War with Russia

[Fab Foodie]

@Milzy have you been to Russia?
Do you regularly talk to Russians?

 

[RecordAceFromNew]

I know full well that this is not just a result of simply Russia bad/West good and that more could have been done to calm the situation in Ukraine over the past 15 years or more, especially the last eight, and not encouraging Ukraine's hopes of joining NATO. But there was no realistic likelihood of Ukraine joining NATO despite Ukraine's rhetoric, yet the decision was taken by one person to stop fighting this battle diplomatically and to invade Ukraine, destroying cities, killing thousands of civilians as well as soldiers. If the war is justifiable why is Putin not letting his own people know it is a war and blatantly lying about deliberately targeting civilians.

I support what you say in your final paragraph but note there is no condemnation of the country that decided to stop talking and start the violence and killings.

I also agree with much in that expert assessment you highlighted...especially this paragraph: "Recognizing this possibility does not excuse Moscow’s actions, which are heinous. Nor does it mean Russia’s insistence on regional hegemony is fair or ethical. And ultimately, it is no guarantee that Putin would not have invaded anyway. There are other factors — including, but not limited to, Putin's general anger over Kyiv drifting away from Russian influence and domination and his isolation as a decision-maker — that may have been sufficient to drive the invasion."

You have confused the journalist’s (Aleem) opinion with that of the CIA expert’s (Beebe). The quote contains all the self-serving speculations used by the West to cloud the fundamental reason – the one repeatedly warned by leading experts over decades, which lays the cause/blame at US/NATO's door. Ex post evidence is Russia's consistent demands for a neutral buffer zone, in which US/NATO/Ukraine not only chose to ignore, but fanned the flame instead.

Nevertheless, not only do I condemn Russia for unspeakable brutality in their current illegal war, it is also their mistake for failing to combat kleptocracy / corruption post USSR, squandering the nation’s endowment – Ukraine MIGHT have been less polarised otherwise, and conflicts avoided. But just condemning Russia, like some are doing in this parish, is distasteful IMHO, because:

a) the wall to wall coverage and condemnation of Russian atrocities has highlighted the hypocrisy of many engaging in it - the sufferings of the Palestinians, Iraqis, Libyans, Afghans, Yemenis etc. have resulted in no equivalent outcry, support for refugees, calls for war crime prosecution, coordinated sanctions etc. Why the difference? To be brutally honest - those victims aren't "white" "like us".

b) the murderous atrocities referred to in a) are all facilitated if not initiated by the leading nation that calls for Russia/Putin's incarceration, while this nation remains no less belligerent around the world.

To put it simply, when a pot calls a kettle black, and when everyone joins the pot to call the kettle black, do you just go with the flow? If you read widely, you would find my sentiment far from extreme/rare outside the West (where only c12% of global population resides). This, e.g., is from one of India’s most popular, if not most popular, political tv programmes. It is loud, chaotic and not exactly to my taste, but it gives you the gist.

If anybody thinks avoiding laying blame squarely on the US is of little consequence, they are badly mistaken - how US is demonising and openly "containing" China’s peaceful rise is history repeating itself, except it can really lead to WW3. I would expect legitimate and effective ways for nations to change another’s behaviour are competent respectful diplomacy, and being a better if not a shining example yourself. US have been exercising the polar opposite, and I see zero sign for change any time soon.

Looking forward, history tells us:

1) Hostile invasions/occupations aren’t sustainable - see Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan by both Russia and US etc. Russia in Ukraine (except for Crimea and the East) will be the same.

2) Sanctions don't work - they harden the target regimes and hurt their citizens instead - see N Korea since 1950, Cuba since 1960, Iran since 1979, Russia since 2014. But since Russia hold some important cards per below, this time round Europeans might end up more hurt than Russians.

3) Megaphone diplomacy, coercion / belligerence don't work - they alienate and unite the target's people instead. Examples are all the past events in 1) and 2).

Apart from Europe’s obvious dependence on Russian energy, the war is already causing shortages and huge price increases of grains, fertilisers and various essential minerals globally (despite economy the size of Spain, Russia+Ukraine are #1 or #2 world exporters of the above). Continued conflict is expected to result in mass starvation, riots and refugee influx from Egypt and Africa etc. within months, to add to perhaps 22 million Ukrainians refugees (c50% of population, using Syrian civil war as proxy) flooding into Europe, to add to rising inflation and shortages, hurting the poorest everywhere who have yet to recover economically from Covid. This will likely lead to radicalisation of politics that would make Brexit, some say catalysed by a million Poles, looks like a teddy bears’ picnic in many countries.

I suspect Europe/UK, not to mention Ukraine, will live to deeply regret they didn’t do more to ensure Ukraine remaining neutral in a proxy war between two brutal world military powers, a choice which would have had no detriment to Ukraine’s economic development, integrity and sovereignty.

Is Zellensky seriously suing for peace? I see zero evidence of that. Why would he? His adoring audience is cheering him on!

 

[Rusty Nails]

You have confused the journalist’s (Aleem) opinion with that of the CIA expert’s (Beebe). The quote contains all the self-serving speculations used by the West to cloud the fundamental reason – the one repeatedly warned by leading experts over decades, which lays the cause/blame at US/NATO's door. Ex post evidence is Russia's consistent demands for a neutral buffer zone, in which US/NATO/Ukraine not only chose to ignore, but fanned the flame instead.

Nevertheless, not only do I condemn Russia for unspeakable brutality in their current illegal war, it is also their mistake for failing to combat kleptocracy / corruption post USSR, squandering the nation’s endowment – Ukraine MIGHT have been less polarised otherwise, and conflicts avoided. But just condemning Russia, like some are doing in this parish, is distasteful IMHO, because:

a) the wall to wall coverage and condemnation of Russian atrocities has highlighted the hypocrisy of many engaging in it - the sufferings of the Palestinians, Iraqis, Libyans, Afghans, Yemenis etc. have resulted in no equivalent outcry, support for refugees, calls for war crime prosecution, coordinated sanctions etc. Why the difference? To be brutally honest - those victims aren't "white" "like us".

b) the murderous atrocities referred to in a) are all facilitated if not initiated by the leading nation that calls for Russia/Putin's incarceration, while this nation remains no less belligerent around the world.

To put it simply, when a pot calls a kettle black, and when everyone joins the pot to call the kettle black, do you just go with the flow? If you read widely, you would find my sentiment far from extreme/rare outside the West (where only c12% of global population resides). This, e.g., is from one of India’s most popular, if not most popular, political tv programmes. It is loud, chaotic and not exactly to my taste, but it gives you the gist.

If anybody thinks avoiding laying blame squarely on the US is of little consequence, they are badly mistaken - how US is demonising and openly "containing" China’s peaceful rise is history repeating itself, except it can really lead to WW3. I would expect legitimate and effective ways for nations to change another’s behaviour are competent respectful diplomacy, and being a better if not a shining example yourself. US have been exercising the polar opposite, and I see zero sign for change any time soon.

Looking forward, history tells us:

1) Hostile invasions/occupations aren’t sustainable - see Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan by both Russia and US etc. Russia in Ukraine (except for Crimea and the East) will be the same.

2) Sanctions don't work - they harden the target regimes and hurt their citizens instead - see N Korea since 1950, Cuba since 1960, Iran since 1979, Russia since 2014. But since Russia hold some important cards per below, this time round Europeans might end up more hurt than Russians.

3) Megaphone diplomacy, coercion / belligerence don't work - they alienate and unite the target's people instead. Examples are all the past events in 1) and 2).

Apart from Europe’s obvious dependence on Russian energy, the war is already causing shortages and huge price increases of grains, fertilisers and various essential minerals globally (despite economy the size of Spain, Russia+Ukraine are #1 or #2 world exporters of the above). Continued conflict is expected to result in mass starvation, riots and refugee influx from Egypt and Africa etc. within months, to add to perhaps 22 million Ukrainians refugees (c50% of population, using Syrian civil war as proxy) flooding into Europe, to add to rising inflation and shortages, hurting the poorest everywhere who have yet to recover economically from Covid. This will likely lead to radicalisation of politics that would make Brexit, some say catalysed by a million Poles, looks like a teddy bears’ picnic in many countries.

I suspect Europe/UK, not to mention Ukraine, will live to deeply regret they didn’t do more to ensure Ukraine remaining neutral in a proxy war between two brutal world military powers, a choice which would have had no detriment to Ukraine’s economic development, integrity and sovereignty.

Is Zellensky seriously suing for peace? I see zero evidence of that. Why would he? His adoring audience is cheering him on!



View attachment 902

10 days to formulate a response when there's nothing in there that couldn't have been said immediately.
I agree about the difference in responses to this illegal war compared to others where the people are not Europeans, but this thread is about Russia/Ukraine and while hypocrisy is unpleasant it does not kill people.

I agree with your penultimate paragraph especially, but not only, in hindsight, but you spoil your reasonable attempt at a considered response with a clearly biased flight of your own fantasy with that last paragraph. You seem to be falling for the line that as a former actor he cannot be a serious leader. Both sides appear to have red lines in their negotiating stance but do not forget who is the aggressor destroying cities and killing civilians, and who is being asked to give up much of their country and its autonomy.

 

[RecordAceFromNew]

10 days to formulate a response when there's nothing in there that couldn't have been said immediately.
I agree about the difference in responses to this illegal war compared to others where the people are not Europeans, but this thread is about Russia/Ukraine and while hypocrisy is unpleasant it does not kill people.

I agree with your penultimate paragraph especially, but not only, in hindsight, but you spoil your reasonable attempt at a considered response with a clearly biased flight of your own fantasy with that last paragraph. You seem to be falling for the line that as a former actor he cannot be a serious leader. Both sides appear to have red lines in their negotiating stance but do not forget who is the aggressor destroying cities and killing civilians, and who is being asked to give up much of their country and its autonomy.

10 days to formulate a response?

That's funny - unlike you, I don't live in this chatroom.

Zellensky a serious leader? If that was the case, he wouldn't have made so many serious mistakes that led to the destruction of his country and slaughtering of his countrymen - like his predecessors, he literally offered Ukraine up to be the battleground of a proxy war.

Ukraine could and should have stayed neutral, which I believe you confirm would have been the right path given you agree with my penultimate paragraph.

 

[mudsticks]

'Corruption and wrong doing on both sides' is a preposterous misinterpretation of this situation. Equating the flaws of Zelenskiy's government and previous Ukrainian adminstrations with those of Putin's isn't just ridiculous, it's obscene.

It's a bit like Trump saying there were 'fine' people on both sides, when neo nazis drive their cars into a peaceful demonstration in Charlottesville..

@Milzy fwiw I see the neocolonialism propogated by the US and much of the west .
Including the UK too.

Mainly done against against the majority world

I see the US military complex also for what it is, their interference in other sovereign nations is and has in the past been terrible.

I also see human rights abuses in many Asian countries both China, and India for a start.



I see the very different ways in which refugees from war torn parts of the Middle East and Africa are regarded compared with those from Ukraine.

All refugees should be treated as well if not better than those from Ukraine..


I abhor our arms supplies to the Saudis, our colonial past, and a lot of our present day collusion with terrible behaviours happening in the world today

And as for the BBC , yes they have in the past sheltered / turned a blind eye to sex abusers.

So have the church, other parts of the entertainment industry, big business, the army , the police, sports organisations, educational establishments etc etc .

This has happened all over the world.
Women and children particularly, are vulnerable to it everywhere, because they are regarded as being of lesser import .

It's worse in places with very poor human rights records, and poor safeguarding, but it's everywhere.

It mainly comes down to an abuse of power imbalances, greed, ego, and entitlement, and patriachy.


And hoping that others will turn a blind eye, because it's in their interest, so to do..

All this can happen at either a personal or a national level.

But right now Russian troops at the command of Putin, are bombing the bejeesus out of innocent Ukrainian civilians

We can argue about what might or might not have been done politically or otherwise to prevent this brutal invasion.

But there is no doubt in this instance about who is the aggressor, who is aggressed against..

Russian citizens are themselves taking big risks themselves to protest and speak out about this atrocity.

We should recognise their and other Russians sufferings too, and not pretend that it's some kind of 'fair fight'.

 

[Rusty Nails]

10 days to formulate a response?

That's funny - unlike you, I don't live in this chatroom.

Zellensky a serious leader? If that was the case, he wouldn't have made so many serious mistakes that led to the destruction of his country and slaughtering of his countrymen - like his predecessors, he literally offered Ukraine up to be the battleground of a proxy war.

Ukraine could and should have stayed neutral, which I believe you confirm would have been the right path given you agree with my penultimate paragraph.

Given the atrocities that Putin was prepared to unleash it would have been a better path to take. But there is no equivalence in responsibility for the destruction and deaths. That is firmly in the hands of a Russian leadership that felt it had the right to do so on some pretext of its own defence and show of power to his own people.

If Putin's actions within Ukraine and Russia define serious leadership then I am afraid I can never agree with your opinions on Zelensky.

 

[Mr Celine]

RT are real. The BBC full of more false propaganda. The BBC like to cover up for child sex offenders.
I only check to compare like any historians would. You need as many sources as possible to put the right pieces together. You must understand that. I don’t know why you’ve got such a bee in your bonnet. I bet you supported the second gulf war with fake weapons of mass destruction, plus many other U.S U.K illegal wars.

How many years in jail are RT journalists facing if they fail to follow Putin's version of events?

How many years in jail are BBC journalists facing if they fail to follow Putin's version of events?

 

[Milzy]

It's a bit like Trump saying there were 'fine' people on both sides, when neo nazis drive their cars into a peaceful demonstration in Charlottesville..

@Milzy fwiw I see the neocolonialism propogated by the US and much of the west .
Including the UK too.

Mainly done against against the majority world

I see the US military complex also for what it is, their interference in other sovereign nations is and has in the past been terrible.

I also see human rights abuses in many Asian countries both China, and India for a start.



I see the very different ways in which refugees from war torn parts of the Middle East and Africa are regarded compared with those from Ukraine.

All refugees should be treated as well if not better than those from Ukraine..


I abhor our arms supplies to the Saudis, our colonial past, and a lot of our present day collusion with terrible behaviours happening in the world today

And as for the BBC , yes they have in the past sheltered / turned a blind eye to sex abusers.

So have the church, other parts of the entertainment industry, big business, the army , the police, sports organisations, educational establishments etc etc .

This has happened all over the world.
Women and children particularly, are vulnerable to it everywhere, because they are regarded as being of lesser import .

It's worse in places with very poor human rights records, and poor safeguarding, but it's everywhere.

It mainly comes down to an abuse of power imbalances, greed, ego, and entitlement, and patriachy.


And hoping that others will turn a blind eye, because it's in their interest, so to do..

All this can happen at either a personal or a national level.

But right now Russian troops at the command of Putin, are bombing the bejeesus out of innocent Ukrainian civilians

We can argue about what might or might not have been done politically or otherwise to prevent this brutal invasion.

But there is no doubt in this instance about who is the aggressor, who is aggressed against..

Russian citizens are themselves taking big risks themselves to protest and speak out about this atrocity.

We should recognise their and other Russians sufferings too, and not pretend that it's some kind of 'fair fight'.

Excellent post!

 

[Johnno260]

I’d agree with that, that’s pretty much the same as what was said on Russian today this morning. I know it was blocked but is now streaming again.

RT is a state run broadcaster who exclusively show what the state tells them.

If you think they're credible then lol that's hilarious.

 

[stowie]

Zellensky a serious leader? If that was the case, he wouldn't have made so many serious mistakes that led to the destruction of his country and slaughtering of his countrymen - like his predecessors, he literally offered Ukraine up to be the battleground of a proxy war.

Putin wanted to invade Ukraine in order to depose Zelensky and install a Moscow friendly puppet regime. Bear in mind that Zelensky - whatever you may think of him - is a democratically elected leader.

I am not sure what you wanted Zelensky to do under these circumstances.

It has now been reported that the KGB spent billions of USD fostering a "shadow" government in waiting - one can only assume that Putin thought the existing government would be toppled within a few days, a new regime installed and the West would grumble but not do too much. In reality it appears that the KGB "assets" took the money and then didn't enact any part of the plan when the invasion happened, coupled with rumours that much of the money didn't even get to the Ukranian assets in the first place, which sounds entirely plausible - I bet there are some KGB agents with healthy bank accounts.

All in all, this sounds like a gigantic miscalculation by Putin at virtually every decision and the Ukranians are paying for the fact that his ego would prefer every Ukranian city turned to dust rather than lose any face at all.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

The Ukraine

It's just Ukraine, without the definite article.

 

[Milzy]

RT is a state run broadcaster who exclusively show what the state tells them.

If you think they're credible then lol that's hilarious.

They are only about as credible as the bbc.

 

[AndyRM]

They are only about as credible as the bbc.

You'll be telling us next that Al Jazeera is a neutral source I suppose...

 

[mudsticks]

Excellent post!

Thanks..
I'm glad you think so.

Now could you please stop pretending that RT and the BBC are anything like the same, in terms of truth reporting..

BBC may have its flaws but it's journalists are not threatened with prison or worse for reporting on Russian atrocities in Ukraine.

 

[Johnno260]

They are only about as credible as the bbc.

Do the BBC arrest people and threaten them with 15yrs imprisonment?

Sorry but you need to take a long look at how you vet data, from the anti vax thread your citations included:
Sherry Tenpenny "The vaccines make you magnetic"
Thomas Cowan " The heart isn't a pump"

So pardon me if I call into question where you get these claims from.