this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
385 points (91.2% liked)

Memes

45746 readers
1694 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org -2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Point to where it says cedeing territory.

to yield or grant typically by treaty

Ukraine would have promised not to join NATO, and Russia would have withdrawn to its prewar boundaries.

More immediate then dead kids, whatever would that be?

People being kidnapped on the streets and being sent to die.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You have 4 subjects and that sentence doesn't make sense for any of them, can you try it again but you know .. better.

[–] bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Changed one mistake from 'on' to 'and', now it's correct

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

That makes sense for one of those quotes, do you want to link them together into a coherent thought the people that aren't voices in your head can understand as the language known as English. Can we do that?

[–] bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Let me know what exactly from my comment doesn't make sense.
I've just re-read and it seems to be well-formed.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Ok one by one.

Point to where it says cedeing territory.

Did you point to in the previous contextual comment where I said cede territory. I did not at that, I said they would have to cede to Russia as in relinquish sovereign authority by treaty.

to yield or grant typically by treaty

Ukraine would have promised not to join NATO, and Russia would have withdrawn to its prewar boundaries.

That's not me, that's your source. Keep up with the conversation.


^ A page break so you don't sound like a fucking lunatic who can't separate two thought chains.

More immediate then dead kids, whatever would that be?

People being kidnapped on the streets and being sent to die.

So these people, who you have zero firsthand accounts of are more important then not killing kids so a sovereign nation doesn't join NATO as is their right as an autonomous nation.

If I want you to not be such a fucking idiot can I invade your parents home kill your daughter and displace your grandparents? No? Then how the fuck do you excuse Russia doing the same.

[–] bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand what you're saying before the "page break". You asked me to point to where it says Russia would cede territory to the Ukraine. It's in this quote:

Ukraine would have promised not to join NATO, and Russia would have withdrawn to its prewar boundaries.

"withdrawn to its prewar boundaries" - effectively cedeing the territory it captured back to Ukraine. It fits your definition of "to yield or grant typically by treaty".


Then how the fuck do you excuse Russia doing the same.

I never "excused" Russia doing the same. You put words in my mouth again, just like you do for the rest of the conversation.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, read the comment again. I asked you to point out where in my relevant comment the phrase "cede territory" exists. You keep quoting your source, I'm not asking for where in the greater universe the phrase exists but rather one specific and specified place. Please, point it out.

You are. Your dipshit theory is that the invader if offered zero resistance will simply stop invading out of the good of their heart even though but your source the only reason Russia is in the country killing kids is to pressure Ukraine to not join NATO.

If that isn't excusing murderous colonial fucking intent I don't know what is.

[–] bobr@lemmy.libertarianfellowship.org 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I asked you to point out where in my relevant comment the phrase "cede territory" exists

I kinda don't understand what are we even talking about now in this thread, but here is quote of you talking about cedeing.. I guess you're trying to say it wasn't about territory? OK then...

That cedeing to a country

the invader if offered zero resistance will simply stop invading out of the good of their heart

Please stop putting words in my mouth. Quote me where I said that.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You kinda don't understand most things. I'll make it simple, where in my words did I say "cede territory" in that comment. Point even to where the word territory appeared in it.

Ed: I'll help, this comment. https://lemmy.world/comment/11819058

Find "cede territory" or "territory" mentioned at all in that entire comment.

Your plan to stop the war is "stop grabbing people off the street", you say the military is almost all forced fighters and would then flee. If there is no more military how do you expect resistance to be offered? Magic, are we to call Merlin? Dog meat? Pray real hard? What?