War with Russia

[Rusty Nails]

Because U.S. foreign policy achieves devious ends without outright war it's easier to forget its effects. There was a fair bit of press coverage of the Ukraine 'coup' in 2014. Not the same degree of outrage we have now, but certainly enough to cast doubt on Ukraine's democratic credentials. Have you heard the news about refugees of colour being denied exit by Ukraine's border guards? The whole thing stinks on both sides.

And Russia does not influence the government or elections in other countries? Of course it does and it has a history of violent invasions, not just in the past but more recently. It hasn't exactly been helping negotiations or sitting idly by in Syria/Aleppo recently. Yes, it is terrible if refugees of colour are being denied exit by Ukraine's guards, but why are there refugees in the first place if not to escape the killing of civilians by Russian troops. Russia was in absolutely no danger from Ukraine but decided that war was necessary, so a sense of perspective might help.

Badly made borders and failed treaties (like Minsk) are the cause of so much tragedy.

Of course that is true and it is sad that both sides seemed to undermine it, but the real tragedy is when unjustified invasion and war is considered more important than continuing to work on the treaty.

Putin is an evil piece of work. However he has done what he said he would, on the whole, faced with NATO expansionism. NATO expansionism is not a feasible policy, neither is it ethically conscionable.

That's OK then, war is somehow more acceptable if it was threatened in advance. NATO is not a perfect organisationt, but it is predominantly a defensive organisation formed to counter the real threat from Russia in the past. This action, and the threats by Putin, make countries across Europe, especially those bordering Russia even more nervous about them and is pushing them even more urgently to join NATO, thus increasing the expansionism. As far as I am aware none of these countries, either in or wanting to join NATO, are actually threatening Russia or its sovereign territory, but apparently having the means to defend your country is seen as a threat by the country that spends a huge amount on its own armed forces and weapons of war, plus sponsoring cyber warfare against its "enemies".

Putin is indeed an evil piece of work and it is sad that their political systems allow such a man almost total power in perpetuity, as they have done previously in their history.

 

[qigong chimp]

What would be the legal implications of setting up a gofundme page or equivalent to beef up the rather trifling bounty on Putin being offered by that rich Russian bloke?

 

[mudsticks]

A friend, whose professional life involved Putin-watching, notes the drastic change in his appearance and manner over time. There's speculation that he is not at all a well man.

He's clearly not a well man.

Invading other peoples countries and instructing your army to murder innocent civilians, whilst pulverising their cities doesn't speak of any kind of 'wellness'.

Although it's been done repeatedly in history - not least by the UK.

Nor does despotic rule over your own country people, for that matter.

But hey , there's still plenty that will 'worship' those 'strongmen' bully types with their general bellendary..

I wish they'd go out of fashion - for ever..

What would be the legal implications of setting up a gofundme page or equivalent to beef up the rather trifling bounty on Putin being offered by that rich Russian bloke?

Oh he'd love that wouldn't he..

Eternal martyrdom for Mother Russia..
In his crazy vision of the world


In reality his ego will need some kind of 'off ramp' as the yanks are calling it, I f were going to 'deescalate'

Sticks in the craw to offer that of course , but I suspect he'd rather take the whole planet down with him, rather than admit he was wrong..

We've all come across macho.men who would literally rather die than admit they're wrong..
Right ??

Putin's that 'on steroids'..

Whether or not he's 'actually' on steroids or not..

 

[Milzy]

Orders to Shoot at civilians trying to flee even if you have agreed an safe coridor, ordering to shot at your own solders if they help civilians instead of shooting them..
What ever it is he has i hope it takes him soon at of action in terms of being able to ''rule'' the country and then kills him very painfully and slowly..

You’ve been watching way too much main stream media.

 

[farfromtheland]

A friend, whose professional life involved Putin-watching, notes the drastic change in his appearance and manner over time. There's speculation that he is not at all a well man.

Syphilis would be my guess.

And Russia does not influence the government or elections in other countries? Of course it does and it has a history of violent invasions, not just in the past but more recently. It hasn't exactly been helping negotiations or sitting idly by in Syria/Aleppo recently. Yes, it is terrible if refugees of colour are being denied exit by Ukraine's guards, but why are there refugees in the first place if not to escape the killing of civilians by Russian troops.

We can iterate almost endlessly the historical context of this war. Did we care that much about Syria though, or did our media present its plight with outrage?

Russia was in absolutely no danger from Ukraine but decided that war was necessary, so a sense of perspective might help.

Some danger I think, with the possibilty of 'colour revolutions' being fermented closer to Moscow. No-one wants their neighbour to build an arsenal either.

That's OK then, war is somehow more acceptable if it was threatened in advance. NATO is not a perfect organisationt, but it is predominantly a defensive organisation formed to counter the real threat from Russia in the past.

Not acceptable but predictable. I think presenting NATO primarily as a defensive safety mechanism is a little disingenuous. Perspective cuts both ways. I think Biden would have agreed not to countenance Ukraine joining NATO had he not been under political pressure at home, and I can't see how this would have been a bad thing.

This action, and the threats by Putin, make countries across Europe, especially those bordering Russia even more nervous about them and is pushing them even more urgently to join NATO, thus increasing the expansionism. As far as I am aware none of these countries, either in or wanting to join NATO, are actually threatening Russia or its sovereign territory, but apparently having the means to defend your country is seen as a threat by the country that spends a huge amount on its own armed forces and weapons of war, plus sponsoring cyber warfare against its "enemies".

As the west is imposing strong sanctions now, could we not imagine such sanctions could have been deployed if necessary anyway, and the NATO issue not been escalated?

Putin is indeed an evil piece of work and it is sad that their political systems allow such a man almost total power in perpetuity, as they have done previously in their history.

Both Russia and the US have regimes close to the extreme of the political spectrum in terms of monolithic power structures, even if the nominal head of state changes in the US. The US right wing is more sophisticated. It operates through more devious channels.

Perhaps the Russian tragedy is in having transitioned from monarchy to republic without questioning its father complex.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Nor am I, yet another reason why I would avoid trying to "diagnose" Putin (or anyone else) from a few minutes TV viewing.

Mrs @BoldonLad was prescribed steroids for a health condition, thankfully, all fixed now, and, again, thankfully, she did not have a side effect which caused her to wage war on a neighbouring Country.

Well, there's anabolic steroids and diabolic steroids....

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Here's a bit of a resumé of recent events:

 

[matticus]

Well, there's anabolic steroids and diabolic steroids....

Is this from a musical? Something by Rogers and Hammerstein maybe? Or a Mel Brooks one?
Damn, it sounds so familiar ...

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

You’ve been watching way too much main stream media.

Nope have been following it from very close, last time i watched main stream media was about a year ago. It's also widespread, Russia shot at it's only solders during the winter war and Russia's track record with killing civilians is well known, ask the Syrians if you can find them alive.

 

[newfhouse]

Well, there's anabolic steroids and diabolic steroids....

Not to mention bisturbile cranabolic amphetamoids.

 

[Ian H]

Daily Mash comments:

View: https://twitter.com/thedailymash/status/1501512280235823108?s=19

 

[Ian H]

You’ve been watching way too much main stream media.

I know. It's sad isn't it, all these long-established professional news outlets taken over by aliens & reptilian overlords.

 

[icowden]

Daily Mash comments:

View: https://twitter.com/thedailymash/status/1501512280235823108?s=19

I also enjoyed:

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/poli...itain-is-imposing-on-oligarchs-20220307218197

 

[Rusty Nails]

We can iterate almost endlessly the historical context of this war. Did we care that much about Syria though, or did our media present its plight with outrage?

There was plenty of outrage at both Assad and Russia over the atrocities in Syria. Not as much as this current atrocity for two main reasons.
1. Syria is not on our doorstep and was not threatening to use nuclear weapons. It is sad, but true, that human nature is more able to minimise or ignore the effect of atrocities that occur far away.
2. The Russian bombing in Syria was at the request of the leadership of that country and, while extremely evil, was not in the same league as invading and waging war in a neighbouring sovereign country.

Some danger I think, with the possibilty of 'colour revolutions' being fermented closer to Moscow. No-one wants their neighbour to build an arsenal either.

Where is ”closer to Moscow”? Do you mean in Russia itself or neighbouring sovereign countries? The “danger” to Russia was that successful neighbours breaking away from or ignoring Russian influence could show its own subjects that there is an alternative.

Not acceptable but predictable. I think presenting NATO primarily as a defensive safety mechanism is a little disingenuous. Perspective cuts both ways. I think Biden would have agreed not to countenance Ukraine joining NATO had he not been under political pressure at home, and I can't see how this would have been a bad thing.

It was vanishingly unlikely that Ukraine would have joined NATO while there was any trouble within Ukraine and while it could have exacerbated the antagonism.
Some continued diplomacy would clearly have been better, but it was almost impossible for NATO or the US to accept a demand from Russia under threat of war.
NATO is primarily a defensive safety mechanism and increasingly being seen as that by Russia’s smaller neighbours. If your use of the term ‘disingenuous’ implies that I am being somehow dishonest in my answer then I strongly disagree with your opinion.

As the west is imposing strong sanctions now, could we not imagine such sanctions could have been deployed if necessary anyway, and the NATO issue not been escalated?

Yes that could, and probably should, have happened, but I believe Russia was set upon this action for a long time, even using Aleppo as practice for its military forces.

Both Russia and the US have regimes close to the extreme of the political spectrum in terms of monolithic power structures, even if the nominal head of state changes in the US. The US right wing is more sophisticated. It operates through more devious channels.

Perhaps the Russian tragedy is in having transitioned from monarchy to republic without questioning its father complex.

We can argue ad infinitum over how extreme, on either side, the regimes of Russia and the US are, but the facts that not just the head of state but the governing party can and does change regularly, and that opposition politicians are not routinely killed or jailed, is an important difference between the two. Unless you believe there is no difference between a Democrat or Republican led US.

The mother/fatherland issue is important as is the fact that Russia immediately replaced one type of autocracy with another where the people were seen as just part of the state and not trusted with the sense or power to participate in a democracy or to choose the regime they wanted.

 

[Unkraut]

Is anybody else bothered by the Polish govt wanting to donate old Soviet Migs to the Ukraine to give them the ability of fight back in the air? I don't know if the ruse to get them to the Ukraine via sovereign US territory at Ramstein air base will really work, and am inclined to hope the Americans don't go along with it. Considering Putin's state of mind this could be massively destabilising and lead to the war spreading if Putin takes reprisals against Poland.