ctk you’d think he’d address the far right in his own capital before sending troops into a war.
Are we sending arms to the Russian far right?
I'm sure it will be fine though. I can only think of a few times it's gone wrong and caused untold deaths and misery.
let’s dismiss anyone who questions any aspect of the western narrative
It’s the same old stuff. Putin claims that other countries forming alliances to prevent Russia taking them by force means it’s necessary for him to take a country by force. Whether that’s echoed in the South Africa Guardian or on Fox News, or RT, it’s the same excuse. Blaming resistance to Russian military aggression for Russian military aggression.
You’ll need to give me and all the reason why you think NATO hasn’t caused problems by expanding right up to the Russian border
Given the destruction that's been waged on southern Ukraine by Russian troops that are there to "rescue" Ukrainians from a "Nazi and Drug riddled fascist government", Given that only yesterday Lavrov even said that "Russia doesn't invade other countries", and that Russian definitely hadn't "Invaded Ukraine"
And you're still banging the ant-NATO drum? You still think that Western Imperialism is to blame for what's going on right now?
That Guardian article writes about "Russian intervention" rather that "Russian invasion". That tells me all I need to know about the author and their agenda.
Blaming resistance to Russian military aggression for Russian military aggression.
It's the geopolitical equivalent of the "slut was asking for it" defence.
Why are some people unable to cope with the slightest element of nuance or seeing things from any other perspective? It's rather bizarre.
That Guardian article writes about “Russian intervention”
Exactly how we framed the invasion of Iraq.
You’ll need to give me and all the reason why you think NATO hasn’t caused problems by expanding right up to the Russian border
Because Russia invaded Ukraine, not NATO. NATO didn't expand, countries joined it. Ukraine didn't join NATO so the NATO expansion excuse isn't relevant there. Russia invaded Ukraine because it wanted to, NATO didn't force it to.
Exactly how we framed the invasion of Iraq.
Who is "we"?
Some global perspective (which will go down like a lead balloon here no doubt).
Strangely one of the articles, from RSA, quoted actually states
“ … Yes, the West’s response to Putin reeks of selective outrage and double standards. Simultaneously, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is an unjustifiable and illegal onslaught on a sovereign state.”
“
Media outlets like even the famously progressive Guardian have also paid far less attention to the shockingly racist treatment of African nationals stranded in Ukraine than one might expect, perhaps because it muddies the highly one-dimensional portrait of Ukraine in vogue at the moment as a country populated exclusively by noble heroes.
There is no possible justification for much of this, but there are some reasonably valid reasons for the seemingly disproportionate volume of media coverage. One is the prospect of nuclear war, which should terrify us all. Another is the fact that South Africa is already feeling the impact of the conflict in practical ways — namely, the rising prices of petrol and food. As much as South Africa might not want to get involved, we are already affected.”
“
In a statement released by the Jacob Zuma Foundation on Sunday night and attributed to Zuma himself, the former president wrote that he had always known Putin to be “a man of peace”.
This is a simply ludicrous statement from anyone who has kept even half an eye on global news over the past two decades, let alone from a former head of state.”
“ Putin’s legacy will, in fact, be one of a regime steeped in violence: whether taking the form of brutal crackdowns on protest and dissent internally or in its actions abroad. In attacks on Georgia and Crimea, the targeting of civilians has been standard for Russian troops. In Syria, the Syrian Network for Human Rights reports that Russia has killed more people than Isis, burning civilians alive in densely populated neighbourhoods and using chemical weapons against children.
Although Zuma making false claims in public is no longer remotely surprising, the brazenness of this particular position must legitimately raise questions about whether Zuma, and other ANC leaders, might owe far more to Russia than just historical gratitude. DM”
Doesn’t seem that perverse a view.
But yes, let’s dismiss anyone who questions any aspect of the western narrative as a lackey of Putin.
You can read any number of articles that condemn western hypocrisy in any UK newspaper or news channel, and you can't be massively defensive about an article that concentrates on countries like North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, and China. all of which are autocratic dictatorships and have a vested interest in spinning the story to fit their own national interests.
Given also the recent reports of softening relationships between Maduro and Biden (oil), It'll be interesting to see if the Venezuelan press narrative changes over time.
Exactly how we framed the invasion of Iraq.
Who’s the “we” here? UK media/press definitely referred to the war in Iraq. And the second Iraq war.
And both those wars had vocal opposition across western media/press.
Important to remember that only the dominant western narrative counts for anything. As you were.
I see you haven't been paying any attention to the thread then? Plus also feel free to be as condescending as you please as if every one apart from you is unable to roam the internet to find other narratives and seek out other opinions, how utterly predictable of you.
Important to remember that only the dominant western narrative counts for anything.
You have a healthy and questioning distrust of our media and press. Wise. You need to apply that to the press in other countries as well, especially when they are in China, Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba etc.
How utterly predictable. Important to remember that only the dominant western narrative counts for anything. As you were.
The only narrative that counts at the moment is that thousands of Russian troops are in Ukraine shelling and bombing cities. Untold thousands of innocent Ukrainians have already died, been wounded, or displaced. This was on Putin's orders. It will not stop until the Russians have been defeated or Putin gives the order for them to withdraw.
NATO didn't invade Ukraine or Russia. Ukraine isn't shelling it's own cities or building WMDs, etc. This is what Russia did on Putin's orders.
Leaving right and wrong aside for one minute it was certainly foreseeable that Russia would have a hissy fit as former Warsaw pact countries turned westward but what should have NATOs policy? Let Russia roll into these countries and put their missiles closer to Poland?
From the South African President:
Amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine, President Cyril Ramaphosa has reaffirmed his commitment to further develop bilateral relations with Russia.
Ramaphosa called Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday.
He said in a tweet that he had wanted to "gain an understanding of the situation that was unfolding between Russia and Ukraine".
"I outlined our position on the conflict that has unfolded as well as our belief that the conflict should be resolved through mediation and negotiation between the parties and - if need be - with the help of agencies that can help bring a solution to the conflict," Ramaphosa said on his Twitter account.
"President Putin appreciated our balanced approach. We believe this position enables both parties to subject the conflict to mediation and negotiation. Based on our relations with the Russian Federation and as member of BRICS, South Africa has been approached to play a mediation role."
There does seem to be a problem with accepting that two things can be true. I think many of us would accept there is a stench of hypocrisy about Western attitudes to the current situation, but the idea that Putin invaded because of NATO doesn't stand up to a minute's scrutiny.
There's some good information on this thread, some speculation by a few people who know what they are talking and a lot of armchair generals, along with a bit of humour (mostly supplied by the Ukrainians) and its generally a good place to discuss things.
.
It has been closed at least twice and the usual suspects seem intent on getting it closed again. It's getting tedious wading through the batching and point scoring to find the useful comments.
I am not a mod, but please don't spoil it for the rest of us. You all know who you are.
Well said andrewh, I haven't commented much but it's generally been an informative thread. If the usual suspects could stop their bun fight it would be nice...
Of course you’ll need to look at it from the Russian perspective. Do you feel Russia was nervous about having NATO military directly on their border, with missiles pointed their way.
I agree that we also need to look at this from a Russian perspective as if we don't understand them we will struggle to limit the damage done to Ukraine. Whether those Russian concerns are realistic or warranted is another thing.
What I can't see (from the Russian perspective) is why they didn't go down the sanctions route first. The Russians could have put NATO countries under tremendous pressure by limiting gas supply and other exports (wheat, metals etc.) but instead decided to invade Ukraine. The same question could be asked about Russia's annexation of Crimea and continued support for the separatists in Donbass & Luhansk. And lets not forget Georgia and Transnistria.
I think NATO have been prodding Russia but Russia have been constantly prodding NATO, it's what both sides do unfortunately. Let's not forget though that Russia have invaded Georgia, launched a chemical attack on British soil, supported Transnistria separatists, propped up Lukashenko, supplied a missile system that shot down a passenger airline and lots of other nefarious actions without NATO invading a smaller neighbour.
Because Russia invaded Ukraine
The bit many including yourself seem to be missing here is that as far as many in Russia (and Ukraine) are concerned - and certainly Putin - Ukraine is part of Russia and not independent. You can argue about the pros and cons of whether Ukraine should be a independent sovereign state free to do as it wants (I would argue it should BTW) but it's silly to talk about the Russian position without recognising this simple fact.
This is not much different to when Catalonia wanted to leave Spain. In that case the Catalan leaders were rounded up and locked up by the Spanish govt and thankfully it never escalated to the point where it required military involvement. But what would have happened if Catalonia were armed by third party states and encouraged to join alliances with countries opposed to Spain?
The war in Ukraine is the inevitable result of a massive strategic failure on the part of Russia, NATO and the wider international community. They hubristically allowed Ukraine to separate itself from Russia and ally itself with the west when it never should have been given that opportunity in such a short time frame. The separation should have been managed over the long term instead of causing a geopolitical earthquake.
what I got back was ‘why should we care what they think in China and Venezuela
I don't think you should trust the press in China and Venezuela. Why did I mention them, when you posted a link to an article without telling us which bit you thought was of interest... well... let's look at it...
‘A necessary war’: reporting on the Ukraine ‘disagreement’ outside the west
Venezuela says Putin is a victim, China blames the US, and a South African pundit calls out western hypocrisy
launched a chemical attack on British soil,
2 chemical attacks. or radiological.
I posted an article with a range of global perspectives
You found an article on the Guardian, and you thought "I know, this'll ruffle some feathers on that giant thread" and stood back and admired your handiwork. It's as close to trolling without crossing the line. Either contribute and discuss or don't. Your choice.
This is not much different to when Catalonia wanted to leave Spain.
Well, it is, because Catalonia was seeking independence. Ukraine is an independent country being invaded.
They hubristically allowed Ukraine to separate itself from Russia and ally itself with the west when it never should have been given that opportunity in such a short time frame.
Separate itself from Russia? Ukraine is a founder member of the UN as a state in its own right. Do you mean that former USSR and Warsaw Pact states shouldn't be allowed to be autonomous from Russia and form their own relationships with countries other than Russia?
They hubristically allowed Ukraine to separate itself from Russia and ally itself with the west
Isn't that what the people of Ukraine wanted, overwhelmingly?
This is not much different to when Catalonia wanted to leave Spain
I can't if you're being serious sometimes, I really can't
They hubristically allowed Ukraine to separate itself from Russia and ally itself with the west when it never should have been given that opportunity in such a short time frame
You know that Ukraine fought a war of independence with the Bolsheviks over a hundred years ago, right? And in 1921 declared themselves The independent Republic of Ukraine? That in 1991 they were one of the first Soviet republics to declare independence from the CCCP? Dos that sound like a country that's been at this for a short time?
This is not much different to when Catalonia wanted to leave Spain.
Top trolling. Get back under your bridge
The bit many including yourself seem to be missing here is that as far as many in Russia (and Ukraine) are concerned – and certainly Putin – Ukraine is part of Russia and not independent.
I don't believe that anything was agreed in 1991 between Ukraine, Russia & Europe that any future Russian political thinking would permit Russia to invade their newly independent neighbour.
I have a fair few Ukrainian friends, most of them Russian speakers from the east of Ukraine and they tell me that very few people back home want to be part of Russia. I'm not sure if the Russian publics view of Ukraine is based on independent analysis or Russian gov controlled media?
The bit many including yourself seem to be missing here is that as far as many in Russia (and Ukraine) are concerned – and certainly Putin – Ukraine is part of Russia and not independent. You can argue about the pros and cons of whether Ukraine should be a independent sovereign state free to do as it wants (I would argue it should BTW) but it’s silly to talk about the Russian position without recognising this simple fact.
Ukraine is a sovereign nation and a member of the UN. That's the fact that matters. The Russian view that Ukraine shouldn't be a sovereign nation is utterly irrelevant.
I can’t if you’re being serious sometimes, I really can’t
At a political and cultural level there are lots of parallels. Where they're different of course is the path both separatist movements took. In spain the Catalans didn't have a major international military power supporting and egging them on.
Isn’t that what the people of Ukraine wanted, overwhelmingly?
Yes, and it's why I support Ukrainian independence. It doesn't however mean it should have been allowed to happen in such a short time frame. It certainly shouldn't have happened whilst Putin was in power, as his response was, in hindsight, inevitable.
The Russian view that Ukraine shouldn’t be a sovereign nation is utterly irrelevant.
It's pretty relevant to the poor buggers now being bombed out of their homes.
Get back under your bridge
Typical STW. Say something that (only slightly) disagrees with the forum group think and you're a troll. 🙄
Yes, and it’s why I support Ukrainian independence. It doesn’t however mean it should have been allowed to happen in such a short time frame. It certainly shouldn’t have happened whilst Putin was in power, as his response was, in hindsight, inevitable.
So you're saying the 93%? Of ukranians that voted for independence should have stayed under Putins brutal autocracy for another 20-30 years?
So what you're saying is that we should suspend democracy in cases where it might upset dictators?
Righto
I'm sure that'll work out well
This idea that Russia somehow had some right to invade sovereign nations on the basis of some ancient desire to remain an empire is complete garbage.
I would ask my lovely Ukrainian contractors what they think of this idea but I think they would find it too insulting and upsetting.
It certainly shouldn’t have happened whilst Putin was in power, as his response was, in hindsight, inevitable.
You can't simultaneously argue that NATO expansion (western imperialism and geopolitics) is the cause of the conflict, and at the same time argue that it's also the answer to this issue, i.e. Western powers should have interfered in the geopolitics of eastern Europe
I’m sure that’ll work out well
You think it's working out now? Democracy is often 'suspended' if there are good reasons. And avoiding war is one of the few where it's justified.
So you’re saying the 93%? Of ukranians that voted for independence should have stayed under Putins brutal autocracy for another 20-30 years?
It's not as black and white as that is it? I'm not saying the independence vote should have been overturned, but the revolutions of 2004 and in particular 2014 were in hindsight not a great idea, and they were encouraged and supported by the west. Had it not been for those Ukraine would still be an independent country and wouldn't now be at war.
Analysis of that attack on the Russian column
https://twitter.com/HoansSolo/status/1501885056310259714?t=ubc4qOeuaq4o3jmMrLB1gg&s=19
Looking pretty grim this morning more cruise missile strikes overnight on previously unhit cities (which a lot of refugees had fled to)
That big convoy has now dispersed looks like plan is to encircle each city and pound it into rubble with local artillery and cruise missles from within Russia
Russian casualties heavy, they are now recruiting mercenaries from Syria to make up numbers.
Intercepted phonecall home with Russian soldiers bragging about killing civilians and looting tvs etc
https://twitter.com/Ukraine/status/1501635351965798402?t=87NMczwymz6Sjaxj3QfzDg&s=19
Yes, and it’s why I support Ukrainian independence. It doesn’t however mean it should have been allowed to happen in such a short time frame. It certainly shouldn’t have happened whilst Putin was in power, as his response was, in hindsight, inevitable.
A bit lost here- I thought Gorbachev was in charge back in 1991.
Had it not been for those Ukraine would still be an independent country and wouldn’t now be at war.
You mean had they been run by a puppet state like Belarus then Putin wouldn't need to invade?
Yes quite
But I'm not sure the Ukrainians would want to live under that kind of nightmare dictatoeship
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Belarus
Yes, and it’s why I support Ukrainian independence. It doesn’t however mean it should have been allowed to happen in such a short time frame. It certainly shouldn’t have happened whilst Putin was in power, as his response was, in hindsight, inevitable.
Ukraine became independent from USSR / Russia, eight years before Putin came to power.
Had it not been for those Ukraine would still be an independent country and wouldn’t now be at war.
This is just speculative though. I suspect that Putin would've invaded regardless. He's done it now before Ukraine joins a trading block that he perceives as antithetical to his territorial ambitions and mutual military support group that will make it harder if not impossible to do in the future.
Had it not been for those Ukraine would still be an independent country and wouldn’t now be at war.
So if it had remained a puppet state then Russia wouldnt have invaded? Quite possibly true but not the strongest argument.
There does seem to be a problem with accepting that two things can be true. I think many of us would accept there is a stench of hypocrisy about Western attitudes to the current situation, but the idea that Putin invaded because of NATO doesn’t stand up to a minute’s scrutiny.
I've stepped back to being a passive observer for the most part on this thread, because yet again it's regressed to bickering and personal insults. I couldn't let that post go by though without saying 'bravo'. Nail on the head. There seems to be be an assumption by some, that directing anger at Putin and Russia, somehow implies we were cheerleaders for the Iraq war, ignored the suffering of other conflicts or can't see the corruption, incompetency and hypocrisy in our own government. It's ignorant and insulting. We can, but at this moment in time the greater evil, the crocodile nearest the boat is our dictatorial, expansionist neighbour who is shelling civilians and threatening to spark WW3.
Well said bloke
You mean had they been run by a puppet state like Belarus
So if it had remained a puppet state
Anyone care to define the phrase 'puppet state'? Yes before 2014 and 2004 Ukraine was a state operating within the sphere of Russian economic and military influence. It wasn't fully independent, but which countries are? All states other than the US, China and Russia itself cede some independence in favour of economic and political stability. For Ukraine that means staying close to Russia (for now). The west encouraged them to abandon that in favour of operating under western influence and look where it has got them. And now that they're suffering the consequences what are the west doing? Pretty much nothing. It's no wonder Zelinsky is so angry with the western response, they've been abandoned to their fate.
I’ve stepped back to being a passive observer for the most part on this thread, because yet again it’s regressed to bickering and personal insults. I couldn’t let that post go by though with saying ‘bravo’. Nail on the head. There seems to be be an assumption by some, that directing anger at Putin and Russia, somehow implies we were cheerleaders for the Iraq war, ignored the suffering of other conflicts or can’t see the corruption, incompetency and hypocrisy in our own government. It’s ignorant and insulting. We can, but at this moment in time the greater evil, the crocodile nearest the boat is our dictatorial, expansionist neighbour who is shelling civilians and threatening to spark WW3.
This sums up how I feel in a much better way than I ever could!! Nice work 👍
They hubristically allowed Ukraine to separate itself from Russia
I think Ukraine became independent of Russia at about the same time as Finland (1917ish)
There seems to be be an assumption by some, that directing anger at Putin and Russia, somehow implies we were cheerleaders for the Iraq war, ignored the suffering of other conflicts or can’t see the corruption, incompetency and hypocrisy in our own government. It’s ignorant and insulting.
Exactly.
That Guardian article writes about “Russian intervention” rather that “Russian invasion”. That tells me all I need to know about the author and their agenda.
The article starts with "Many an insult has been hurled at Vladimir Putin since he invaded Ukraine a fortnight ago". This is unquoted and unattributed text, the author's own choice of words. A major issue addressed by the article is whether other publications around the world describe the Russian action as an invasion, and more of those mentioned in the article do so than don't. So after the introduction the word "invasion" appears many times, mostly in quotes or, on one occasion, as part of a point attributed to another author but not in quotes.
The word "intervention" appears once, in quotes, attributed to the South African publication "The Mail and Guardian".
The article tells me some interesting stuff about how news publications around the world are addressing the issue and from that I can learn about their agendas. Which is, I think, what the article was intending to communicate.
I’ve stepped back to being a passive observer for the most part on this thread, because yet again it’s regressed to bickering and personal insults. I couldn’t let that post go by though with saying ‘bravo’. Nail on the head. There seems to be be an assumption by some, that directing anger at Putin and Russia, somehow implies we were cheerleaders for the Iraq war, ignored the suffering of other conflicts or can’t see the corruption, incompetency and hypocrisy in our own government. It’s ignorant and insulting. We can, but at this moment in time the greater evil, the crocodile nearest the boat is our dictatorial, expansionist neighbour who is shelling civilians and threatening to spark WW3.
Please everyone apply this logic the other way round aswell. Calling people 'Putin stooges' or 'useful idiots' for posting slightly different viewpoints is not helpful.
I think Ukraine became independent of Russia at about the same time as Finland (1917ish)
After 1917 Russia did't exist, it was replaced by the USSR in 1922 following the post-revolutionary civil war. Ukraine's self declared independence lasted less than 4 years before it became a founding member of the USSR. It's plainly ridiculous to say Ukraine was independent from 1917 in a similar way as Finland was.
I think many of us would accept there is a stench of hypocrisy about Western attitudes to the current situation
I certainly would.
somehow implies we were cheerleaders for the Iraq war, ignored the suffering of other conflicts or can’t see the corruption, incompetency and hypocrisy in our own government
Nail on head! Those of us that have campaigned against wars, and in favour of accepting refugees from war, and bore people with our constant criticism of our own government… still see Putin invading a country when his own is at no risk of invasion. And some of us fear that his expansion through force is not over, just as we did when he took Crimea and other territory by using military force.
Blokeuptheroad nails it for me
So if, which regrettably seems likely, Putin does integrate Ukraine back into Russia, how will this play out? Will sanctions remain until Putin is toppled and Ukraine is released?
Ukraine’s self declared independence lasted less than 4 years before it became a founding member of the USSR. It’s plainly ridiculous to say Ukraine was independent from 1917 in a similar way as Finland was.
Ukraine's independence lasted only 4 years because the Bolsheviks invaded in 1919 after the defeat of Germany in WW1, and they fought a really rather nasty war involving Poland and surrounding states. I don't think it was very keen to become a "founding member of the USSR" as it really didn't have a choice in the matter.
It’s not as black and white as that is it? I’m not saying the independence vote should have been overturned, but the revolutions of 2004 and in particular 2014 were in hindsight not a great idea, and they were encouraged and supported by the west. Had it not been for those Ukraine would still be an independent country and wouldn’t now be at war.
That statement says quite enough about the failed reasoning of your argument, there's still time to roll back and admit you've made an error, or you can go full tucker on this one.
So if, which regrettably seems likely, Putin does integrate Ukraine back into Russia
I don't think that's what's going to happen. I suspect that this will become an occupation (like Iraq) drag on and on for years until the Russian have made southern Ukraine a wasteland, declare "mission accomplished" or some such horse shit and retreat back to Crimea. I'll give it 5 years. Ukraine will have joined the EU and it'll take billions of euros and dollars to rebuild. Any Russian economic gains in the last 20 years will have been wiped out and it will also take decades to recover. In the meantime 1000's will have died.
Congratulations Putin
That statement says quite enough about the failed reasoning of your argument
Care to elaborate? Given what we know now do you still think the 2004 and 2014 revolutions which were supported by the west were a good idea? Do you think if NATO and the EU hadn't encouraged Ukraine to move westwards that the Ukrainian people wouldn't now be at the mercy of a deranged dictator with the worlds second largest war machine at his disposal?
retreat back to Crimea
If an independent Ukraine exists at all at the end of this war, it will be smaller than before, and continually watching and waiting to lose more territory.
[ really hope I’m wrong ]
As for EU membership for a smaller Ukraine… 25 years at least… if at all… but if they loose all their sea access because there is a “New Russia” across the whole of the South, then EU markets and support will become essential for survival, not just prosperity.
When the war is over and the sanctions start to be lifted I take it the bad guys will get their money back.
Well this isn't good
https://twitter.com/mrsorokaa/status/1502235167217401856?t=3eDj1Osa85i4XTjbpjcSQQ&s=19
But might not be smooth sailing
https://twitter.com/franakviacorka/status/1500197649307348994?t=drNWS8yisMWLDDPd-91fcg&s=19
Given what we know now do you still think the 2004 and 2014 revolutions which were supported by the west were a good idea?
How are you deciding that protests started by citizens in a country a good or bad idea? You think they should weigh the pros and cons beforehand? that they have a crystal ball that allows them to see what's going to happen in the future?
Do you think if NATO and the EU hadn’t encouraged Ukraine to move westwards that the Ukrainian people wouldn’t now be at the mercy of a deranged dictator with the worlds second largest war machine at his disposal?
So we just allow Putin to do what he likes regardless of what Ukraine decide (and they had started the process to join) Do you think Estonia, Latvia, or Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Hungry the Czech republic, Slovakia regret turning towards the west right now?
[b] Can we please keep this thread a civil discussion. If not it will be closed. Thanks. [/b]
I think its fair to say that this war will change both Ukraine and Russia.
Russia is likely to be far less of a threat potentially after this, particularly if it turns out to be Afghanistan 2.0 which is looking very likely. That plus the huge economic deterioration to come will leave Russia in a very poor state. Ironically Putin might get his USSR back... but at the stage it was when it was crumbling and people were queueing for bread.
Both Ukraine and Russia will be diminished. However money is likely to flow into Ukraine. That less likely to happen in Russia.
One way or another this will be the defining moment for Putin and I can't but help think it's the biggest mistake he's ever made.
Surrounding himself with yesmen hasn't been the best plan
https://twitter.com/AndreiSoldatov/status/1502221544499601411?t=H_3BO_zHfFsOK99IGyjvjQ&s=19
Dazh : Do you think if NATO and the EU hadn’t encouraged Ukraine to move westwards that the Ukrainian people wouldn’t now be at the mercy of a deranged dictator with the worlds second largest war machine at his disposal?
If that is the case then why did Russia not invade the former countries of the USSR who have joined Nato/forged closer ties to the EU?, your apologist argument falls flat.
In 1997, three former Warsaw Pact countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, were invited to join NATO. After this fourth enlargement in 1999, the Vilnius group of the Baltics and seven East European countries formed in May 2000 to cooperate and lobby for further NATO membership. Seven of these countries joined in the fifth enlargement in 2004. The latest waves of expansion saw 4 Southeastern European states join; Albania and Croatia joined in the sixth enlargement in 2009, Montenegro in 2017 and North Macedonia in 2020.
Do you think if NATO and the EU hadn’t encouraged Ukraine to move westwards that the Ukrainian people wouldn’t now be at the mercy of a deranged dictator with the worlds second largest war machine at his disposal?
The problem, I think, is with the deranged dictator, not with the encouraging of ex-soviet states to look westward. After all Russia itself has been encouraged to embrace westernism as the pull out from Russia of a myriad of western companies indicates. Putin himself and his oligarchs have embraced capitalism and western luxury (although they've gone down the organised crime route).
For all the arguments I can't see beyond Putin as the problem. We've been watching the "Putin, a Russian spy story" documentary on All4 and the guy is an absolute evil monster (but very clever one as well).
<strong class="bbcode-strong">Can we please keep this thread a civil discussion. If not it will be closed. Thanks.
It is being civil, or at least one side is being civil, the other is spitting insults back, ignoring debate on the subject rather to throw out their choice phrases in petty personal attacks.
#Useful Idiots
#Putin apologists
#
Get back under your bridge troll.
I have seen no such insults being thrown out by the side(if you really really want to call it a side) stating that the situation has been exacerbated by NATO expansionism.
I suppose I should put my hands up when i made comment about how Britain took over India, or Germany, the French gained territory in Africa or South America when i quipped about Hitler and Germany's method that started the 2nd world war. But it was Binners and Kelvin, who then attacked me not on this point, and nothing to do with Hitlers actions or how Great Britain conducted it's foreign policy centuries ago, but straight in there with a personal attack on how i must be in support of this proposed genocide(though for the life of me i cannot equate that phrase to the definition of the word to the actions of this war)
Want to point to the troll, Then look no further than those quick not just to criticize,but quick to insult, and using that as an attack. So please attribute blame where blame is due and if anyone is derailing this thread it is those with closed minds and big mouths.
I was on my 'Break' when the 'oh lets be nicer to everyone' thread came, and then went, with the same voices here that derailed that totally to the point it was shut down. If that is indicative of how certain members of this community feel they need to conduct themselves,then this community are better off without them. They are a taint to any community.
Kelvin spoke about how he protested against the war in Iraq, and for that we should all applaud such public actions, but then to fail to see that his going against public or government narrative would mean he faced the same insults and attacks he himself is directing at people who in this thread question the narrative, leaves me speechless.
.
To be able to debate the points you need to accept they exist. Peoples ideas or perspectives can be changed through clear and concise argument, by reference of history, but never ever by insulting them.
It’s the insulating from both parties.
Ahh opinions causing problems Oh the irony
I wonder how much those Syrian volunteers are being paid (or what Assad is getting paid which they wont see).
I am not aware of any real reason for them to be volunteering unless there has been lots of preparation work with propaganda which then has the problem of what happens if when it doesnt live up to it.
This conflict somehow seems to have united the whole country, yet some people on here still find something to argue about.
Strange.
Anyone care to define the phrase ‘puppet state’?
Generally one which is completely under the control of another state with everything bar minor decisions being made by that state.
Belarus is a good example.
stating that the situation has been exacerbated by NATO expansionism.
The issue is that it's a false narrative, NATO doesn't force countries to join it. The sovereign state applies, usually waits a few years then gets in.
NATO membership requirements are tough for the former Soviet bloc countries
I am certain that Russia has a expansionist strategy, it regularly deploys it's military and paramilitary forces to satellite states to maintain a sympathetic leader in situ. Examples Belarus and Kazakhstan etc
Anyone care to define the phrase ‘puppet state’?
A Russian MP on the BBC World Service was talking about a puppy state. I think I prefer that idea.
This conflict somehow seems to have united the whole country, yet some people on here still find something to argue about.
There is plenty of pro Russia, pro Putin stuff out there, notably from a number of academics as well as the usual suspects
Can we please keep this thread a civil discussion. If not it will be closed. Thanks.
Mods/Drac
Please don't close the thread, this is a vital topic that needs to be open and there is a lot of useful information here for mostly silent observers like myself.
If it continues to descend (once again) into bad behaviour I (and I think many others) would prefer you 'sanction' the offenders or send them to the naughty step and let the thread continue otherwise we all lose out.
Either people around the world love Putin so much they are prepared to die for him or Putin is utterly desperate and is calling in debts from his dictator buddies.
https://twitter.com/XVIVLXX/status/1502233116806725633
Over in Retrobike, we have many members spread throughout the world, but one particular group from the Ukraine. they appear to be quite a crazy bunch.
They're really into their old bikes, roast pork and strong drink, and have been posting since 2018.
They post plenty of pictures and also videos of day rides, and broken bikes 😆 but it worries me that many of these riders instead of holding an old set of XT wheels are now holding an AK47, or for than matter might even have died. I truly hope to god they all come through.
https://www.retrobike.co.uk/threads/ukrainian-oldschool-mtb.387517/