to do that.

 

[pmv]

My favorite part is he argues 'Russia is justified in its actions by the German invasion in 1941' and then when you mention the Russian invasion of 2014 he's like 'stop living in the past'.

Those events do differ rather dramatically in scale, so it's not unreasonable to apply different time-scales accordingly.

 

[fskimospy]

Justified to do what? Move troops within Russia as it sees fit? I don't think they need a justification to do that.

And if that's all they do nobody will care! Russia is clearly making threats to its neighbors though and I think since we both agree Russia has exhibited extreme aggression against its neighbors those threats should be taken seriously.

 

[fskimospy]

Those events do differ rather dramatically in scale, so it's not unreasonable to apply different time-scales accordingly.

It is very weird to say that a country should accept a CURRENT, ONGOING INVASION as being something in the past while saying an 80 year old invasion should dominate the discourse.

It's doubly weird to say that to one of the countries that was also invaded by Germany and suffered some of the worst death tolls.

Finally, it's triply weird to say that because if the scale of the trauma is what's controlling here then Ukraine has even more of a reason to resist Russian domination considering the genocide Russia inflicted on them.

 

[IronWing]

Justified to do what? Move troops within Russia as it sees fit? I don't think they need a justification to do that.

So you've decided that Russia's current invasions are not really invasions anymore because no one has chased them out: the Bundy defense written large.

 

[fskimospy]

So you've decided that Russia's current invasions are not really invasions anymore because no one has chased them out: the Bundy defense written large.

Imagine making this argument with a straight face:
'people who think Russia would invade Ukraine are insane and no, the parts it is currently invading don't count.'

 

[senseamp]

And if that's all they do nobody will care! Russia is clearly making threats to its neighbors though and I think since we both agree Russia has exhibited extreme aggression against its neighbors those threats should be taken seriously.

That's all they did and the West is freaking out. No one is invading a country of 40 million with 1M strong army with 100K troops unless the people there want it, which they probably don't anymore. If Putin wanted a bigger invasion, he would have done it in 2014.

 

[Leymenaide]

Had a visit last weekend with a retired Warsaw Pact general. He is a close family member. He said Russia will get Ukraine. Russia will not invade. They will not have to.

 

[fskimospy]

That's all they did and the West is freaking out. No one is invading a country of 40 million with 1M strong army with 100K troops unless the people there want it, which they probably don't anymore. If Putin wanted a bigger invasion, he would have done it in 2014.

So wait are we pretending Russia hasn't been threatening Ukraine this whole time? Are we also supposed to pretend the country currently invading Ukraine should not be taken seriously when it issues new threats?

We do both agree that Russia has a long history of extreme aggression against its neighbors, correct? After all it's not like it's a mystery why Russia's neighbors want to join NATO - it's not to encircle and destroy Russia, it's because Russia has invaded ALL OF THEM in recent history! They are trying to protect themselves from the next Russian attack, not attack Russia.

 

[senseamp]

Imagine making this argument with a straight face:
'people who think Russia would invade Ukraine are insane and no, the parts it is currently invading don't count.'

We all sympathize with the Ukraine. They thought they would gain EU membership, but instead they lost Crimea and gained a separatist conflict. That's a massive case of blue balls. Can't help but feel sorry for them.

 

[fskimospy]

We all sympathize with the Ukraine. They thought they would gain EU membership, but instead they lost Crimea and gained a separatist conflict. That's a massive case of blue balls. Can't help but feel sorry for them.

Is there a reason you insist on incorrectly referring to Ukraine as 'the Ukraine'? It's clear you do it on purpose, but it seems childish and weird.

 

[Brainonska511]

We all sympathize with the Ukraine. They thought they would gain EU membership, but instead they lost Crimea and gained a separatist conflict. That's a massive case of blue balls. Can't help but feel sorry for them.

Fancy way to gloss over how they lost Crimea and got a separatist conflict because Russia invaded Crimea and have sponsored the separatists.

 

[senseamp]

Is there a reason you insist on incorrectly referring to Ukraine as 'the Ukraine'? It's clear you do it on purpose, but it seems childish and weird.

Grammar? The Ukraine means the Borderlands. Or the Buffer Zone, whichever you prefer, but both call for a "the." If the Ukraine spent more time in 90s and 2000s making life better for Donbas and Crimea, instead of renaming stuff and fighting grammar wars, they would be in much better shape now. But it's water under the bridge now.

 

[fskimospy]

Grammar? The Ukraine means the Borderlands. Or the Buffer Zone, whichever you prefer, but both call for a "the." If the Ukraine spent more time in 90s and 2000s making life better for Donbas and Crimea, instead of renaming stuff and fighting grammar wars, they would be in much better shape now. But it's water under the bridge now.

That's improper grammar though as Ukraine is a proper noun, and the name of the country is 'Ukraine' and not 'The Ukraine'. Since your justification for incorrectly using its name was grammatical, I can only assume you're happy to know how to refer to it correctly now, right?

Ukraine or the Ukraine: Why do some country names have 'the'?

As Ukraine prepares to co-host one of football's biggest tournaments, Euro 2012, why do fewer people these days say "The Ukraine"?

www.bbc.com

After all, to insist on calling something by an incorrect name is something small children do and I'm sure we are all above that.

 

[Ajay]

Had a visit last weekend with a retired Warsaw Pact general. He is a close family member. He said Russia will get Ukraine. Russia will not invade. They will not have to.

A bit of expository would be helpful here.

 

[senseamp]

It was dictionary grammar to use "the" until Ukraine started lobbying to take it out in the 90s That was the level of their policymaking. There was talk of going back to historic name recently, but the problem is that name is "Kievan Rus(sia)."🤣
Anyway, you can drop the "the" if you want to.

That's improper grammar though as Ukraine is a proper noun, and the name of the country is 'Ukraine' and not 'The Ukraine'. Since your justification for incorrectly using its name was grammatical, I can only assume you're happy to know how to refer to it correctly now, right?

Ukraine or the Ukraine: Why do some country names have 'the'?

As Ukraine prepares to co-host one of football's biggest tournaments, Euro 2012, why do fewer people these days say "The Ukraine"?

www.bbc.com

After all, to insist on calling something by an incorrect name is something small children do and I'm sure we are all above that.

 

[fskimospy]

It was dictionary grammar to use "the" until Ukraine started lobbying to take it out in the 90s That was the level of their policymaking. There was talk of going back to historic name recently, but the problem is that name is "Kievan Rus(sia)."🤣
Anyway, you can drop the "the" if you want to.

So in other words it hasn't been grammatical in roughly 30 years. Remember, you said the reason you called it 'the Ukraine' was for grammatical reasons. Now that you know that's incorrect grammar can you confirm you will be referring to it correctly from now on? As the article mentions Deutschland means 'German Land', therefore even if you wanted to adhere to your bad grammar it would only make sense to refer to it as The Germany from now on. Because remember, the only thing you care about here is grammar.

I love threads like this where stupid people try and make up some allegedly impartial reason for why they are being shitty, because then you can just take their assertion at face value and watch them twist into knots defending it instead of just admitting they are being shitty.

 

[Ajay]

OMG, this thread has gone so far off the rails with people responding to sensamp's bizarre logic. Please stop feeding the troll. He's not going to change. It's like trying to reason with that someonesmind guy.

 

[senseamp]

So in other words it hasn't been grammatical in roughly 30 years. Remember, you said the reason you called it 'the Ukraine' was for grammatical reasons. Now that you know that's incorrect grammar can you confirm you will be referring to it correctly from now on? As the article mentions Deutschland means 'German Land', therefore even if you wanted to adhere to your bad grammar it would only make sense to refer to it as The Germany from now on. Because remember, the only thing you care about here is grammar.

I love threads like this where stupid people try and make up some allegedly impartial reason for why they are being shitty, because then you can just take their assertion at face value and watch them twist into knots defending it instead of just admitting they are being shitty.

It means "the Borderlands" (I'll let you figure out the borderlands of what).
Standard grammar is to use the "the." You can use the new PC grammar, not stopping you.

 

[Brainonska511]

It means "the Borderlands" (I'll let you figure out the borderlands of what).
Standard grammar is to use the "the." You can use the new PC grammar, not stopping you.

Next you're going to tell us how North Korea has a democratic form of government because of its name.

 

[fskimospy]

It means "the Borderlands" (I'll let you figure out the borderlands of what).
Standard grammar is to use the "the." You can use the new PC grammar, not stopping you.

Standard grammar is to treat proper nouns as proper nouns.

Regardless, you aren't even internally consistent. Every country ending in -'stan' means 'land of the', so to consistently follow your rule they should be The Pakistan, The Uzbekistan, The Afghanistan, etc. After all, you wouldn't want to fall victim to PC grammar.

Can you let me know if you will be referring to them as 'The Afghanistan' and such from now on or if you will be referring to Ukraine by its correct name? Since all you care about is grammar and everyone wants to be consistent, I'm sure you'll be choosing one or the other.

Alternatively you can just admit grammar has nothing to do with it and prefer to adopt Russian framing of this issue. If you want to keep pretending it's something else I can keep making you look dumb though.

 

[Leymenaide]

Next you're going to tell us how North Korea has a democratic form of government because of its name.

Please this is meant with respect.
Before our time Mykhailo Serhiiovych Hrushevsky wrote The History of Ukraine. He died in 1934. I read it while in university. The Politics of "the" is older than The Soviet Socialist Republic. The history of Ukraine is very complex, and I come down on the side of Ukraine for Ukrainians. I have refused to claim Family villages in Ukraine. It is a minor war in my family. I am an ethnic Pole.
Please read Hrushevsky , it is a good if sometimes Romantic read.

No Central European would put the before Ukraine, unless they are German or Russian fascists.

 

[senseamp]

Standard grammar is to treat proper nouns as proper nouns.

Regardless, you aren't even internally consistent. Every country ending in -'stan' means 'land of the', so to consistently follow your rule they should be The Pakistan, The Uzbekistan, The Afghanistan, etc. After all, you wouldn't want to fall victim to PC grammar.

Can you let me know if you will be referring to them as 'The Afghanistan' and such from now on or if you will be referring to Ukraine by its correct name? Since all you care about is grammar and everyone wants to be consistent, I'm sure you'll be choosing one or the other.

Alternatively you can just admit grammar has nothing to do with it and prefer to adopt Russian framing of this issue. If you want to keep pretending it's something else I can keep making you look dumb though.

Not stopping you from calling the Ukraine "Ukraine." But you seem very obsessed with making sure others use your preferred noun for it. It's not healthy.

 

[fskimospy]

Not stopping you from calling the Ukraine "Ukraine." But you seem very obsessed with making sure others use your preferred noun for it. It's not healthy.

Oh come on, I'm just having some fun with you. Like I said when people transparently lie like you're doing here it's always fun to play a game where you pretend they aren't. Can you confirm you'll be using 'the Afghanistan' from now on as this is purely about grammar?

On a related note it's good insight into your other posts - if you're willing to lie this transparently about something this trivial you're probably lying elsewhere.