BigNote

I think you could do it with a civil suit filed in the appropriate jurisdiction. But IANAL, so that's just a guess. It seems like that's what they did with the guy in New Mexico.

Just read the fucking article. The legal reasoning is pretty clearly explained. You're basically asking people to read it for you.

For most people most of the time it's a perfectly fine quality of life. That said, it's a huge country with tons of variation so if you're looking for bad qualities, there are always plenty of examples to point to.

What pisses me off is that we are nowhere near as good as we could be and as we claim to be. There are some very powerful and objectively evil forces in this country.

Are you not self-aware enough to see how brilliantly you are making their point? This is the tyranny of small differences in action; either you're with me 100 percent, or you are cast out as an unclean bigot. This is why the Democrats are losing the working class that would otherwise be their natural allies. People have been yelling this at you for years, but for some reason you are unable to hear it.

I begrudgingly agree, but with the proviso that I may change my mind later. My problem with the hexbears is that a lot of them are less interested in intellectual honesty than they are in playing stupid word games and bludgeoning other users with walls of text that no one has the time or bandwidth to refute, and dishonestly claiming a lack of response as some kind of moral victory. Many of them are clearly not here in good faith.

Either the quote is applicable or it's not. Sartre's own political leanings have no bearing on that. Are you deliberately ignoring OP's intent because you don't have a response?

You kind of missed the point. Not sure if you did so deliberately or because you are simply obtuse. That's one thing I don't like about you guys; some of you are obviously being intellectually dishonest and playing stupid semantic games, but others seem to actually believe their nonsense, like you going on a rant about Sartre being a Marxist while totally ignoring the context in which the quote is invoked in the first place.

So which is it; are you trying to change the subject for some kind of quick "win," or do you honestly not understand OP's point in citing the quote?

Nonsense. NATO didn't just move into the former Soviet nations and set up shop; to the contrary, NATO expanded specifically at the request of those sovereign nations who knew, better than anyone, that Russia was still dangerous as fuck. To ignore that is to ignore their right to autonomy while hypocritically championing the same right for the Russian speaking population of eastern Ukraine.

That said, it's not my position that relations with post-Soviet Russia could not have been handled better. I simply reject the idea that NATO expansion forced Putin to invade Ukraine.

But your analogy would only be valid if Mexico had asked Xi to build a Chinese military base in Mexico, which they would never do because unlike Russia's neighbors, they're not worried about being invaded by their stronger neighbor.

Whataboutism is the redoubt of the intellectually impoverished and/or lazy.

I like how you take a Russian quote and then try to somehow twist it to be about how Ukraine defines victory. It's a blatantly dishonest bit of casuistry, yet here you are heavily upvoted. It's an unfortunate indicator of the kinds of people populating this thread. We're overrun by idiots and liars.

I'll put it on the giant pile of overconfident predictions about Russian military prowess that we already have. Kiev in 3 days, amirite?