Latter-day Saint killed in Ukraine

[Dario_M]

Poor guy. I hope he is in heaven right now. 🙏🌈

[Stargazer]

On 11/13/2022 at 5:46 PM, Bernard Gui said:

My dad was busted from corporal to private but exited as a technical sergeant in WW2. He was stationed in Los Alamos as military support for the Manhattan Project. He was not happy to be there because he had signed up to fight, not to babysit guys in white coats and suits. The soldiers did not know what was going on until the bombs ended the war.

An Army during a full-blown war is not an Army of a series of limited wars. Plenty of hard fighters got busted down a grade or two because they were young and wild and didn't tolerate being told what to do, and nothing further happened to them, and many increased in rank again over time. In fact, men were promoted far faster because of casualties, but also because of the way the Army dramatically increased in size over a short time. But once the hard fighting was over, those same guys were no longer tolerated as they had once been. 

As for fast promotions, I got promoted to Sergeant after just 2 years in service, because my speciality was severely short of sergeants. But promotion to the next few grades was going to be slow for various reasons. If I had stayed in, I might have made the Master/First Sergeant grade after maybe 15 more years. But during World War II, Carwood Lipton (of Band of Brothers fame) enlisted in the Army in 1942, and by the end of 1944 had risen to First Sergeant -- and then received a field commission to Lieutenant. If you had demonstrated ability, you rose quickly. But in the peacetime Army, it is easy to not rise at all if you are not demonstrating ability.

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Stargazer

[Dario_M]

Btw... whas this guy a missionairie??? I hope not because in that case he must have been really young. 

 

I feel for all the missionairies anyway. That typ of work is kinda tough. A lot of depression comes involved with that. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

Btw... whas this guy a missionairie??? I hope not because in that case he must have been really young. 

 

I feel for all the missionairies anyway. That typ of work is kinda tough. A lot of depression comes involved with that. 

No, he was a veteran who volunteered to help Ukraine. 

[Dario_M]

5 hours ago, Calm said:

No, he was a veteran who volunteered to help Ukraine. 

Ooh i see. Well anyway.. god bless his soul. 💜✝️✝️✝️

Edited December 19, 2022 by Dario_M

[blarsen]

On 11/12/2022 at 7:32 AM, Stargazer said:

In my case I am a descendant of both invaders and the invaded. My Indian ancestors lived in Northern California when the Europeans came. One of my great great grandmothers, a Maidu woman, married an English-descended man from Vermont.

So I can definitely sympathize with the invadeds. 

But it must be said, that except for those peoples who migrated into areas where previously no humans had ever lived, all of us are descended from invaders. Even my Indian ancestors were invaders: before the Maidu occupied the lands the Europeans found them in, there was an earlier group of Indians there who were either driven out by the Maidu, or who joined the Maidu when they arrived.

Sounds fascinating.  Your GG Grandmother's story sounds very similar to that of Lucy Thompson, a Yurok indian (Lucy Thompson, She-Na-Wah Weitch-Ahwah) living along the Klamath River in southern Oregon.  She had been a Yurok 'Priestess", and married an Anglo, and one of her tribal legends was that when her tribe first moved into the area, they encountered 'white' people, who later left, and the white people claimed that when they first came into the country, there were very large animals roaming around, suggesting Pleistocene mega-fauna.

Her book is:  To The American Indian - Reminiscences of a Yurok Woman, first edition 1916.

Edited January 20, 2023 by blarsen

[blarsen]

On 12/12/2022 at 10:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Poor guy. I hope he is in heaven right now. 🙏🌈

My view is that it is very ill advised to volunteer to fight in this kind of war.  It does seem like the invaders were violating Christian just-war theory, but the situation is quite complicated and not that simplistic, and full or ironies and ambiguities.  But tough to air them in a non-political blog.  For anyone interested in an alternative view, you can get it by reading a lot of the output from Scott Ritter, Gen. MacGreggor, French Lieutenant Colonel Jacques Guillemain; and Dr. John Mearsheimer; etc., etc., etc.

I just hope that the invader doesn't start to feel cornered and lash out w/nukes against us.

Edited January 20, 2023 by blarsen

[The Nehor]

37 minutes ago, blarsen said:

My view is that it is very ill advised to volunteer to fight in this kind of war.  It does seem like the invaders were violating Christian just-war theory, but the situation is quite complicated and not that simplistic, and full or ironies and ambiguities.  But tough to air them in a non-political blog.  For anyone interested in an alternative view, you can get it by reading a lot of the output from Scott Ritter, Gen. MacGreggor, French Lieutenant Colonel Jacques Guillemain; and Dr. John Mearsheimer; etc., etc., etc.

I just hope that the invader doesn't start to feel cornered and lash out w/nukes against us.

You are going to Scott Ritter for alternative views? The sex offender?

Macgregor? The darling of Russian propagandists? Ewwww.

Mearsheimer is one of the weirdos who argues that the US caused the war by “forcing” Russia to act. The problem with this argument is it assumes that the US has agency to act morally or aggressively but when Russia acts aggressively they have no agency. So US assisting Ukraine with its own self-defense is blatant imperialism but when Russia commits acts of genocide it is just a state acting in its own best interests because the US forced them to murder and abduct civilians.

Get out of here with this “both sides” rubbish.

[blarsen]

59 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You are going to Scott Ritter for alternative views? The sex offender?

Macgregor? The darling of Russian propagandists? Ewwww.

Mearsheimer is one of the weirdos who argues that the US caused the war by “forcing” Russia to act. The problem with this argument is it assumes that the US has agency to act morally or aggressively but when Russia acts aggressively they have no agency. So US assisting Ukraine with its own self-defense is blatant imperialism but when Russia commits acts of genocide it is just a state acting in its own best interests because the US forced them to murder and abduct civilians.

Get out of here with this “both sides” rubbish.

Ah Nehor, what I would expect from you:  attack the messenger and black-and-white commentary.  But I love your consistency.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, blarsen said:

Ah Nehor, what I would expect from you:  attack the messenger and black-and-white commentary.  But I love your consistency.

On one side you have a bunch of people who want to commit cultural and literal genocide. On the other side you have people who don't want to be genocided.

So how can anyone tell who is in the right?

Clearly if we turn to those who praise dictators and to pedophiles we can use their brilliant moral compasses to light the way to true understanding.

 

[Dario_M]

5 hours ago, blarsen said:

My view is that it is very ill advised to volunteer to fight in this kind of war.  It does seem like the invaders were violating Christian just-war theory, but the situation is quite complicated and not that simplistic, and full or ironies and ambiguities.  But tough to air them in a non-political blog.  For anyone interested in an alternative view, you can get it by reading a lot of the output from Scott Ritter, Gen. MacGreggor, French Lieutenant Colonel Jacques Guillemain; and Dr. John Mearsheimer; etc., etc., etc.

I just hope that the invader doesn't start to feel cornered and lash out w/nukes against us.

Uhm... i don't understand. 

[blarsen]

12 hours ago, The Nehor said:

On one side you have a bunch of people who want to commit cultural and literal genocide. On the other side you have people who don't want to be genocided.

So how can anyone tell who is in the right?

Clearly if we turn to those who praise dictators and to pedophiles we can use their brilliant moral compasses to light the way to true understanding.

 

You'd have to elaborate on your "pedophile" accusations w/good citations.  Also, you need to focus on their actual arguments instead of simply falling back n ad hominem accusations.  Speaking of which, do you really believe that Zelensky is a paragon of virtue??  If so, not sure what world you are living in.  And BTW, didn't Alma kill you off a long time ago??

And the folks I've cited aren't praising dictators, more like exhibiting real-politic objectivity.  Currently the Russians really think they are fighting NATO, which was their main concern to begin with.  Who exactly is supplying most of the arms and advanced weaponry to the Ukraine??

[blarsen]

11 hours ago, Dario_M said:

Uhm... i don't understand. 

The Russians have elaborated many times about their concern of being surrounded by NATO countries, which are allowed to harbor Nuke batteries, and because of this they have multiple times said they won't tolerate the Ukraine from joining NATO.  Currently they have also stated that they currently feel they are fighting NATO, which is essentially true because NATO countries, mainly the US, is where the Ukrainian are getting their advanced and conventional weaponry and advisors to run them, etc.

They also cite the many pronouncements of key western leaders who have said they want to destabilize Russia and essentially break it up and/or remove its current leaders.

The danger is, that the Russians begin to feel they are cornered and decide to lash out against various NATO countries, especially the US, which would probably involve tactical nukes, at the very least, and possibly targeting what they regard as the head of the snake; namely, NYC and/or Washington DC.  Ask yourself, do you think they blew up their Nordstrom pipe line?  If so, there is a bridge in Brooklyn you may be interested in.

Ignoring Russian arguments for what they are doing could be exceedingly dangerous, in my and many others views.  This large group of people think NATO countries as well as the Ukraine should sit down and start directly talking to the Russians, instead of making threats against them and supplying  weaponry to the Ukrainians.

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by blarsen

[manol]

2 hours ago, blarsen said:

You'd have to elaborate on your "pedophile" accusations w/good citations. 

That was news to me too (I sometimes watch Ritter to get the other viewpoint).  First of many Google hits:

https://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Scott-Ritter-paroled-in-online-sex-case-5936227.php

 

2 hours ago, blarsen said:

Currently the Russians really think they are fighting NATO, which was their main concern to begin with.  Who exactly is supplying most of the arms and advanced weaponry to the Ukraine??

Was the United States fighting the Soviet Union in Vietnam?  Nope.  Nor did we behave as if we were. 

If the Russians honestly think they are fighting NATO, then why are they not interdicting supplies in NATO countries?  Why are they allowing virtually all "enemy territory" sanctuary status?   The answer is, they do not REALLY think they are fighting NATO, nor do they WANT to really fight NATO. 

Imo it makes sense to look at what the Russians (or anyone else for that matter) DO, and not rely only on what they SAY. 

Edited January 20, 2023 by manol

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, blarsen said:

You'd have to elaborate on your "pedophile" accusations w/good citations.  Also, you need to focus on their actual arguments instead of simply falling back n ad hominem accusations.  Speaking of which, do you really believe that Zelensky is a paragon of virtue??  If so, not sure what world you are living in.  And BTW, didn't Alma kill you off a long time ago??

And the folks I've cited aren't praising dictators, more like exhibiting real-politic objectivity.  Currently the Russians really think they are fighting NATO, which was their main concern to begin with.  Who exactly is supplying most of the arms and advanced weaponry to the Ukraine??

I really don’t have to elaborate on the “accusations”. They are on his Wikipedia page, both incidents. I refuse to accept that someone being a pedophile is an ad hominem attack. I don’t listen to pedophiles who want to arbitrate who is morally right in any situation.

Another writes for Russian propaganda outlets.

They aren’t being objective. They are whining that the big mean US “FORCED” Russia to start a genocide as if Putin is some poor victim of US bullying. I am not a fan of US foreign policy in general.

The US and NATO are supplying weapons because Ukrainians want to fight for their continued freedom. Ukraine is hardly a perfect liberal democracy but it is better than living under whatever puppet government Russia would install. They don’t want to be another Belarus. You focus too much on the weapons being given. This is not a proxy war where the innocent locals are suffering because two powers are rattling their sabers like another Vietnam. The Ukrainians want to fight. They want to be free. If the US just giving weapons made people fight our puppet Afghanistan government would have fought the Taliban. Russia argues (falsely) that Ukraine doesn’t have a national history. If they didn’t before they do now. Our fathers who fought off the Russian invaders.

Zelensky has flaws but he is not known for murdering his political enemies like Putin is nor is he running his state with the intent of maintaining a corrupt oligarchy. Using the “he is no angel” argument against the victim to try to absolve Putin and Russia of genocide is morally reprehensible. To be clear what I am saying is that you are morally bankrupt and are giving rhetorical cover to murderers, rapists, and genocidal intentions. You are a terrible person.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, blarsen said:

real-politic objectivity. 

Doesn’t exist. Always sets off a red flag for me when someone claims it does.