On Tuesday, March 1, 2022 at 10:18:28 PM UTC, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> Al Kamista vient de nous annoncer :
> > On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 6:11:04 PM UTC-5, ixion
> > martin - GdBx wrote:
> >> Krishna Raja Nadar a exprimé avec précision :
> >>
> >>> Russia OUT
> >>
> >> Absolutely scandalous !
> >
> > I am conflicted about this too. It seems that FIFA has
> > caved-in to the (predominantly) Western rage towards this
> > invasion. Where is the line drawn? Should Saudi Arabia be
> > also banned for its campaign in Yemen? Israel for its
> > apartheid policies? Should the US/UK have been banned for
> > their illegal invasion of Iraq?
> If you ban Russia for what happens now, yes, you should ban
> Saudi Arabia, Israël and you should have banned UK and US (and
> even France, too).
>
> Football uncluded FIFA had until now the quality not to do
> politics. Now, they definitively lost all their credibility.
>
> --
> Ixion

It's a fair point to note that other nations who in the past carried out hostilities toward other countries weren't banned from football. However, two wrongs don't make a right. Just because we didn't seize the opportunity to ban countries for military aggression in the past doesn't mean we should have our hands tied from doing the right thing today.

Instead of trying to find injustices in the treatment of Russia compared to past treatment of other nations, let's view the Russian ban as a start of a new chapter, the marking of a new standard. If, in a few months time (say) the USA illegally invades Canada for no justifiable reason, then I agree they should be banned too.

Finally, you suggest that sport and politics don't mix. I'm not sure this was ever the case, but where a country illegally invades another sovereign country and goes beyond the standard rules of engagement to shelling and bombing civilians, then I'm afraid every representative of the aggressor country is going to be viewed from a political lens and the Russian football team, whether playing under the Russian flag or that of the Russian Football Union, are no exception. In all walks of life Russia is being sanctioned for its actions in Ukraine and football should be no different.

Let us not forget that Ukraine could yet qualify for Qatar 2022. Had Russia not been banned, how could you expect Ukrainian players to play in the same tournament as the nation bombarding their country and killing their civilians? If they were to both progress far enough into the tournament you can only keep them apart so long.

RM

Dans son message précédent, Michael Falkner a écrit :
> On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 7:21:34 AM UTC-8, ixion martin
> - GdBx wrote:
>
>> UEFA should draft the next admissible team in the Nations
>> League so Hungary if I am not wrong.
>
> That would have to be done quickly to allow for the
> assemblage of the squad.

Sure.

--
Ixion

Michael Falkner wrote:
> Let me be clear on one thing:
>
> If this goes where I think it's going, that we won't be having a
> Qatar 2022 in November and December will be the LEAST of our problems.

True. But I'd like to think it's not going to go *there*!

I'd like to believe that the 'talks' will make some sort of progress
and we can eventually get a ceasefire in Ukraine and then everyone can
then sit back and realise how fucking stupid they have been!

ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
>
> But it is dangerous to judge who is good and who is bad. Some people
> will consider that a part is the good one and other people will
> consider that the opposite part is. What is FIFA, if they want to
> gather all countries in the World, to judge what is good and what is
> bad ?

Clearly not all Russians are bad, (there are Russian people protesting
against the Ukraine invasion in Moscow) and clearly not all Ukrainians
are Saints. But FIFA were left with no choice but to ban Russia as
nobody was going to play them anyway. Poland said they would not play
Russia in their play-off semi-final later this month, before FIFA even
issued their ban.

> I can be the devil's advocate and give some arguments to prove that
> Russia attitude has legitimacy and that Ukrain is the dark side. Off
> course you will say me I am a liar or that my arguments are not good,
> but it is not the purpose.

Not at all, I live in the real world. I know that NATO have been
encroaching in to former Warsaw Pact countries and Russia might have
legitimate concerns. I'm also well aware of the Azov Battalion and the
like in the Ukraine and stuff that's been going on in the Donbas
region, etc... I'm old enough to know nothing is ever black and white.

> And if your ultimate argument

I don't have an ultimate argument. Nobody has said you are wrong. The
position taken by "The West" is not consistent with other localised
aggressions over the years. But in *this* scenario, because of the
possible long-term scenario if the events in the Ukraine escalate, and
the fears of us people living in Europe, sanctioning Russia is the only
realistic option available. The other option could well be World War
III.

What I see happening from all of this is that with a common enemy, the Right wingers and lefties now have a common enemy and will all become friends again, at least for a couple of weeks. This is great for all the Trudeaus and Bidens and Boris'.

The conspiracy theorist in me would like to know who is behind this, I think Oil/gas companies and obviously weapon manufacturers, nothing to do with Russia reclaiming territory or wanting Ukraine resources or Putin going mad. It is always about money.

On Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 5:08:48 p.m. UTC-5, Blueshirt wrote:
> ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> >
> > But it is dangerous to judge who is good and who is bad. Some people
> > will consider that a part is the good one and other people will
> > consider that the opposite part is. What is FIFA, if they want to
> > gather all countries in the World, to judge what is good and what is
> > bad ?
> Clearly not all Russians are bad, (there are Russian people protesting
> against the Ukraine invasion in Moscow) and clearly not all Ukrainians
> are Saints. But FIFA were left with no choice but to ban Russia as
> nobody was going to play them anyway. Poland said they would not play
> Russia in their play-off semi-final later this month, before FIFA even
> issued their ban.
> > I can be the devil's advocate and give some arguments to prove that
> > Russia attitude has legitimacy and that Ukrain is the dark side. Off
> > course you will say me I am a liar or that my arguments are not good,
> > but it is not the purpose.
> Not at all, I live in the real world. I know that NATO have been
> encroaching in to former Warsaw Pact countries and Russia might have
> legitimate concerns. I'm also well aware of the Azov Battalion and the
> like in the Ukraine and stuff that's been going on in the Donbas
> region, etc... I'm old enough to know nothing is ever black and white.
> > And if your ultimate argument
> I don't have an ultimate argument. Nobody has said you are wrong. The
> position taken by "The West" is not consistent with other localised
> aggressions over the years. But in *this* scenario, because of the
> possible long-term scenario if the events in the Ukraine escalate, and
> the fears of us people living in Europe, sanctioning Russia is the only
> realistic option available. The other option could well be World War
> III.

On 2022-03-02 15:08, Blueshirt wrote:
> ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
>>
>> But it is dangerous to judge who is good and who is bad. Some people
>> will consider that a part is the good one and other people will
>> consider that the opposite part is. What is FIFA, if they want to
>> gather all countries in the World, to judge what is good and what is
>> bad ?
>
> Clearly not all Russians are bad, (there are Russian people protesting
> against the Ukraine invasion in Moscow) and clearly not all Ukrainians
> are Saints. But FIFA were left with no choice but to ban Russia as
> nobody was going to play them anyway. Poland said they would not play
> Russia in their play-off semi-final later this month, before FIFA even
> issued their ban.
>
Sure. But with these things there is a lack of consistency. In some
instances in the past when a country refused to play another one for
some reason, it was the country that refused that was banned. Thinking
of the USSR in qualification for WC 1974 (I think that was the one) who
refused to play Chile.

I am not saying that the current decision is not the best one under the
circumstances, just that it is not entirely logical based on precedent.
FIFA has been inventive in the past (having Israel qualify through the
Oceania process at one point). Not sure how they could have solved this
one though.

On 2022-03-02 14:15, Real Mardin wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 1, 2022 at 10:18:28 PM UTC, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
>> Al Kamista vient de nous annoncer :
>>> On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 6:11:04 PM UTC-5, ixion
>>> martin - GdBx wrote:
>>>> Krishna Raja Nadar a exprimé avec précision :
>>>>
>>>>> Russia OUT
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely scandalous !
>>>
>>> I am conflicted about this too. It seems that FIFA has
>>> caved-in to the (predominantly) Western rage towards this
>>> invasion. Where is the line drawn? Should Saudi Arabia be
>>> also banned for its campaign in Yemen? Israel for its
>>> apartheid policies? Should the US/UK have been banned for
>>> their illegal invasion of Iraq?
>> If you ban Russia for what happens now, yes, you should ban
>> Saudi Arabia, Israël and you should have banned UK and US (and
>> even France, too).
>>
>> Football uncluded FIFA had until now the quality not to do
>> politics. Now, they definitively lost all their credibility.
>>
>> --
>> Ixion
>
>
> It's a fair point to note that other nations who in the past carried out hostilities toward other countries weren't banned from football. However, two wrongs don't make a right. Just because we didn't seize the opportunity to ban countries for military aggression in the past doesn't mean we should have our hands tied from doing the right thing today.
>
> Instead of trying to find injustices in the treatment of Russia compared to past treatment of other nations, let's view the Russian ban as a start of a new chapter, the marking of a new standard. If, in a few months time (say) the USA illegally invades Canada for no justifiable reason,

apparently we need to be "liberated"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/02/28/lauren-boebert-canada-liberated-ukraine/

then I agree they should be banned too.
>
> Finally, you suggest that sport and politics don't mix. I'm not sure this was ever the case, but where a country illegally invades another sovereign country and goes beyond the standard rules of engagement to shelling and bombing civilians, then I'm afraid every representative of the aggressor country is going to be viewed from a political lens and the Russian football team, whether playing under the Russian flag or that of the Russian Football Union, are no exception. In all walks of life Russia is being sanctioned for its actions in Ukraine and football should be no different.
>
> Let us not forget that Ukraine could yet qualify for Qatar 2022. Had Russia not been banned, how could you expect Ukrainian players to play in the same tournament as the nation bombarding their country and killing their civilians? If they were to both progress far enough into the tournament you can only keep them apart so long.
>
> RM
>

On 2022-03-03, MH <MHnospam@ucalgary.ca> wrote:
> apparently we need to be "liberated"
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/02/28/
> lauren-boebert-canada-liberated-ukraine/
>
> then I agree they should be banned too.

We don't know how to ban these people without hurting our own freedoms,
or in this case even legal legitimacy. This idiot was put into
Congress by other idiots, and its inability to behave itself in any
reasonable manner, even in Congress, even in the State of the Union
Address, is clear to all who are paying attention.

--
ciao, Bruce

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:01 AM UTC+1, Binder Dundat wrote:
> What I see happening from all of this is that with a common enemy, the Right wingers and lefties now have a common enemy and will all become friends again,
> at least for a couple of weeks. This is great for all the Trudeaus and Bidens and Boris'.
>
> The conspiracy theorist in me would like to know who is behind this, I think Oil/gas companies and obviously weapon manufacturers, nothing to do with Russia
> reclaiming territory or wanting Ukraine resources or Putin going mad. It is always about money.

Are you so brainwashed by capitalism that you cannot imagine people having other motivations?

Ciao,
Werner

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 6:21:25 a.m. UTC-5, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:01 AM UTC+1, Binder Dundat wrote:
> > What I see happening from all of this is that with a common enemy, the Right wingers and lefties now have a common enemy and will all become friends again,
> > at least for a couple of weeks. This is great for all the Trudeaus and Bidens and Boris'.
> >
> > The conspiracy theorist in me would like to know who is behind this, I think Oil/gas companies and obviously weapon manufacturers, nothing to do with Russia
> > reclaiming territory or wanting Ukraine resources or Putin going mad. It is always about money.
> Are you so brainwashed by capitalism that you cannot imagine people having other motivations?
>
> Ciao,
> Werner

Yes I am and unfourtanetly it is usually the case.
Are you so brainwashed by the media that you think this is only about Putin liberating and saving the good people of Ukrania? Or Madman Putin wanting to kill off the good people of Ukrania. There is always far more to the story, which ever one you chose to believe.
At the very least this is about Russia wanting Ukraine's vast agriculture and natural resources, he does not care about repatriating Russians back with Russia, You could have an argument that Hitler went into Poland and Czech to save the German speaking people, but that is not the case now with Putin.

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 5:23:44 AM UTC-8, Binder Dundat wrote:
> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 6:21:25 a.m. UTC-5, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:01 AM UTC+1, Binder Dundat wrote:
> > > What I see happening from all of this is that with a common enemy, the Right wingers and lefties now have a common enemy and will all become friends again,
> > > at least for a couple of weeks. This is great for all the Trudeaus and Bidens and Boris'.
> > >
> > > The conspiracy theorist in me would like to know who is behind this, I think Oil/gas companies and obviously weapon manufacturers, nothing to do with Russia
> > > reclaiming territory or wanting Ukraine resources or Putin going mad. It is always about money.
> > Are you so brainwashed by capitalism that you cannot imagine people having other motivations?
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Werner
> Yes I am and unfourtanetly it is usually the case.
> Are you so brainwashed by the media that you think this is only about Putin liberating and saving the good people of Ukrania? Or Madman Putin wanting to kill off the good people of Ukrania. There is always far more to the story, which ever one you chose to believe.
> At the very least this is about Russia wanting Ukraine's vast agriculture and natural resources, he does not care about repatriating Russians back with Russia, You could have an argument that Hitler went into Poland and Czech to save the German speaking people, but that is not the case now with Putin.

On 2022-03-01, Al Kamista <alkamista@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 6:11:04 PM UTC-5, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
>> Krishna Raja Nadar a exprimé avec précision :
>>
>> > Russia OUT
>>
>> Absolutely scandalous !
>
> I am conflicted about this too. It seems that FIFA has caved-in to
> the (predominantly) Western rage towards this invasion.

Poland, Czechia and Sweden have refused to play Russia. In this
situation you can either ban Russia, or give them a free pass into the
World Cup. In the latter case, you'll have a World Cup with Russia and
Serbia as the only UEFA sides. Good luck with that.

And yes, Europeans care more about a conflict in Europe, than about
some remote conflict, where none of the parties will appreciate
intervention anyway.

> Where is the line drawn?

Where a sufficiently large group of countries care about it being
drawn.

> Should Saudi Arabia be also banned for its campaign in Yemen? Israel
> for its apartheid policies? Should the US/UK have been banned for
> their illegal invasion of Iraq?

If Israel is your human rights bar, there won't be much left of CAF and AFC.

MH wrote:
> On 2022-03-02 15:08, Blueshirt wrote:
> > ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> > >
> > > But it is dangerous to judge who is good and who is bad. Some
> > > people will consider that a part is the good one and other people
> > > will consider that the opposite part is. What is FIFA, if they
> > > want to gather all countries in the World, to judge what is good
> > > and what is bad ?
> >
> > Clearly not all Russians are bad, (there are Russian people
> > protesting against the Ukraine invasion in Moscow) and clearly not
> > all Ukrainians are Saints. But FIFA were left with no choice but to
> > ban Russia as nobody was going to play them anyway. Poland said
> > they would not play Russia in their play-off semi-final later this
> > month, before FIFA even issued their ban.
>
> Sure. But with these things there is a lack of consistency. In some
> instances in the past when a country refused to play another one for
> some reason, it was the country that refused that was banned.

There is no consistency with past events, there isn't any argument
about that. Things seemed to have changed in the world though and the
current trendy word is "sportswashing".

Here's a link to an article today in The Irish Times. I'm sure our RSS
comrade ixion martin will find it interesting...

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/history-will-judge-the-ioc-and-fifa-as-hypocrites-complicit-in-sportswashing-1.4817525

On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 5:25:28 PM UTC-5, Jesper Lauridsen wrote:
> On 2022-03-01, Al Kamista <alka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 6:11:04 PM UTC-5, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> >> Krishna Raja Nadar a exprimé avec précision :
> >>
> >> > Russia OUT
> >>
> >> Absolutely scandalous !
> >
> > I am conflicted about this too. It seems that FIFA has caved-in to
> > the (predominantly) Western rage towards this invasion.
> Poland, Czechia and Sweden have refused to play Russia. In this
> situation you can either ban Russia, or give them a free pass into the
> World Cup. In the latter case, you'll have a World Cup with Russia and
> Serbia as the only UEFA sides. Good luck with that.

Boo fucking hoo.

66 countries boycotted the 1980 Olympics to protest Russia's invasion of Afghanistan and 14 Eastern Bloc countries boycotted 1984 in retaliation. Both games went ahead. Granted they missed many top athletes but the IOC stood its ground, and rightly so.

The great irony of course is that the US led the 1976 boycott just a few short years after setting Vietnam on fire.

Just like the Western rage today, when in 2003 US-UK-Spain-Poland all went their merry way after invading Iraq. Hell, war criminal GW Bush even got reelected.

>
> And yes, Europeans care more about a conflict in Europe, than about
> some remote conflict, where none of the parties will appreciate
> intervention anyway.
> > Where is the line drawn?
> Where a sufficiently large group of countries care about it being
> drawn.

But it's not a matter of how many here, but rather of whom. Might does not make right.

> > Should Saudi Arabia be also banned for its campaign in Yemen? Israel
> > for its apartheid policies? Should the US/UK have been banned for
> > their illegal invasion of Iraq?
> If Israel is your human rights bar, there won't be much left of CAF and AFC.

Thank you for agreeing with me. The line is so subjective that sporting bodies should stay out of the matter entirely.

Jesper Lauridsen a émis l'idée suivante :
> On 2022-03-01, Al Kamista <alkamista@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, February 28, 2022 at 6:11:04 PM UTC-5, ixion
>> martin - GdBx wrote:
>>> Krishna Raja Nadar a exprimé avec précision :
>>>
>>>> Russia OUT
>>>
>>> Absolutely scandalous !
>>
>> I am conflicted about this too. It seems that FIFA has
>> caved-in to the (predominantly) Western rage towards this
>> invasion.
>
> Poland, Czechia and Sweden have refused to play Russia. In
> this situation you can either ban Russia, or give them a free
> pass into the World Cup.

Rules are rules.
If teams refuse to play, Russia has a free pass and other teams
are banned for next edition.

> In the latter case, you'll have a
> World Cup with Russia and Serbia as the only UEFA sides. Good
> luck with that.

What is the problem ?

> And yes, Europeans care more about a conflict in Europe, than
> about some remote conflict, where none of the parties will
> appreciate intervention anyway.

Absolutely irrelevant. FIFA is not Europe.

>> Where is the line drawn?
>
> Where a sufficiently large group of countries care about it
> being drawn.

OK. Si why not refereering depending of the team ?

>> Should Saudi Arabia be also banned for its campaign in
>> Yemen? Israel for its apartheid policies? Should the US/UK
>> have been banned for their illegal invasion of Iraq?
>
> If Israel is your human rights bar,

There is a lot of countries which will see Israel banned. Maybe
more than countries wanting Russia banned.

> there won't be much left of CAF and AFC.

Exactly.

--
Ixion

Blueshirt a présenté l'énoncé suivant :

> But in
> *this* scenario, because of the possible long-term scenario
> if the events in the Ukraine escalate, and the fears of us
> people living in Europe, sanctioning Russia is the only
> realistic option available. The other option could well be
> World War III.

In football ? Seriously ?
You really think we have the risk of a WWIII if Russia is not
banned from WC ?

--
Ixion

Le 03/03/2022, Werner Pichler a supposé :
> On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:01 AM UTC+1, Binder
> Dundat wrote:
>> What I see happening from all of this is that with a common
>> enemy, the Right wingers and lefties now have a common enemy
>> and will all become friends again, at least for a couple of
>> weeks. This is great for all the Trudeaus and Bidens and
>> Boris'.
>>
>> The conspiracy theorist in me would like to know who is
>> behind this, I think Oil/gas companies and obviously weapon
>> manufacturers, nothing to do with Russia reclaiming
>> territory or wanting Ukraine resources or Putin going mad.
>> It is always about money.
>
> Are you so brainwashed by capitalism that you cannot imagine
> people having other motivations?

People may have other motivations but imagining that Oil/gas
companies and weapon manufacturers may act to ease a big war to
have more money is not out of touch with reality. What is out
of touch with reality is believing that the opposite is
impossible.

--
Ixion

MH a couché sur son écran :
> apparently we need to be "liberated"
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/02/28/lauren-boebert-canada-liberated-ukraine/

Classic american overstatement.
But what happend in Canada is worrisome. Your gouvernant people
are more mad than ours is France which is not a small feat.

--
Ixion

ixion martin - GdBx wrote:

> Blueshirt a présenté l'énoncé suivant :
>
> > But in this scenario, because of the possible long-term scenario
> > if the events in the Ukraine escalate, and the fears of us people
> > living in Europe, sanctioning Russia is the only realistic option
> > available. The other option could well be World War III.
>
> In football ? Seriously ?
> You really think we have the risk of a WWIII if Russia is not banned
> from WC ?

Don't be silly, you know exactly what I mean. Banning Russia is part of
a [supposed] deterrent by "the west" as they are tooth-less in other
ways. FIFA were left with no choice for their part in it, as nations
said they would not play Russia. But even though FIFA were dragged down
that road, it was - and is - the right thing to do.

Ok, I have to believe my conspiracy theory, the Fossil Fuel companies somehow got Russia to invade Ukraine so as to raise the price of gas to the point we are now paying a $1.70 a litre,!!!even though Canada probably does not import a drop of Russian oil. The attacking of Nuclear plants also lends itself to my theory of Fossil Fuel companies behind this, who wants dangerous nuclear power when you can get nice clean safe coal generated power.

Could be an even more sinister organization though, the WWEpl could be behind this. They get Putin to think he needs to invade (probably working closely with the equally sinister big Pharma to make him think he needs to get back his Ukrania), then the rightful public backlash and outrage forces Russian owners to sell and forgive the billions they pumped into the league and they give up a league they essentially made great.
WWEpl was not even a thing before Mother Russia made it big. Yup, the fricking gold diggin mofo WWEPL, I never trusted those guys, you cant walk 3 seconds within a stadium before you are practically forced at gun point to make some ridiculous bet, like who is going to take the first throw in or what minute Timo Werner is going to score, I mean come on, those are impossible bets!

> > You really think we have the risk of a WWIII if Russia is not banned
> > from WC ?
> Don't be silly, you know exactly what I mean. Banning Russia is part of
> a [supposed] deterrent by "the west" as they are tooth-less in other
> ways. FIFA were left with no choice for their part in it, as nations
> said they would not play Russia. But even though FIFA were dragged down
> that road, it was - and is - the right thing to do.

On 2022-03-04 01:16, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> MH a couché sur son écran :
>> apparently we need to be "liberated"
>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/02/28/lauren-boebert-canada-liberated-ukraine/
>>
>
> Classic american overstatement.
> But what happend in Canada is worrisome.

Which part? Certainly it was disquieting that a small minority engaged
in an illegal protest that made no sense (most "lockdown" regulations
are provincial, not federal; US had a cross border vaccine mandate too,
so Canada on its won could have done nothing about that part), and was
tainted by some extremists views and a naive assertion that they could
reverse the result of a democratic election held only months ago, where
most Canadians voted for progressive parties that espoused mandates. (By
asking the GG to dissolve government - not within her power)

But on the other hand, the occasion was largely peaceful, and eventually
resolved. No barricades (other than snow), no setting cars on fire, no
looting,.....

Or are you concerned about the short-lived invocation of our Emergencies
act for the first time ?

Your gouvernant people are more
> mad than ours is France which is not a small feat.

?? Explain.

On Friday, March 4, 2022 at 12:55:10 p.m. UTC-5, MH wrote:
> On 2022-03-04 01:16, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> > MH a couché sur son écran :
> >> apparently we need to be "liberated"
> >> https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/02/28/lauren-boebert-canada-liberated-ukraine/
> >>
> >
> > Classic american overstatement.
> > But what happend in Canada is worrisome.
> Which part? Certainly it was disquieting that a small minority engaged
> in an illegal protest that made no sense (most "lockdown" regulations
> are provincial, not federal; US had a cross border vaccine mandate too,
> so Canada on its won could have done nothing about that part), and was
> tainted by some extremists views and a naive assertion that they could
> reverse the result of a democratic election held only months ago, where
> most Canadians voted for progressive parties that espoused mandates. (By
> asking the GG to dissolve government - not within her power)
>
> But on the other hand, the occasion was largely peaceful, and eventually
> resolved. No barricades (other than snow), no setting cars on fire, no
> looting,.....
>
> Or are you concerned about the short-lived invocation of our Emergencies
> act for the first time ?
> Your gouvernant people are more
> > mad than ours is France which is not a small feat.
> ?? Explain.

Because the CDN govt called on the Emergency act which more or less gives them the ability to do anything they want, including closing your bank account if you donated to the hot tub trucker convoy or arresting you for standing in the wrong place.

To keep this on topic and football relevant, China is banning WWEPL game on tv this week in opposition of the anti Russian measures.

To go back off football, they may want to reconsider what side they support, going by what the media is telling us is happening now.
I would love to see the world boycott China as they did with Russia. Honestly, we need to learn to live with out made in China shit, we wont, but it would really be a good step for society in general. I mean come on, do you need a new phone or tv or laptop every year. I am totally guilty, just ordered a bunch of made in china shit on Amazon. I would buy seed starting heating mats or grow lights if they were made in Canada and pay twice as much as I did for the Made in China shit, but you cant.

On Friday, March 4, 2022 at 12:55:10 p.m. UTC-5, MH wrote:
> On 2022-03-04 01:16, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> > MH a couché sur son écran :
> >> apparently we need to be "liberated"
> >> https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/02/28/lauren-boebert-canada-liberated-ukraine/
> >>
> >
> > Classic american overstatement.
> > But what happend in Canada is worrisome.
> Which part? Certainly it was disquieting that a small minority engaged
> in an illegal protest that made no sense (most "lockdown" regulations
> are provincial, not federal; US had a cross border vaccine mandate too,
> so Canada on its won could have done nothing about that part), and was
> tainted by some extremists views and a naive assertion that they could
> reverse the result of a democratic election held only months ago, where
> most Canadians voted for progressive parties that espoused mandates. (By
> asking the GG to dissolve government - not within her power)
>
> But on the other hand, the occasion was largely peaceful, and eventually
> resolved. No barricades (other than snow), no setting cars on fire, no
> looting,.....

There were some barricades and allegedly someone tried to light a building on fire, though I think that was local people using the situation to their advantage. The protest was always going to be an excuse to have a party after two years of lockdown, which is what this was, I live here I saw it, that is what it was, people re-connecting, the people may not have been my social crowd, but like you said peaceful and fun loving. There may have been some local people and businesses inconvenienced, but the main problem was the image of the street the Parliament buildings are located was closed for Electronic dance music, hot tubs, sauna, street hockey, fireworks and of course, drinking and drugs. It was a big Canada Day party, with no police, run remarkably well in my opinion. They had food stalls and coffee and child day care and all of this done during what is the coldest time of year, any other 3-4 week period would not have been as cold.

>
> Or are you concerned about the short-lived invocation of our Emergencies
> act for the first time ?
> Your gouvernant people are more
> > mad than ours is France which is not a small feat.
> ?? Explain.
France protests a lot more than we do and the govt use strong arm tactics, which for the most part we dont, until we did.

On Friday, March 4, 2022 at 9:13:16 AM UTC+1, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> Le 03/03/2022, Werner Pichler a supposé :
> > On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:01 AM UTC+1, Binder
> > Dundat wrote:
> >> What I see happening from all of this is that with a common
> >> enemy, the Right wingers and lefties now have a common enemy
> >> and will all become friends again, at least for a couple of
> >> weeks. This is great for all the Trudeaus and Bidens and
> >> Boris'.
> >>
> >> The conspiracy theorist in me would like to know who is
> >> behind this, I think Oil/gas companies and obviously weapon
> >> manufacturers, nothing to do with Russia reclaiming
> >> territory or wanting Ukraine resources or Putin going mad.
> >> It is always about money.
> >
> > Are you so brainwashed by capitalism that you cannot imagine
> > people having other motivations?
>
> People may have other motivations but imagining that Oil/gas
> companies and weapon manufacturers may act to ease a big war to
> have more money is not out of touch with reality. What is out
> of touch with reality is believing that the opposite is
> impossible.

So we agree that there are evil people who will literally walk over corpses to
achieve money and/or power, but you find it inconceivable that there are evil
people who will do the same thing because of their worldview?

A desire for historical revenge is a far more powerful motivation than any petty conspiracy
to earn more money . Europeans should know from their own history what it does to the
psyche of a country and its leaders to lose a war, like France after 1870 and Germany after 1918.
It brings out the absolute worst.

In Putin's mind he wants to undo the 'catastrophe' of the Soviet Union's collapse.
He hasn't been secretive about that either.

Ciao,
Werner

On Monday, March 7, 2022 at 6:08:19 a.m. UTC-5, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Friday, March 4, 2022 at 9:13:16 AM UTC+1, ixion martin - GdBx wrote:
> > Le 03/03/2022, Werner Pichler a supposé :
> > > On Thursday, March 3, 2022 at 12:06:01 AM UTC+1, Binder
> > > Dundat wrote:
> > >> What I see happening from all of this is that with a common
> > >> enemy, the Right wingers and lefties now have a common enemy
> > >> and will all become friends again, at least for a couple of
> > >> weeks. This is great for all the Trudeaus and Bidens and
> > >> Boris'.
> > >>
> > >> The conspiracy theorist in me would like to know who is
> > >> behind this, I think Oil/gas companies and obviously weapon
> > >> manufacturers, nothing to do with Russia reclaiming
> > >> territory or wanting Ukraine resources or Putin going mad.
> > >> It is always about money.
> > >
> > > Are you so brainwashed by capitalism that you cannot imagine
> > > people having other motivations?
> >
> > People may have other motivations but imagining that Oil/gas
> > companies and weapon manufacturers may act to ease a big war to
> > have more money is not out of touch with reality. What is out
> > of touch with reality is believing that the opposite is
> > impossible.
> So we agree that there are evil people who will literally walk over corpses to
> achieve money and/or power, but you find it inconceivable that there are evil
> people who will do the same thing because of their worldview?

Admittedly, with Putin targeting civilians, it is looking more like a madman with no agenda outside of death and destruction, but I think there has to be more to the story. Why did he wait until now, would you not want to stop "westernization" early, before people get a taste of western decadence and it is harder to make them go back to waiting in line for a pound of butter or driving a Lada.

>
> A desire for historical revenge is a far more powerful motivation than any petty conspiracy
> to earn more money . Europeans should know from their own history what it does to the
> psyche of a country and its leaders to lose a war, like France after 1870 and Germany after 1918.
> It brings out the absolute worst.

Why target Nuclear Power plants, that not only hurts your victims, but the long (and short) term effects will hurt your side, this is where I can see evil fossil fuels companies somehow being behind this. You have a bunch of people who became rich from Gas, oil or coal and they see that revenue declining, all cars will be electric in 20 years, heat pumps and such will reduce the need for gas and oil heat, so they want to make as much as possible from their resources, before it ends.
If it is simply "historical revenge", I just have to wonder, why now. Is it due to seeing a weakness in the west, is Biden seen as being weak, is the world too woke and that is perceived as the west being weak.

>
> In Putin's mind he wants to undo the 'catastrophe' of the Soviet Union's collapse.
> He hasn't been secretive about that either.
>

That "catastrophe" has made them all rich though, without it they would not have all their yachts, all of London, all of those velvet pictures of Elvis and Dogs playing poker hanging in their mansions. You always have some people who will say things were better before -a lot of East Germans thought that things were better before re unification- but I doubt most Russians want to go back.
It is possible this is just a way for Putin and his cronies to become even more filthy rich and in control, by keeping the populous poor and afraid. If you can go back to Soviet era control of the population while having all the riches, without having to share them with the commoners, that scenario for war would make sense to me, it is just not sustainable in this day and age, nor is it necessary, you just have to follow the American model.

>
> Ciao,
> Werner