He keeps saying that he thinks the Ukrainians should surrender in order to end the war. That’s basically just endorsing the view that Ukraine is not a legitimate country and has no right to exist
No, it's not 'basically' doing that. It's pacifism, a perfectly rational world view that places human life above politics. You can say that it's wrong that Putin wants to take over Ukraine whilst also thinking it's not worth thousands of deaths to prevent.
I don't like this interpolation that goes on on internet threads - as if you are actively looking for a reason to kick off against someone like some kind of tabloid newspaper. That's a Bush-ist 'with or us or against us' idea, and it stinks.
No, it’s not ‘basically’ doing that. It’s pacifism, a perfectly rational world view that places human life above politics. You can say that it’s wrong that Putin wants to take over Ukraine whilst also thinking it’s not worth thousands of deaths to prevent.
The above is the same thinking that a few countries had in WW2, but in the same manner, if Ukraine were to surrender, Russia were then to put in the puppet government and basically police the area, how many thousands, or even millions do you think might 'disappear'?
I'm not justifying it. I'm explaining it....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60912754 - UK seizes first superyacht in British waters.
Is it just me or has that most definitely got a face?
the biggest one of course being the rise of liberal democracies. The west hasn’t presented even an abstract threat to Russia since the Cold War ended. I think the only explanation that the anti anti-putins apologists can come up with is that the institutions of the west present an existential threat to Putins notion of an historical Russia.
Yes, I think liberal democracies along Russia's western border are antithetical to that notion, and probably other romanticised notions of historical strong leaders (Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great, Stalin)
No, it’s not ‘basically’ doing that. It’s pacifism,
Blaming the crimes of a murderous tyrant on NATO is not pacifism. A pacifist would blame the war and the war crimes on Putin (i.e. the guy who is actually doing the war criming).
Blaming the crimes of a murderous tyrant on NATO is not pacifism.
I don't think that's what he was doing.
Seems the talks have led to a) agreement to back off forces around most areas not in the east of the country and b) pathway to Zelensky and Putin actually meeting...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-60890199
Please tell me that Zelensky will wipe the floor with PooTin on the PR and tactical front, and in front of the worlds cameras.
Hopefully Zelensky can give Putin a gift of his favourite novichok covered door handle.
Yes, I think liberal democracies along Russia’s western border are antithetical to that notion,
They are definitely a threat to his regime. You dont really want your people looking across the border and asking why are those people looking a lot happier and better off than us.
Please tell me that Zelensky will wipe the floor with PooTin on the PR and tactical front, and in front of the worlds cameras.
I dont know about that. His style might be cramped by the full NBC suit that, if I were him, I would be wearing before getting anywhere close to Putin.
Maybe that's what he's afraid of. Domestic propoganda would have to create a whole deepfake version just to air it and they're still running windows XP
PJM1974
I commented at the beginning of this thread that I did not want to interact with Chewkw in any way – this sums up why:
FTFY. He’s just uncritically repeating Putin’s claims.
Be open minded as all perspectives are valid coz that's how I view things anyway. Yes, I see things very differently to "most" perhaps in a "realist" perspective. You have your own perspectives on things which is good to know (general reference to other threads), but that does not mean we have to agree. Clash of perspectives is normal.
Chewkw has a habit of repeatedly parroting what he’s heard on Fox News or read on Breitbart and conflating with reality.
I don't watch American news etc but only BBC and Channel 4 (occasionally ITV) News or perhaps other far east news, which have their own interpretation but certainly not the same. I am just interested in the way the nuclear nations decide and negotiate their way around as the stake is high.
Doesn’t matter whether Ukraine is or is not a real country. Putin/Russia does NOT tolerate NATO in Ukraine and Ukraine has to realise that. This is the red line and Putin/Russia is fighting for their way of life.
That's a direct quote. Seems clear to me that Chewkw is posting from a position of doubt.
From his point of view we’re all Western as hell and we clearly have no idea of how things work in other parts of the world.
Which is a very valid point - we have a very Liberal Western western world view. Doesn't matter if chewkv agrees with it or not, he puts forward an alternative view. His earlier posts pointing out that Putin needs something out of this to "save face" before he can pull back is very true.
Be open minded as all perspectives are valid
They are not. For example, NAZI perspectives have no validity. You can't claim to be a pacifist and say all perspectives are valid because you are acknowledging anti-pacifist perspectives as valid. And you cannot argue that NATO is to blame and also argue that pro-NATO perspectives are valid. That whole relativism thing is just lazy nonsense.
They are not. For example, NAZI perspectives have no validity. You can’t claim to be a pacifist and say all perspectives are valid because you are acknowledging anti-pacifist perspectives as valid. And you cannot argue that NATO is to blame and also argue that pro-NATO perspectives are valid. That whole relativism thing is just lazy nonsense.
I am saying that they exist but we don't have to agree with them regardless of whether they are right or left, right or wrong etc.
Pacifist or anti-pacifist is irrelevant when nuclear powers are engaged in a bit of confrontation. Once nuclear war starts ALL will regret. We are not there yet but we are slowly heading in that direction if not careful.
I am saying that they exist but we don’t have to agree with them regardless of whether they are right or left, right or wrong etc.
Saying they exist isn't the same thing as saying they are valid.
Do you think Nazis have a valid viewpoint?
What do you believe, Chewkw? Is Ukraine a real country or not?
Once nuclear war starts ALL will regret.
Hang on a minute?!
Are the pacifists not granted some kind of immunity?
I agree I’m not sure what Chewkw’s position, and sometimes it seems like he believes in Putins position a bit more than we’d like, BUT this thread would be poorer without his contributions. Admittedly it sometimes gets a bit circular but then we don’t have to respond.
Same goes for Dazh, although I have more sympathy for his positions than Chewie’s!
Once nuclear war starts ALL will regret. We are not there yet but we are slowly heading in that direction if not careful.
We're not going to end up in a nuclear war. Even if Putin's stupid enough to order a launch, which he won't, which nuclear armed country is he going to throw it at, who'd to be stupid enough to retaliate to such obvious provocation.
Seems the Russians are pulling back their troops from the Kiev area, really hope it's not clearing the way to drop some really horrible stuff.
Saying they exist isn’t the same thing as saying they are valid.
Do you think Nazis have a valid viewpoint?
You have to ask them but my assumption is most will see a valid point as they wish to see it themselves. However, I disagree with all on the polar opposite.
What do you believe, Chewkw? Is Ukraine a real country or not?
Ukraine is a real country.
But their nuclear power neighbour is vague on this or has decided they are not.
Sovereign does not come into play when your next door nuclear armed neighbour thinks you are trying to call the "cavalry" to threaten them.
Hang on a minute?!
Are the pacifists not granted some kind of immunity?
We all get vaporised, pacifists or not.
I agree I’m not sure what Chewkw’s position, and sometimes it seems like he believes in Putins position a bit more than we’d like, BUT this thread would be poorer without his contributions.
My position is simple. If NATO/EU keeps pushing east then conflict is inevitable. Smaller nations might just follow suit (join NATO/EU for various reasons) but this time it is nuclear Russia. This is no longer a proxy war fought between NATO/EU and Russia but is now at Russia's doorstep. Push further and we all get vaporised. US might not be in harms way but EU certainly is.
Seems the Russians are pulling back their troops from the Kiev area
Because they're getting the shit beaten out of them, and they need to re-group.
My position is simple. If NATO/EU keeps pushing east then conflict is inevitable.
Nato and EU are very different things.
Nato isnt pushing anywhere. Some countries applied to join because they were concerned about the neighbour with a history of "pushing" places.
Current events indicates they were right to be concerned.
If NATO/EU keeps pushing east then conflict is inevitable
Bring it on, the Russians are currently having their arse handed to them militarily by Ukraine, a country that just 6 years ago didn't really have a military to speak of. I think most European countries are busy redefining their own doctrines in the light of the fact that Russia has been very much revealed, now that the tide's gone out, to be swimming naked.
Thank you Chewkw, I appreciate your response but please understand that until now our forum interactions have been hugely aggravating for me. I have seen you parrot some quite offensive far-right memes and assertions that you yourself have presented as fact, without any critical analysis. I have personal reasons why I find this quite offensive and until your forum behaviour changes in this respect I will choose to avoid interacting with you directly.
FWIW, I have read and agreed with some of the points you've made in this thread but I do hope that you learn to critically appraise some of the language that you post/repeat, as I strongly suspect that you do this intentionally in order to provoke a response, rather than to make a valid point.
Posting on a British forum advocating that Ukraine should roll over and submit a la Czechoslovakia is an absolute no-no though, I'm sure that you would understand why.
But their nuclear power neighbour is vague on this or has decided they are not.
Early on, wasn't the Kremlin showing a map of what Ukraine was nearly 200 years back, surrounded by territories described as being gifted by russia in the intervening centuries? I don't think they've been vague at all. And Putin has not been particularly vague about the break up of the USSR, has he?
We all get vaporised, pacifists or not.
Pfft! In that case, pacifism sounds like a rubbish idea. Surely you'd be miles better off being Mad Vlad McMad?
Push further and we all get vaporised.
Push further where? Your occasional reminder that there have always been NATO countries bordering Russia from the day it was created. That the USA & UK helped Ukraine dismantle its nuclear capability, and send the warheads to Russia. There is no pushing against Russia. Countries want to join NATO, or work with NATO countries, because of Russia pushing into their territory. Countries want to join the EU because of the economic and social advantages (Russia hasn’t been offering them the same, despite the hope of the 1990s that soon they might). What you are saying is don’t resist Russia. Don’t seek close trading or cultural links between countries. Don’t enable free elections. Don’t let countries defend themselves from Russia… because… they have nuclear capabilities.
Ukraine gave up its nuclear capabilities in return for reassurances about not being invaded by anyone, and a whole heap of cash from the USA as a bribe to become “neutral” on the nuclear worldstage. All other nuclear states are looking on now with the knowledge that the disarmament programme has more than stalled, it is going backwards fast. All thanks to one man.
Pfft! In that case, pacifism sounds like a rubbish idea. Surely you’d be miles better off being Mad Vlad McMad?
Mad Vlad LOL! Vlad the Impaler is another Vlad.
I don't think I am a pacifist but certainly not one that think the current situation is easy to comprehend considering the involvement of powerful nuclear nations. This is the first time Russia/Putin felt threaten. i.e. the buck stop at red line Ukraine. Also interesting to see that Russia/China/US/EU/NATO are actively courting nations in SE Asia. Although many SE Asian nations want to remain neutral they are caught in a difficult position of having to choose side. Most non-politicians actually see NATO/US as the aggressor which poses the question of how the future will look like if the world is divided into two.
Do you think Nazis have a valid viewpoint?
You have to ask them but my assumption is most will see a valid point as they wish to see it themselves. However, I disagree with all on the polar opposite.
The question was whether you believe Nazis have a valid viewpoint. Why would I ask Nazis what you believe about them? You know what you believe, just answer "yes" or "no". It's a very simple question.
If NATO/EU keeps pushing east then conflict is inevitable
They haven't pushed east. Russia has pushed neighboring countries and they have turned to NATO for security. The only country doing any pushing here is Russia, they invaded Ukraine and have murdered thousands of innocent Ukrainians. This is not NATO's doing. It's Russia's.
Posting on a British forum advocating that Ukraine should roll over and submit a la Czechoslovakia is an absolute no-no though, I’m sure that you would understand why.
No I don't. Unless you're claiming that because this is a 'british' forum that people should be barred from disagreeing with whatever you think is the 'british' position. That's just ludicrous, and is a good example of what I keep objecting to.
War is complex, tragic and ultimately indefensible. All wars are indefensible. If we take sides then we're simply condoning, prolonging and encouraging them. The only side we should be taking is that of stopping it as soon as possible by whatever peaceful means are necessary.
The only side we should be taking is that of stopping it as soon as possible by whatever peaceful means are necessary.
Putin has no interest in stopping this war. It will not end by peaceful means. It will end when one side is militarily defeated. That's the reality. The best way of ending it quickly is to provide Ukraine with the weapons they need to defeat Russia.
Most non-politicians actually see NATO/US as the aggressor
Bollox.
The only side we should be taking is that of stopping it as soon as possible by whatever peaceful means are necessary.
How do you propose doing that then? Should I get your guitar.....
😀
The question was whether you believe Nazis have a valid viewpoint. Why would I ask Nazis what you believe about them? You know what you believe, just answer “yes” or “no”. It’s a very simple question.
I disagree with the Nazi same as I disagree with CCP. Both are hell bent on seeing their fantasy through and perhaps something not quite right in their minds. Having said that I think I understand their perspectives (understand does not mean I agree) i.e. one race (Nazi) to rule them all and many races (CCP - actually party) to rule them all. At the end of the day both tend to say "do as I say/think or else ...". Both will only accept their own ideological definition and both love to use force directly or indirectly. Valid point refers to the way they manage the situation. i.e. in the case of Nazi they see themselves as the superior apex to rule over others, just like their counterpart CCP who see themselves ruling over others. Their emphasis is mainly, one race(s), one thinking, unity and order (machine like). But we all know that both are living in the dreamland. In their views chaos (individual thinking etc) is to be erased or discouraged.
Most non-politicians actually see
NATO/USRussia as the aggressor
FTFY. It's actually a very simple thing. Russia invaded another country and is deliberately and systematically targeting civilians to try and force a capitulation. Most people can see very clearly that Russia is the aggressor in this.
I disagree with the Nazi same as I disagree with CCP
Then you don't think all viewpoints are valid. Pretty simple really.
No I don’t. Unless you’re claiming that because this is a ‘british’ forum that people should be barred from disagreeing with whatever you think is the ‘british’ position.
I wasn’t replying to you, but FWIW I am trying to find the closest analogy to asking Ukraine to roll over and allow itself to become a Russian puppet state. Perhaps I handled that clumsily, but as a Brit who has worked with and socialised with Czechs and Slovaks, “our” sellout in 1938 still leaves a bitter taste for many. I dob’t believe that we gain anything from appeasing a dictator.
Bollox.
I agree with Gobuchul - Putin’s claim that “NATO is the aggressor” is not widely shared as most people would agree that’s a flimsy pretext for invasion. Putin is the most dangerous politician we’ve seen in Europe since 1945 and his regime should be treated as such.
Then you don’t think all viewpoints are valid. Pretty simple really.
Actually, if view from realist perspective they all exist and valid on their own account (they consider themselves valid) and they will fight over to dominate.
If you have a liberal perspective then one of the core point is individual rights, which should also include rights of those that oppose liberalism is it not? But somehow liberalism has opposed certain ideologies which sounds contradictory.
Maybe I am not frequenting the 'right' news sites, but Putin has been very quiet for the last few days compared to previously? Whereas he was making statements and speeches, now it all seems to be representatives that are presenting opinions and on news channels
