Plan for Peace

a reply to: Faeded

Thanks for your support. More and more, I'm feeling compelled to do #.

Imagine us all knowing the truth, these stupid evil #s, who fell to such small corruption, we learn plan to kill us and see evidence, and have decades of history supporting this case - the government is evil, kills people, because it's "stupid" without or voice, the true democratic will of the people expressed and tallied anyhow, # if i care if drawn in the sand on beaches.

We must see the world after it is enlightened through the lens and power of the true collective, majoritive will. What is the shape of the will of the people, what does it look like on this or that, what compromises would it take to protect what it cherishes most, what risks.

Seriously think about it. What do we all want, the basic human, man and woman, and expect common upon all - the basic measure entitled to the breathing. Then imagine a place where we can see the truth, where it will gather - for there is one true voice and will of the people so will it come from one place - that we will create. 10 million dollars - 20 repectable people - 12 parades of 1 million plus is the price.

It's just too simple - those in light - atleast no starvation. How quickly big # will happen when collected and gathered, this will of the people I so long for to see of any true shape and structure.

If the will of the people is we all die, then I won't resist - it's upon God. But I will fight for there own lives and curse # them for not acting after knowing. It's just so evil to be higher good and not act upon stupid lower evil, for might that be the anti equivalent of evil.

I The buds of the rose

What is the worst case, but to know something is required of us, after learning the truth and seeing the fall. Finding yourself in a place starving, dying after being drafted in world war, seeing nukes go off, or dying slowly after being poisend in every possible way - chemicals, bacteria, etc.

Like, its' what I thought, where my intelligence and heart brought me before it happened, and it happened. For let it happen after we act but fail ,atleast this moment, dying, we won't regret, for knowing and not doing anything to stop it and having it happen to you means one thing - reaping what one sows, and one may do so with inaction.

originally posted by: Grenade
Simpleton bait thread.

Nice catch.

Yo grenade, what ya mean, my idea is simpleton or that dumb dude?

I wish people to tear apart my idea to thrashes and come up with bettter one.

# eers

originally posted by: kwakakev
It is a very noble idea. As for the practical application of such a treaty at this time looks bad. It would take a very powerful and well organized form of global governance to enforce such a treaty. With the amount of disagreements at the UN during these times, it would take an extremely forceful, totalitarian approach to pull it off.

It is not just nation states that are a nuclear threat, but large private and corporate entities with the resources and experience to pull it off. With increasing privatization of the military around the world, it is not just nationalism, but also capitalism that is a driving force of global conflict.

The guys working on the Manhattan project knew once the Genie was out, there was no going back. Knowing all the major cities of the world can all be taken out in just one day is a burden. As for why the guys on the project keep pushing, it has become one tool that has restrained the war machine. It has not stopped all wars, but is a big blockage to any world war scale conflicts kicking off.

In promoting your ideas you do remind me of what the Nordics said to Eisenhower before he signed up with the Grays. It does sound nice. To get there I see two main approaches.

1/ Let all the nukes blow up the world and send it back to the stone age, if anything does survive. That will get rid of the technology and capability to build more nukes.

2/ Just be patient with the UN. At the moment there are too many nut jobs there to take it seriously. Perhaps in time and over more generations a better caliber of people will find there way there and the world will be in a better position to sort its issues out and no longer need the MAD deterrent to stop from going too far.

Thank you for seeing its potential. You are right, a global conglomerate of countries would be sweet, but we really need just one coutry - USA.

There's only one plan for peace I see.

Russia must be totally defeated.

And then the Russian people must be de-Putinized.

Just like the Germans were de-Nazified.

originally posted by: halfoldman
There's only one plan for peace I see.

Russia must be totally defeated.

And then the Russian people must be de-Putinized.

Just like the Germans were de-Nazified.

Russia must be defeated, is yeah, but what if it means nuclear war?

Have you an alternative action of any kind to this, or see any way the dude will fold and go home peacefully looking at the face of defeat. Its nuclear war. As I've said...

You clearly haven't enough knowledge on stuff. spewing propaganda thoughts.

Nuclear war or not, this empire must be defeated.

At all costs.

Because if they rule, life is not worth living.

originally posted by: TTU77
Nato exists because russia has nukes. If russian has no nukes, no need for nato.

No, NATO exists for other reasons. It's a security alliance.

To the OP. Rewarding Russia is the last thing we should do. Ukraine is a sovereign and independent nation who has borders that should be respected.

Disarming Russia of their vast stockpile of nuclear weapons is something that should happen, but it should not be contingent on gaining territory at the expense of another.

a reply to: TTU77

I mean it’s a simple idea and a good one, unfortunately never going to happen.

You’re ok, just this thread was bound to catch the Ukrainian cheerleaders espousing grand ideas from their tiny intellects.

I was complementing you on the bait tbh.

As a birdy once told me about the War in the 1940's ...

"It's not the War we are worried about, it's the peace".

How much # are you accountable for?

Karma never sleeps.

As they say lad, in for a Pound, in for a war crime.

originally posted by: TTU77
Thank you for seeing its potential. You are right, a global conglomerate of countries would be sweet, but we really need just one coutry - USA.

But the current administration will do nothing until near or after the close of the next election cycle.

The Democrat party will need to use this to pin Conservatives and the GOP as pro-Russia.

I'd say prepare for another year of the status quo because that insinuation is just now cropping up in the media, it isn't full force just yet.

a reply to: Grenade

Russia needs to expedite this spacial operations and go ahead and turn it into a war and bring closure to it, Ukraine will not settle because they are being told not to.

It's not about being pro-Russian or pro-Ukraine. let just say it's in our and everyone's best interest to get this business over with.

originally posted by: halfoldman
There's only one plan for peace I see.

Russia must be totally defeated.

And then the Russian people must be de-Putinized.

Just like the Germans were de-Nazified.

No, no and no.

They deserve to live, if you say you do.

Give them secure peace, with no more nato encrouchment, or NUCLEAR WAR.

Tssh Tosh, putin supporter -- right

Dude, let them have it - no nato - okay, i'm sure our lives will go on, buch much better the same.

Ha - So you advocate them to step down, but they stepped up because they feel they can't. Nor can Europe consider seeding any territory to them - on both sides is a no go.

These cards on the table are disatrious - and we have Biden and Obama to blame.

This is all looking bad - like deliberate sabotage from all parties -- and those twits behind them.

Seriously, must thing outside the box...

originally posted by: iamthevirus
a reply to: Grenade

Russia needs to expedite this spacial operations and go ahead and turn it into a war and bring closure to it, Ukraine will not settle because they are being told not to.

It's not about being pro-Russian or pro-Ukraine. let just say it's in our and everyone's best interest to get this business over with.

At the start of the war, I was like, yeah, Russian wins... how could it not. It failed.... #, way worse situation.

Must look at the eyes of Europe - Nato - # what anyone else says. nato equals russia --- having nukes.

The enemy is on both sides. It is afar and it is near for neither care about the end point not nearly enough as they should, or possibly can. Simple minds

originally posted by: iamthevirus

originally posted by: TTU77
Thank you for seeing its potential. You are right, a global conglomerate of countries would be sweet, but we really need just one coutry - USA.

But the current administration will do nothing until near or after the close of the next election cycle.

The Democrat party will need to use this to pin Conservatives and the GOP as pro-Russia.

I'd say prepare for another year of the status quo because that insinuation is just now cropping up in the media, it isn't full force just yet.

No no no and no. There will never be a message come forth as this from MSM or any other source - the degredation we are within is beyond boundaries and precedent since the creation of the USA -- but certainly not beyond the precedent of history itself. Same old #.

What do you have it mind - you say politics won't grab this idea. That's the point. So help. How?

originally posted by: halfoldman
As a birdy once told me about the War in the 1940's ...

"It's not the War we are worried about, it's the peace".

How much # are you accountable for?

Karma never sleeps.

Wtf this even mean bro. Not worry about war - killing people - but peace - never sleeping?

Explain

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: TTU77

I mean it’s a simple idea and a good one, unfortunately never going to happen.

You’re ok, just this thread was bound to catch the Ukrainian cheerleaders espousing grand ideas from their tiny intellects.

I was complementing you on the bait tbh.

It is simple and good and a hella of an oppurtunity for gods sake. But it needs support. A kind word like placing a hand on something precious.

You must believe. Haha, just stole Ugua from Kung fu Panda - # you for making me

Nothing comes easy, times are bleak - to turn our dreams into reality requires support and motivation. Even though you might not believe, if you even hope such a thing to be worthy and good.

Does anyone else feel the dire straight situation we are in. Look toward the future taking into the geopolitical situations.

A BIGGER PIECE NEEDS TO MOVE ON THIS CHESSGAME ON EARTH or very bad stuff. Something amazing happens, or something happens in future time, as our conciousness fades slowly in the moments of death, thinking I should have tried something...

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: TTU77
Nato exists because russia has nukes. If russian has no nukes, no need for nato.

No, NATO exists for other reasons. It's a security alliance.

To the OP. Rewarding Russia is the last thing we should do. Ukraine is a sovereign and independent nation who has borders that should be respected.

Disarming Russia of their vast stockpile of nuclear weapons is something that should happen, but it should not be contingent on gaining territory at the expense of another.

Security alliance against what? Russia Dude. Whatever it was meant to be, and turned into, it is towards russia. And russia is a paper tiger without nukes. The aliance is against massive destruction. No MD no need for Nato.

That is the point - there is no such thing - as gaining territy in a world with nuclear weapons, especially not in Europe from a fallen Soviet Russia. Nor is Nato upon the doorsteps of Russia.

So both of these are impossible - any peace treaty without addressing both - means nuclear war, or a prolonged expansion from either side, which leads to it.

originally posted by: TTU77
Security alliance against what? Russia Dude. Whatever it was meant to be, and turned into, it is towards russia. And russia is a paper tiger without nukes. The aliance is against massive destruction. No MD no need for Nato.

NATO is a security alliance which should be able to collectively deal with any security threat. It is not an alliance that exclusively faces Russia. It's just that at the minute, the biggest ongoing threat to Europe and members of NATO is Russia.

originally posted by: iamthevirus
a reply to: Grenade

Russia needs to expedite this spacial operations and go ahead and turn it into a war and bring closure to it, Ukraine will not settle because they are being told not to.

It's not about being pro-Russian or pro-Ukraine. let just say it's in our and everyone's best interest to get this business over with.

Not in the best interests of Moldova and other former Soviet States who might be next in line, though?