Point 1: You trivialized the numerous and complex root causes for the Russian invasion in to a single "all I need to hear" political, low blow.
Point 2: You took the opportunity to lay the blame fully on the POTUS, which again was purely political and not factual.
Commentary: The first was inaccurate, the second wasn't respectful of presently elected officials. But neither bothered me as much as the spirit and timing with which is was posted. I have a problem with political grandstanding during crises, especially when there is an opportunity for national unity. Was I ever tempted to do it myself? Absolutely. Have i done it myself? Sadly yes. Is it easy to do? It literally requires no discernment. Is it moral? Is it beneficial? Is anything honorable about it? Does it reflect the values of SA's? Listen, I admit that I screw up a lot, but I bite my tongue a lot on here. Listening to blatant misinformation over and over, watching the immature comments/reactions, hearing people attack the integrity of top brass generals just because they don't align politically... I filter 99% of it out. And when Trump avoided starting a war with Iran, I credited him for it. Bottom line, I expected more out of all of you, my fellow red, white and blue brothers and sisters - the good guys. And I expect more out of myself.
I knew exactly who you were quoting.
Interesting that you didn't comprehend that I knew exactly what he was saying. And you don't "sling" arrows, fool. (just kidding, sorry.)
Nice. It doesn't matter that I meant to type "flinging" and was also thinking "slings and arrows" and made a typo (or is that a Freudian slip?)...attack!
On the body of your post we will just have to agree to disagree. I understand a bit better the problem you had with the post mentioned, I didn't read it that way and still don't.
If you reference my post it should be clear that I concede that the invasion was likely inevitable, regardless of the POTUS statement. However I also believe it was a terrible statement on our foreign policy,
or rather the wording was extremely unfortunate, even if the sentiment that could be inferred from it I happen to agree with. What I believe POTUS was trying to say is that our response will be proportional to Putin's aggression. But that is not what he said and MANY people in the world thought some version of "oh crap."
Despite what the other guy (not you) said, it is not "naive" to think that Putin pays attention to what our POTUS says. I think it is quite the opposite, I am quite certain he listens very carefully. What is probably naive is thinking that he will comply with what our POTUS says without some extrinsic motivation. Any time a world leader makes a statement it can be expected that it will be used for and against them. The goal should be to maximize the "for" and minimize the opportunities of "against". In other words, when you are in the big chair, it's best to choose your words carefully. Gosh, I am a "fool" for having typed an "s" instead of an "f", think what would be said of POTUS if he did something similar.
My takeaway from THParent's post was different than yours. Putin made what appears to me to be an outrageous statement that they were going in to get rid of Nazism. Potus made a statement that caused an international uproar (for a short time) that it was a green light to Putin. I took THParent's comment as an attempt at levity, a commentary on the ridiculousness of the entire situation. I read it as an attack on Putin that Putin is going to do what Putin is going to do and any crazy reason he can come up with to justify it he will.
You took it as an attack on POTUS. Such is the risk of written communication. Do me a favor, you don't owe me anything but I would appreciate it. Go back and read THParent's post from the perspective I had and see if maybe, possibly you could have got it wrong. Maybe/probably you won't, but it is a worthy mental exercise.
