[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

In America, when hippies burned their draft cards, we gave them a slap on the wrist. But "in Putin's Russia, draft card burns you."

Or, to be exact, in Putin's Russia hippies get left to starve in a dungeon pit straight out of medieval times:



Friends, I've talked out Jihad-envy before, that embarrassment we all felt as we saw non-Christians being better at Christianity than actual Christians.

Well, just in the last couple of days Putinism has given us, among other things, a beheading video, the order to shoot all prisoners, and an amount of child abductions to make both Boko Haram and Joseph Kony look pathetic.

As someone recently said, "Putin's Russia is just ISIS with vodka", and that has got me feeling something that I will call "Tsar-Envy". I considered "Putin-Envy" but what with Ukrainians now flying drones around in Red Square, I'm not sure Putin will still be alive by the time the term becomes popular.

Scripture on Putinism:

1 Samuel 17:54 teaches us that heroes can heroically carry around severed heads:

As for the castrations, this is repeatedly recommended by Jesus: Mark 9:47, Matthew 18:9, Matthew 5:29, Matthew 19:12.

As for punishing shirkers in pits, well, hell is a pit, though it's hot and Putin's pits are very cold, either way it's close enough.

In Numbers 31:17-18 God commands the killing of prisoners and abduction of kids.

Death by stoning: ( Deuteronomy 21:18-21, Leviticus 24:16, Leviticus 20:27, Leviticus 20:2, Numbers 15:32-36, Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Exodus 21:28, Joshua 7:25, etc.)

As for that thing where they booby-trap children's toys, they mostly do this to teddy bears, meaning that only potential future furries are affected. God hates Furries!

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

It seems the Russians have been able to use attack helicopters properly for the first time in over a year. Ukraine has air defenses that can defeat a volley of hypersonic missiles, yet Russian helicopters are hovering with impunity. Why?

The Ukrainians don't have enough air defense on the battlefield because it's all back defending civilians.

Anyone who payed attention to the War Of Terror knows who won the war, and why. Anyone who hasn't been asleep for the past 2 decades knows by now that only losers use their warriors to shield their civilians, while winners use civilians to shield their warriors.

Putin the genius knew that if he bombed enough playgrounds, maternity hospitals, and flood-rescue workers, Ukraine would all go "white-knight" do-gooder mode and try to rescue their damsels in distress. Losers!

Aiming at Rabbis is always a smart tactic when fighting against Jewkraine:

Also maternity hospitals. Stupid Ukrainians, it only takes 9 months to make a baby, yet it took an entire year of begging to get the handful of western tanks which you've now left unguarded.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Every heard a democrat say "We can't let Trump lose the election, if he's cornered he might go nuclear"? Or how about "We can't let America lose in Vietnam/Afghanistan/Iraq/Detroit, they might nuke the place, causing the rubble to be slightly re-arranged"?

I haven't either, and I'm envious.

The Russians even have better coup-attempts. Over here we have endless hearings trying to figure out whose violent mob tried to overturn whose electoral victory. Blah blah blah.

Meanwhile in Russia if you send tanks full of mutineers to Moscow they call you a traitor a few times, then they cut a deal and everybody moves on with their lives:

[Dr. Anthony J. Toole]

I think the way to understand this is to invoke Rumsfeldian Epistemic Modal Logic: there are known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns. There may also be unknown knowns but if there are I don't know about them, a bit like Trump's secret plan to defeat ISIS. We know it was real - it's a known - but precisely what it was and when it happened is unknown: a unknown known.

A more sophisticated analysis would likely go beyond the interests of the readership here - let's just say it involves known and unknown unknown knowns, and leave the implementation as a homework exercise.

[Johny Joe Hold]

Originally Posted by Dr. Anthony J. Toole

I think the way to understand this is to invoke Rumsfeldian Epistemic Modal Logic: there are known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns. There may also be unknown knowns but if there are I don't know about them, a bit like Trump's secret plan to defeat ISIS. We know it was real - it's a known - but precisely what it was and when it happened is unknown: a unknown known.
A more sophisticated analysis would likely go beyond the interests of the readership here - let's just say it involves known and unknown unknown knowns, and leave the implementation as a homework exercise.

Good analysis, Dr. Toole. President Trump is an expert in both the known unknowns and the general concept of open government which is the known. In the latter, he carefully measures the public to determine the level of unknowns that it can tolerate. When it reaches a certain level of frustration the unknowns need to be shared and made known. I'll explain it this way:

Trump has said more than once he could have prevented Putin's invasion of Ukraine. He had said also he could end it with a phone call. These are clearly known unknowns. He has not nor should not reveal what would be involved in either of these.

On the other hand he has converted known unknowns into knowns. He has done this with the best interests of our country in mind. Several of his staff now say he showed highly classified intelligence documents to visitors in the White House and later in Mara Largo. He did these latter acts because he instinctively knows there is only so much tolerance for unknowns and they need to be made public or known when the right time arrives.

We can thank God for giving us President Trump.

[MitzaLizalor]

This could be one of those rare situations where philosophy is actually some use. Most of its propositions, "gotchas" and so on, were answered two or three millennia ago.

In the Putin/Trump dialectic we have a new role for philosophy and novel elements for it to engage with. Will it be successful? Should we rehabilitate philosophy, even if only temporarily, for this purpose?

Or is it still the junk science we know and contemn.

Ezekiel 21:13, 14

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Director of Russian Orthodox Radio: "Ukrainians are not Christians, but pagans. And we should do to them as in the Old Testament - slit their throats."

[MitzaLizalor]

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ..but if the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is pagan, unseparated from whenever the Italian Orthodox splintered itself off in the then latest schism as Roman Catholics, wouldn't that make the Russian Orthodox pagan too

I am getting very confused.