Nobody interested in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?

Post Reply New Topic

Now I remember.
Mikah believes in a Russia that is free of corruption, respects human rights, tells the truth, values human life and is perfectly happy limiting their activities to their borders.
So of course, compared to this Russia, USA are indeed evil.
The problem is, Santa does not exist.

It sounds like some ultra-bizarre sci-fi novel.

I'd say your above comments apply equally to Russia and the U.S. Now the two evil empires are at war with each other and neither care how many Ukrainians have to die, nor if the conflict goes nuclear.

No, not equally.
Every country has their sins and problems but they are not equal in it.
My country used to be in the "rusosphere" and now it's part of the "collective West".
The difference is rather striking.
If you want even more striking example - North and South Korea. "American imperialism" vs hardcore isolationism, in real life.

I used to believe my country had some moral upon which to stand, but I no longer do. A worse humanitarian crisis is occurring in Yemen right now, where thousands of people are being massacred. Guess who is still funding that genocide?

We have an Arab on our site who gave me more insight into what's going on in Yemen.
Generally, the ones responsible for that mess are the Houthis who started the civil war. Various parties try to intervene, usually making things even worse.

I admit USA does not understand Middle East, which makes them cause disasters there. Still, I wouldn't want them to withdraw from NATO in Europe or from their bases in South Korea. USA is moderately awful as an occupant but not bad at all as an ally. Certainly infinitely better ally than Russia - I have our own history and some Belarussian sources to have comparison.

So, if we East Europeans have a right to choose (some try to deny us this), we prefer not to be occupied by anyone and to be allied with each other and with USA. It just suits our interests best.

I'll assume you've just forgotten what I've said on that matter. It's not about being worthy of self-determination - it's about whether you have the ability at all where it counts - this I doubt. I talk as though all the big decisions are taking place in Washington and the opinions of EE states barely matter when it comes to important issues - because that is exactly how it works. You can do whatever you like in the US empire, except hurt US interests. If you try to cross them to benefit your own people - you'll find tons of money finds its way to opposition parties (if you have democracy), well-funded media campaigns, perhaps even mysterious deaths if you believe some theories. And suddenly you're described as a "dictator" and your freedom fighting citizens are on the streets calling for your head. Remarkable how these things work out in Washington's favour most of the time.

Let me ask you this, imagine there's some strange sea change in Poland. Suddenly the majority of Polish people want to sign an alliance with the Russian Federation and distance themselves from the EU and by extension the USA. Do you really believe they would let you go?



How can a nation opt out of the American Empire or the influence of the British Empire before that? You have to wait for them to wear themselves out. If that doesn't happen you're out of luck.



In some ways there is little point talking about the USA's interference in Ukraine. It looks like NATO aren't going to put boots on the ground - that's the only way Ukraine will "win". So if NATO isn't coming, the right thing to do now is to end the war asap and minimise the suffering of Ukraine, even if that means concessions for Russia. Not send more and more weapons to ensure it continues for the foreseeable future, which means more and more death and Ukraine's prospects for ever being a functioning entity ever again growing dimmer and dimmer.



You jest. But the USA is degenerating and is not what it once was - it's the fate of all empires. Not that it ever really was such a moral actor abroad. Need I remind you again that the USA is perfectly happy to ally with countries that make Russia look like saints as long as they play ball. But because Russia is potentially a real competitor to American power on the Eurasian continent - the USA paints them as Satan incarnate and undermines them at every turn, while letting their Saudi buddies commit all sorts of war crimes and their allies in Afghanistan literally screw underage boys with impunity. It's all good if you're willing to let the Americans do what they please. Getting how it works now?

Did this post fall through from last year or something?

There's so much obviously wrong with it that I struggle to believe anyone could actually believe it.

For one thing, it is the invasion that you've been cheering on for the past year that has "sacrificed Ukraine's future". The US is Ukraine's ally; that alliance has been hugely beneficial to Ukraine. It isn't the Americans who have bombed Ukraine, shot civilians, destroyed infrastructure - it is the Russians. Nobody is to blame for the Russian invasion except Russia. I don't even really blame the Western fascists such as yourself who cheerlead for every attempt by Putin's fascist mob to expand its empire.

Your precious Aryan leader is getting his ass handed to him by the Ukrainians. You thought you were going to take Kyiv in the first few days of the war, and you lost most of your best soldiers in the attempt. You have been driven back out of Kharkiv oblast and Kherson city. You're losing badly, and your original goal of overthrowing the Ukrainian state is in tatters. Best you can hope for is that maybe some sort of truce ends up being signed where you get to keep Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk - except now everyone else in Europe has united against Russia and Belarus. You've pushed more countries towards NATO and now everyone is taking Russian aggression more seriously, while also being aware of what an incompetent paper tiger the Russian military is. Putin's aspirations upon Tallinn and Riga look impossible now.



You can ignore the rest of the post if you wish ^ but I would like an answer to that question. If you can at least understand why someone might think a Ukraine where Yanukovych was not illegally overthrown (whether foreign powers were involved or not) might be a better place and definitely not a war zone - then you are most of the way to understanding my position and my anger at the USA, the EU, my own country and everyone else for their hand in this avoidable disaster.


To quote yourself- you know full well that nobody outside of your white separatist pro-Kremlin paleoconservative circle is ever going to believe this, so why bother?

It's obviously completely batshit to say that the US is even remotely comparable to Russia on this front. When was the last time the US tried to annex another territory? It just doesn't happen.

It's also completely batshit to blame Russia's invasion on the US. Russia is not an automaton. A sensible, moral government would accept that other countries have the right to choose who they ally with. Putin is not a sensible, moral individual, so he wishes to subjugate his neighbouring countries to his will.


The US doesn't have imperial ambitions in Ukraine.

There is no "mission to destabilise the Russosphere and encircle Russia". The US has not invaded Belarus or Kazakhstan or Armenia or indeed any country bordering Russia.

The Russians aren't interested in a settlement, and in any case, the US is not fighting the war. The Russians invaded Ukraine. Obviously the Ukrainians are not going to surrender, because they are fighting an enemy who wants to subjugate them - it is existential. On the other hand, if Russia surrendered and retreated to their borders then the war would be over.

Given that the Russians are the ones damaging Ukraine, the moral responsibility for rebuilding should lie with Russia. However, I think we all know who will actually pay for it. Compare how the US rebuilt Western Europe and Japan after WWII to how the Soviets failed to rebuild Eastern Europe.


Let's compare Ukraine to Iraq.

Ukraine was a free, democratic country, with a reasonable human rights record, no record of military aggression, that gave up its WMDs, and was not engaged in genocide.

Iraq was an absolute dictatorship, with an awful human rights record, that had invaded two of its neighbours and threatened more, where ethnic minorities were persecuted and killed, and with a track record of using chemical weapons.

Does that necessarily mean that the invasion of Iraq was justified? No. I happen to think it was, but reasonable minds may differ. What no reasonable person would ever conclude is that the Russian attack on Ukraine has been in any way justified.

I also think there are a great deal of cases where the pretext for war is the same as the real reason. Afghanistan is a pretty clear recent example. Libya, too. Kosovo, Bosnia, Sierra Leone. WWII, of course. Even something as controversial as Vietnam... say what you want about American motives, whether they were fighting a fight that they should have been fighting, whether they were complacent, but the US leadership was at least clear that it wanted to seem powerful in the fight against communism. They didn't contrive something, they just gave their questionable reason.

I may not agree the source is trustworthy.
Give me a link to the PRIMARY source, not Hersh's INTERPRETATION.



Why not?
Unless we are dealing with FACTS, we are involved with SPECULATION.
What FACTS did the PRIMARY source provide?



Provide the specific FACTS that are relevant here, plz.
If you want to continue this discussion, of course.
Or, we can simply "Agree to disagree' if you like. <shrug>

Psst...
I will let you into something...



You SOUND as though you are a pootin apologist, based on your arguments.
War/invasion against a sovereign nation.
Russians raping, torturing, deporting, murdering...
Can you see why I think that?

The "Nation Security" argument can't defend those atrocities, right?

I see, so you are in the "Two wrongs make a right" club.

You do realise that NATO is so unprepared for a war that there is a 2 year waiting list for ammunition shells, right?
And as I said before, NATO spent pathetically little amounts on their defence spending, until the Russian aggression, something the orange man was trying to remedy.

Not a fan of Trump, btw.

You do realise that Russia was considered the second most powerful military in the world before it was humiliated by the heroic Ukrainian ppl, right?


BTW, what is the deal with your luv affair with pootin?
Is your girlfriend/boyfriend Russian?

Pootin is f****d militarily and economically for the next decade at least.
He can't even handle Ukraine, a much smaller country population-wise.

Poland is a NATO country.
Even pootin isn't crazy enough to activate a NATO and US collective response.

Hooah!

The Ukrainians CHOSE to fight.