Lao Tzu has said: Compare not what is not comparable, lest you mix the sweet apple with the sour orange to make a sweet-and-sour sauce.

But we are larger than atoms. We can look down on them. Ho ho ho you atoms are so small, so inconsequential... (says he while nuclear Armageddon looms)

Since the moment that our lives are limited we tend to see everything with limitations in terms of time, age, ability, understanding, etc...
It can affect us because it shows how weak we are towards universe.
For example: "A trip to Pluto takes 35 years of our life" it is literally a barrier of our capacities and nobody can pursue the trip yet. — javi2541997

It would be a barrier if one wanted to go to Pluto. The motivations for such a trip are unclear to me. I would rather be an eagle, or Superman, or Spiderman (he's funnier) but that too is impossible. It shows how weak I am compared to comic book heroes.

Did they see these thoughts as forming a wall, a barrier? — Art48

Not really. Why would the size of the universe or the duration of a star be seen 'a barrier'? Does size matter that much?

According to the path of science,
The stars are a thousand times
More helpless than you.
-- Omar Khayyam

US involvement in this war is beyond question. — Xtrix

Yes, and it is beyond question that the US is not fighting this war directly. They are not among the belligerants. And therefore they don't have the power to stop this war. That's up to the belligerants.

Coming from someone actively denying US involvement. — Xtrix

That's just not true.

When he withdraws his forces and the country is liberated or when that outcome becomes inevitable, obviously. — Baden

Evidently we're not at this stage yet.

Do try and draw a diagram for a good, productive conversation. That could be loads of fun to see what a serial liar like you put in there.

Can we agree that this is not what an effective defense of a country looks like? At what point does it become a failure to defend? 50% 60% 70% of the infrastructure, the population, what is it? — FreeEmotion

This is not what an effective attack of a country looks like. At what point does it become a failure for the invader? When he invades 5% of the target country at huge loss?

Is that why you are lying on this thread? To protect someone?

Once again, do you agree that we have a duty not to lie?

It's just another case of this childish notion thst we have to pass moral judgement on every fucking thing we say. — Isaac

We have a duty not to lie, in my view. Do you agree?

Peace — Isaac

Peace is generally preferable to war, I agree. The Russians should stop their war of choice ASAP.

While you may be enjoying the spectacle, they are dying and their country is being destroyed. — Baden

I am not enjoying it. Trust me on this.

It has to do with your selective attention to nazis in Ukraine at the expense of nazis in the Kremlin.

What alternative do you have in mind?

So the Soufan centre are propagandists now? What evidence do you have for that accusation? — Isaac

Rather than fighting against neo-Nazis, Putin has been supporting far-right extremists including white supremacists, for years. Russia has nurtured neo-Nazis and used mercenaries and other extremists to wage a separatist war in Ukraine, while also seeking to execute Russian foreign policy abroad, and has deployed disinformation and misinformation tools to manipulate the narratives.

It could be worse. The Russians could have taken Kiev for instance.

The most likely outcome is still Russia forcing Ukraine to capitulate through conventional warfare. That might take a month or a year depending on how much support Ukraine gets, but they're losing the war simply because they're facing a much more powerful opponent — Baden

And I for one wish they keep 'losing' it as effectively as they have so far.

Your delusions are your own. — Xtrix

Unlike your lies, which someone else put in your mouth.

There's hate

We've got more than just love to trade
There's hatred too
It must go out
We must dump it somewhere

JJ Goldman loooooves American music. This is a nice bouncy blue grass / blues on an interesting story.


She had a baby all alone
She made a baby on her own
It was in those crazy years
When dads were out of fashion
Ooh, she made a baby on her own
She chose the father scientifically
For his genes, his astrological sign
Ooh, she made a baby on her own
And she runs all day long
She runs from December to summer
From nanny to babysitter
From diapers to snack time
And she smokes, smokes, smokes even at breakfast

She unmakes her big bed by herself
She lives like in those magazines
Where money and men are facile
Ooh, she makes her bed all by herself
And she runs all day long
She runs from December to summer
The garage, the gym and the blues all alone
And the girlfriends crying for hours on the phone
She assumes, -sumes, -sumes her new femininity
And she runs all day long
She runs from December to summer
From nanny to babysitter
From the diapers to snack time
And she smokes, smokes, smokes even at breakfast

She calls me when she's blue
When she can't sleep
I take her to the movies, I give her hugs
I make her laugh
Am a bit like a big brother, a little incestuous when she wants
And then, her kid is almost my kid
Except he's got blue eyes
She did make a baby on her own

There are shadows in "I love you"
Not just love, not just that
Traces of time that linger
There's a contract in these words
You say love has its language
But words are useless to me
If you need phrases to hold hostage
Like a seal on a parchment...

Then know that I
Know that
Know that I...

There is death in "I love you"
There is "I see only you"
Die to the world, to its poems
To read one's own rhymes only
A dishonest stratagem
These three words do not affirm
There is a question in "I love you"
That asks "do you love me too?"...

Then know that I
Know that
Know that I...

They’re still fighting this war by contributing support. They’re as involved as one can be. — Xtrix

No they are not. The ones that are as involved as one can be are the actual belligerants: Ukraine and Russia.

But “they” don’t have the pull that Big Oil does. — Xtrix

So you agree it's bad for most businesses under the sun. Thank you.

It’s extremely good for business. Take a look at Lockheed stock since the beginning of the war — Xtrix

There are many factors at play here, including I would think the recent contracts for the f-35 in Finland and Switzerland. And that's just one company among zillions.

Another is the fossil fuel industry. They’ve been very happy indeed, now that they can present themselves as heroes. — Xtrix

And everybody else -- all the consumers and companies not selling fossil fuels but buying it -- have to pay them through the nose. How is that good for their business?

There’s no way Ukraine lasts this long without military support, as you know. So yes, the US is also fighting this war. — Xtrix

A little conceptual clarity, please? The US is helping Ukraine fight this war via weapons donations, but the US is not fighting itself directly. It's an important distinction if one wants to avoid WW3.

How long Ukraine could continue fighting without such support is an open question.

The guys in Mariupol are still fighting to this day, after several weeks during which all Western war monitoring sites have reported "Mariupol should fall in the next few days", thus beating all expectations, and they received none of these fancy US javelins, to my knowledge.

We'll leave it there. — Isaac

You're welcome to surrender at any time.

That I'm angry is entirely a fantasy of yours, I — Isaac

Well then, you might wish to tone down the insults.

What interests me here is why, given two reasonable views people could adopt, they choose the one which exculpates the West (mostly their own nations) and puts all agency on Russia (the one nation they have absolutely no say in, nor responsibility for). I find that choice suspicious in motive, but it's still one of the plausible options. — Isaac

And I find your interest in blaming the West suspicious, when the topic is a war started by Russia. It's quite bizarre. People are not 'putting all agency on Russia'. Rather, Russia objectively started this war and can stop it. That's a fact that we simply recognize, not a choice we are making. The US or the UK cannot stop this war because they did not start it and do not fight in it.

n that respect, it seems the difference of opinion is over whether 'giving in' to Putin's bullying is going to cause more suffering long-term, or whether a long drawn-out war followed by crippling debt would.

But that's just exactly the contrast I've been pointing to for the last 200 pages. Apparently it makes me a Putin apologist, because it seems concern for the well-being of ordinary folk has to take second place to flag waiving for the 'goodies'. — Isaac

Why do you behave so aggressively then, if we are talking of a mere tactical difference but agree on the goal? Why are you so angry at folks who think that giving in to Putin would create more suffering than resisting him? It's a perfectly valid opinion, no?

There's a fourth option you forgot to mention: The US and Europe supply weapons, intelligence, political and media support to Russia in its war against Ukraine. It ought to be mentioned as the fastest way to bring this war to a close, even though it would be a catastrophy for the world.

Not so farfetched, when you think of it. President Trump would have supported Putin.

They have no interest in a negotiated settlement. This war is good for business, and so there's little chance the US will allow Putin any kind of path to save face. — Xtrix

For one, Putin can find in him the strength to make peace, irrespective of the US. He doesn't need the support of the US to do so.

For two, so can Zelensky. If he wants to go for peace, the US can't stop him. Sorry to break it to you but your country is not that powerful anymore.

For three, I don't know where you've seen that the war is good for business. Inflation is already here. Global recession awaits us after the Russian debt default.

What lesson do you derive from your 'historical context', pray tell?
— Olivier5

That the United States has a major role to play in this conflict, historically and currently -- and are, as usual, making things worse by rejecting peace negotiations. — Xtrix

How is the US 'rejecting peace negotiations'?

Define 'nazi'.

I do read it.

I expected some level of moral understanding, some level of understanding of pragmatic hard choices, but this thread is just as bad as any Reddit thread on the subject. — Christoffer

I used to think so but I then checked on the corresponding Reddit thread, and found it better than here...

As I pointed out already, history is relevant to the present IFF you can derive a lesson from it applicable in the present. Otherwise it's water under the bridge. What lesson do you derive from your 'historical context', pray tell?

Mods have been wallowing in low quality themselves on this thread, and have consistently played the anti-NATO flute. Disappointing.

My advice to you, Stench, and to the other Kremlinophilic idiots here, is to stop lying. Try a little intellectual rigor and honesty for a change. Otherwise don't bother with engaging others.

A minimum level of intellectual honesty would be required for an average conversation, not to mention for a philosophical one, and Isaac has proven many times that he lacks any of it. He just another compulsive liar. They keep coming. I don't know where they make them.

But what we're being asked here to accept, by ssu, @SophistiCat, @Christoffer et al, is that all that just happened by chance, just dumb luck. — Isaac

That's a lie.

The US has the best bombs.