Weapons, poll - Page 13

wollery · 15th May 2022, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Why a sane person would make poison if there is no profit to make with it

I asked you a question a few days ago, but you never answered. I’ll repeat it, because it seems relevant after some of your recent posts, the one above in particular.

Have ever actually met any real, flesh and blood human beings?

Gaetan · 15th May 2022, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by The Man

Of course you can make profit with it, you can take the resources that others have. You continue to fail to understand that getting rid of money does not and can not get rid of profit. As long as people value things one can always profit through such valuations.

So again, Who's going to stop you? Remember, by your own assertions, there are no controls or oversight in your no money world?

Since everything is free that would include the factory to make said "poison".

In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons.

The Man · 15th May 2022, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons.

Again, getting rid of money doesn't get rid of profit. So again, how will weapons and poisons be stopped form being manufactured and marketed?

Foster Zygote · 15th May 2022, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That wasn't posted as a joke.

Well, not intentionally.

Foster Zygote · 15th May 2022, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons.

In your "system", if I work my garden all summer long and produce enough food to can for the winter, if a dozen people come along and ask me for my produce, do I just give it to them?

JoeMorgue · 15th May 2022, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons.

Okay. That gives people who aren't good people a viable reason to treat others well. What's the issue?

Systems where you DON'T have to just trust in the vague, undefined, and unenforceable "kindness of strangers" are BETTER than systems where you do.

bruto · 15th May 2022, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Why a sane person would make poison if there is no profit to make with it

Money or not, there is always profit. Power, enslavement, personal advantage, pleasure....no money is required. Every rapist and every school bully has figured that out.

Gaetan · 15th May 2022, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by bruto

Money or not, there is always profit. Power, enslavement, personal advantage, pleasure....no money is required. Every rapist and every school bully has figured that out.

If you have tools like money and fire arms that ease up crimes you just get more victimes. Healty products in groceries are rare, a lot of poison sold for the goal profit that kill people slowly.

Jack by the hedge · 15th May 2022, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Why a sane person would make poison if there is no profit to make with it

Or bread. Or cars. Or houses. Why would a sane person make anything in your no money world when they gain no benefit for doing so?

Serious question.

Jack by the hedge · 15th May 2022, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Healty products in groceries are rare, a lot of poison sold for the goal profit that kill people slowly.

What do you eat, then? Do you grow your own food?

The Man · 15th May 2022, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

If you have tools like money and fire arms that ease up crimes you just get more victimes. Healty products in groceries are rare, a lot of poison sold for the goal profit that kill people slowly.

As already asked multiple time by Craig4...

Originally Posted by Craig4

Why didn't not having weapons help the people the Russians murdered with their hands tied behind their backs?

Did a lack of firearms help those victims?

Ziggurat · 15th May 2022, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Well, not intentionally.

I don't think it's funny at all. It's sad. Towards the end of the thread, Gaetan says that he's on medication to stop seeing things, but he still believes the things he sees are real.

He needs professional help, and an internet forum debate cannot offer that to him.

JoeMorgue · 15th May 2022, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

What do you eat, then? Do you grow your own food?

I've asked Gaetan what his solution to the "Who will till the soil?"* problem a dozen times across the dozen threads he keeps getting to start that all lead back to the same nonsense. I've never gotten an answer.

https://libquotes.com/aristophanes/quote/lbu9j7i

Gaetan · 21st May 2022, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Or bread. Or cars. Or houses. Why would a sane person make anything in your no money world when they gain no benefit for doing so?

Serious question.

If i wash dishes there is benifit for me as i eat in clean dishes and others, if others do some work as well there is benifit for them and me somewhere.

The Man · 21st May 2022, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

If i wash dishes there is benifit for me as i eat in clean dishes and others, if others do some work as well there is benifit for them and me somewhere.

Responded to in appropriate thread.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post13813047

Gaetan · 22nd May 2022, 05:03 PM

Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war.

Foster Zygote · 22nd May 2022, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war.

If there's a nuclear war, they'd still be ****** even if they weren't on Putin's to do list. Pretty much everyone will be ******.

8enotto · 22nd May 2022, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war.

Being in NATO also means other NATO nations will come to your aid should something bad happen.

Like a Russian invasion maybe? It could be a useful alliance in so many other ways too.

Putzin basically forced four nations on his borders to rethink future national security. They can trust him or try their luck with NATO.
It's not a really difficult choice in light of recent events.

Craig4 · 22nd May 2022, 06:01 PM

As we've seen and you have confirmed, the only way to prevent Russian aggression is to be part of NATO and have an army capable of defending their citizens from Russia. We've seen proof positive that not being part of NATO and not being armed won't prevent Russia from killing you.

Lurch · 22nd May 2022, 08:32 PM

I'm late to this party. Stupid poll is stupid. A hard binary choice on this topic is at the very least impractical because it leaves out the vast middle ground where some nuanced approach can be striven for.

I voted "yes" to be rid of firearms only because my philosophy lies nearer to that end of the restricted spectrum of choice.

In the real world there are valid reasons for people to own firearms. And there are reasonably effective means to greatly reduce gun violence without an outright ban. Other countries do it.

bruto · 22nd May 2022, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by Lurch

I'm late to this party. Stupid poll is stupid. A hard binary choice on this topic is at the very least impractical because it leaves out the vast middle ground where some nuanced approach can be striven for.

I voted "yes" to be rid of firearms only because my philosophy lies nearer to that end of the restricted spectrum of choice.

In the real world there are valid reasons for people to own firearms. And there are reasonably effective means to greatly reduce gun violence without an outright ban. Other countries do it.

Well, considering the source, one would have to wish awfully hard, maybe on a falling star or something, to expect a smart poll.

Crossbow · 23rd May 2022, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war.

If this is actually the case, then you do not have anything to worry about.

Because I expect that anyone who may be seriously involved with the international diplomacy issues of Finland and/or Sweden would quickly determine that none of your the postings that you have made in this thread has any real value to such a person.

Lurch · 23rd May 2022, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war.

In the event of a major nuclear slugfest, it'll not matter that much if one's country is hit directly or not. Civilization will functionally end, and radiation poisoning will take its toll on the survivors in most places. The southern hemisphere might fare not quite so terribly due to the fewer hits there and the slow rate of atmospheric interchange between hemispheres.

Gaetan · 23rd May 2022, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by 8enotto

Being in NATO also means other NATO nations will come to your aid should something bad happen.

Like a Russian invasion maybe? It could be a useful alliance in so many other ways too.

The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?

8enotto · 23rd May 2022, 05:59 PM

Yes, I do think putzin will attack any neighboring nation for fun. He has already made veiled threats to that effect.

NATO is a community of nations dedicated to mutual defence and assistance in some non military things. It benefits it's members with the strength of the group.

Your town or city is a community with pretty much the exact same goals. Should that be considered dangerous too?

arthwollipot · 23rd May 2022, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?

NATO is a defensive alliance. NATO has no interest in threatening Russia.

Sideroxylon · 23rd May 2022, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?

Very few thought Putin was about to attack Ukraine but here we are.

bruto · 23rd May 2022, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?

Backwards as usual.

Craig4 · 24th May 2022, 01:11 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?

Yes.

The Don · 24th May 2022, 01:26 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?

Not for fun per-se, but Russia has a great deal of history attacking adjacent countries when it suits their geopolitical aims.

Finland and Sweden are much less likely to be attacked if they are NATO members and being NATO members may even make it marginally less likely that they would attack Russia because if there was previously a 0.00000000001% chance of a unilateral unprovoked attack, it's now zero.

Crossbow · 24th May 2022, 04:01 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?

You are wrong again.

I do not expect that Putin would attack Finland and/or Sweden for fun.

However, I do expect that Putin would attack Finland and Sweden if he thought that he could do so successfully.

Gaetan · 24th May 2022, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by The Don

Finland and Sweden are much less likely to be attacked if they are NATO members and being NATO members may even make it marginally less likely that they would attack Russia because if there was previously a 0.00000000001% chance of a unilateral unprovoked attack, it's now zero.

The opposite is true, they'll be the first attaked in case of a nuclear war because they are closer to Russian and so a maximum threat.

Gaetan · 24th May 2022, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by Crossbow

You are wrong again.
However, I do expect that Putin would attack Finland and Sweden

And for what reason?

Craig4 · 24th May 2022, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The opposite is true, they'll be the first attaked in case of a nuclear war because they are closer to Russian and so a maximum threat.

This assumes a lot. Why would Russia launch a nuclear attack? Three NATO nations have a survivable counter strike capability.

arthwollipot · 24th May 2022, 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The opposite is true, they'll be the first attaked in case of a nuclear war because they are closer to Russian and so a maximum threat.

In a nuclear war, the first to be attacked will be enemy nuclear powers, because they are the ones that will retaliate. Specifically, the US, UK, and France.

You'd better hope it doesn't come to that.

Sideroxylon · 24th May 2022, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I don't think it's funny at all. It's sad. Towards the end of the thread, Gaetan says that he's on medication to stop seeing things, but he still believes the things he sees are real.

He needs professional help, and an internet forum debate cannot offer that to him.

Thanks for the heads up.

Crossbow · 25th May 2022, 04:33 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

And for what reason?

If you actually bothered to read my entire posting, then you would have your answer.

Foster Zygote · 25th May 2022, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The opposite is true, they'll be the first attaked in case of a nuclear war because they are closer to Russian and so a maximum threat.

In the case of nuclear war, being nuked first is better than being nuked last. It's like when Cthulhu wakes - better to be devoured first.

The Don · 25th May 2022, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by Gaetan

The opposite is true, they'll be the first attaked in case of a nuclear war because they are closer to Russian and so a maximum threat.

Nope.

As has been pointed out upthread by arthwollipot, they won't be the first attacked in the event of a nuclear war.

Given the size and preparedness of their forces and the logistical challenges involved then it's also unlikely that they would be first to be attacked in the event of a conventional war - that dubious privilege would likely go to the Baltic states.

Gaetan · 28th May 2022, 08:23 AM

Originally Posted by Crossbow

You are wrong again.

I do not expect that Putin would attack Finland and/or Sweden for fun.

However, I do expect that Putin would attack Finland and Sweden if he thought that he could do so successfully.

If the Russian would like to attack successfully others countries they could do it with 90% of countries in the world but they don't do so because they are not a threat for them.

Agree	22	32.84%
Disagree	45	67.16%
Voters: 67. You may not vote on this poll

15th May 2022, 09:21 AM	#481
wollery Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs! Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 11,174	Originally Posted by Gaetan Why a sane person would make poison if there is no profit to make with it I asked you a question a few days ago, but you never answered. I’ll repeat it, because it seems relevant after some of your recent posts, the one above in particular. Have ever actually met any real, flesh and blood human beings?
	__________________ "You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad "Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin

15th May 2022, 10:03 AM	#482
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Originally Posted by The Man Of course you can make profit with it, you can take the resources that others have. You continue to fail to understand that getting rid of money does not and can not get rid of profit. As long as people value things one can always profit through such valuations. So again, Who's going to stop you? Remember, by your own assertions, there are no controls or oversight in your no money world? Since everything is free that would include the factory to make said "poison". In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons.
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533

15th May 2022, 10:08 AM	#483
The Man Unbanned zombie poster Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Poughkeepsie, NY Posts: 16,580	Originally Posted by Gaetan In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons. Again, getting rid of money doesn't get rid of profit. So again, how will weapons and poisons be stopped form being manufactured and marketed?
	__________________ BRAINZZZZZZZZ

15th May 2022, 10:08 AM	#484
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 19,899	Originally Posted by Ziggurat That wasn't posted as a joke. Well, not intentionally.
	__________________ Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.

15th May 2022, 10:11 AM	#485
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 19,899	Originally Posted by Gaetan In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons. In your "system", if I work my garden all summer long and produce enough food to can for the winter, if a dozen people come along and ask me for my produce, do I just give it to them?
	__________________ Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.

15th May 2022, 10:18 AM	#486
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 40,791	Originally Posted by Gaetan In a system of money goods and services exist to make profit not because they are good to people, most products are just poisons. Okay. That gives people who aren't good people a viable reason to treat others well. What's the issue? Systems where you DON'T have to just trust in the vague, undefined, and unenforceable "kindness of strangers" are BETTER than systems where you do.
	__________________ "If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

15th May 2022, 10:38 AM	#487
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 32,811	Originally Posted by Gaetan Why a sane person would make poison if there is no profit to make with it Money or not, there is always profit. Power, enslavement, personal advantage, pleasure....no money is required. Every rapist and every school bully has figured that out.
	__________________ I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver) "There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)

15th May 2022, 11:23 AM	#488
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Originally Posted by bruto Money or not, there is always profit. Power, enslavement, personal advantage, pleasure....no money is required. Every rapist and every school bully has figured that out. If you have tools like money and fire arms that ease up crimes you just get more victimes. Healty products in groceries are rare, a lot of poison sold for the goal profit that kill people slowly.
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533

15th May 2022, 11:38 AM	#489
Jack by the hedge Safely Ignored Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 13,611	Originally Posted by Gaetan Why a sane person would make poison if there is no profit to make with it Or bread. Or cars. Or houses. Why would a sane person make anything in your no money world when they gain no benefit for doing so? Serious question.

15th May 2022, 11:40 AM	#490
Jack by the hedge Safely Ignored Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 13,611	Originally Posted by Gaetan Healty products in groceries are rare, a lot of poison sold for the goal profit that kill people slowly. What do you eat, then? Do you grow your own food?

15th May 2022, 11:42 AM	#491
The Man Unbanned zombie poster Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Poughkeepsie, NY Posts: 16,580	Originally Posted by Gaetan If you have tools like money and fire arms that ease up crimes you just get more victimes. Healty products in groceries are rare, a lot of poison sold for the goal profit that kill people slowly. As already asked multiple time by Craig4... Originally Posted by Craig4 Why didn't not having weapons help the people the Russians murdered with their hands tied behind their backs? Did a lack of firearms help those victims?
	__________________ BRAINZZZZZZZZ

15th May 2022, 02:06 PM	#492
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 51,991	Originally Posted by Foster Zygote Well, not intentionally. I don't think it's funny at all. It's sad. Towards the end of the thread, Gaetan says that he's on medication to stop seeing things, but he still believes the things he sees are real. He needs professional help, and an internet forum debate cannot offer that to him.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

15th May 2022, 03:27 PM	#493
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 40,791	Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge What do you eat, then? Do you grow your own food? I've asked Gaetan what his solution to the "Who will till the soil?"* problem a dozen times across the dozen threads he keeps getting to start that all lead back to the same nonsense. I've never gotten an answer. https://libquotes.com/aristophanes/quote/lbu9j7i
	__________________ "If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

21st May 2022, 03:16 PM	#494
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge Or bread. Or cars. Or houses. Why would a sane person make anything in your no money world when they gain no benefit for doing so? Serious question. If i wash dishes there is benifit for me as i eat in clean dishes and others, if others do some work as well there is benifit for them and me somewhere.
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533

21st May 2022, 04:05 PM	#495
The Man Unbanned zombie poster Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Poughkeepsie, NY Posts: 16,580	Originally Posted by Gaetan If i wash dishes there is benifit for me as i eat in clean dishes and others, if others do some work as well there is benifit for them and me somewhere. Responded to in appropriate thread. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...7#post13813047
	__________________ BRAINZZZZZZZZ

22nd May 2022, 05:03 PM	#496
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war.
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533

22nd May 2022, 05:10 PM	#497
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 19,899	Originally Posted by Gaetan Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war. If there's a nuclear war, they'd still be ****** even if they weren't on Putin's to do list. Pretty much everyone will be ******.
	__________________ Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.

22nd May 2022, 05:53 PM	#498
8enotto Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2018 Location: Mexico Posts: 2,511	Originally Posted by Gaetan Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war. Being in NATO also means other NATO nations will come to your aid should something bad happen. Like a Russian invasion maybe? It could be a useful alliance in so many other ways too. Putzin basically forced four nations on his borders to rethink future national security. They can trust him or try their luck with NATO. It's not a really difficult choice in light of recent events.

22nd May 2022, 06:01 PM	#499
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 25,719	As we've seen and you have confirmed, the only way to prevent Russian aggression is to be part of NATO and have an army capable of defending their citizens from Russia. We've seen proof positive that not being part of NATO and not being armed won't prevent Russia from killing you.
	__________________ Fight like a Ukrainian.

22nd May 2022, 08:32 PM	#500
Lurch Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Ottawa Posts: 2,217	I'm late to this party. Stupid poll is stupid. A hard binary choice on this topic is at the very least impractical because it leaves out the vast middle ground where some nuanced approach can be striven for. I voted "yes" to be rid of firearms only because my philosophy lies nearer to that end of the restricted spectrum of choice. In the real world there are valid reasons for people to own firearms. And there are reasonably effective means to greatly reduce gun violence without an outright ban. Other countries do it.

22nd May 2022, 09:02 PM	#501
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 32,811	Originally Posted by Lurch I'm late to this party. Stupid poll is stupid. A hard binary choice on this topic is at the very least impractical because it leaves out the vast middle ground where some nuanced approach can be striven for. I voted "yes" to be rid of firearms only because my philosophy lies nearer to that end of the restricted spectrum of choice. In the real world there are valid reasons for people to own firearms. And there are reasonably effective means to greatly reduce gun violence without an outright ban. Other countries do it. Well, considering the source, one would have to wish awfully hard, maybe on a falling star or something, to expect a smart poll.
	__________________ I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver) "There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)

23rd May 2022, 08:14 AM	#502
Crossbow Seeking Honesty and Sanity Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Charleston, WV Posts: 14,178	Originally Posted by Gaetan Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war. If this is actually the case, then you do not have anything to worry about. Because I expect that anyone who may be seriously involved with the international diplomacy issues of Finland and/or Sweden would quickly determine that none of your the postings that you have made in this thread has any real value to such a person.
	__________________ On 29JUL2022, 'Gaetan' said: "We all know here that the moderators are for the use of firearms and they don't mind if some people recieve a bullet in their head." On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool." A man's best friend is his dogma.

23rd May 2022, 11:44 AM	#503
Lurch Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Ottawa Posts: 2,217	Originally Posted by Gaetan Sweden and Finland voted to be in NATO, these politicians must be corrupted by billions of dollars printed by US national bank because it doesn't make any sense, they'll be on the list to be bombed in case of a nuclear war. In the event of a major nuclear slugfest, it'll not matter that much if one's country is hit directly or not. Civilization will functionally end, and radiation poisoning will take its toll on the survivors in most places. The southern hemisphere might fare not quite so terribly due to the fewer hits there and the slow rate of atmospheric interchange between hemispheres.

23rd May 2022, 04:47 PM	#504
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Originally Posted by 8enotto Being in NATO also means other NATO nations will come to your aid should something bad happen. Like a Russian invasion maybe? It could be a useful alliance in so many other ways too. The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun?
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Last edited by Gaetan; 23rd May 2022 at 04:53 PM.

23rd May 2022, 05:59 PM	#505
8enotto Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2018 Location: Mexico Posts: 2,511	Yes, I do think putzin will attack any neighboring nation for fun. He has already made veiled threats to that effect. NATO is a community of nations dedicated to mutual defence and assistance in some non military things. It benefits it's members with the strength of the group. Your town or city is a community with pretty much the exact same goals. Should that be considered dangerous too?

23rd May 2022, 06:03 PM	#506
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 77,485	Originally Posted by Gaetan The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun? NATO is a defensive alliance. NATO has no interest in threatening Russia.
	__________________ This is Australia. It's possible to start a fire with a lukewarm audience reaction to your standup routine.

23rd May 2022, 06:23 PM	#507
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 26,422	Originally Posted by Gaetan The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun? Very few thought Putin was about to attack Ukraine but here we are.

23rd May 2022, 06:34 PM	#508
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 32,811	Originally Posted by Gaetan The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun? Backwards as usual.
	__________________ I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver) "There is another world, but it's in this one." (Paul Eluard)

24th May 2022, 01:11 AM	#509
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 25,719	Originally Posted by Gaetan The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun? Yes.
	__________________ Fight like a Ukrainian.

24th May 2022, 01:26 AM	#510
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 34,709	Originally Posted by Gaetan The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun? Not for fun per-se, but Russia has a great deal of history attacking adjacent countries when it suits their geopolitical aims. Finland and Sweden are much less likely to be attacked if they are NATO members and being NATO members may even make it marginally less likely that they would attack Russia because if there was previously a 0.00000000001% chance of a unilateral unprovoked attack, it's now zero.

24th May 2022, 04:01 AM	#511
Crossbow Seeking Honesty and Sanity Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Charleston, WV Posts: 14,178	Originally Posted by Gaetan The benefit is for NATO not for Finland and Sweden. Why would the russian bother them if they are not a threat, now they are. Do you think they would attack them for fun? You are wrong again. I do not expect that Putin would attack Finland and/or Sweden for fun. However, I do expect that Putin would attack Finland and Sweden if he thought that he could do so successfully.
	__________________ On 29JUL2022, 'Gaetan' said: "We all know here that the moderators are for the use of firearms and they don't mind if some people recieve a bullet in their head." On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool." A man's best friend is his dogma.

24th May 2022, 05:52 PM	#512
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Originally Posted by The Don Finland and Sweden are much less likely to be attacked if they are NATO members and being NATO members may even make it marginally less likely that they would attack Russia because if there was previously a 0.00000000001% chance of a unilateral unprovoked attack, it's now zero. The opposite is true, they'll be the first attaked in case of a nuclear war because they are closer to Russian and so a maximum threat.
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533

24th May 2022, 05:55 PM	#513
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533	Originally Posted by Crossbow You are wrong again. However, I do expect that Putin would attack Finland and Sweden And for what reason?
Gaetan Suspended Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 4,533

24th May 2022, 07:08 PM	#514
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 25,719	Originally Posted by Gaetan The opposite is true, they'll be the first attaked in case of a nuclear war because they are closer to Russian and so a maximum threat. This assumes a lot. Why would Russia launch a nuclear attack? Three NATO nations have a survivable counter strike capability.
	__________________ Fight like a Ukrainian.