The War in Ukraine

the pleasure principal said:
i don't believe i've said he's awful but i do think portraying him as some sort of superhero serves pro-war interests.
Click to expand...
But there’s a big difference between being pro-war and people across the globe being supportive of a president who’s on the battleground defending his country from an illegal invasion by a much tougher opponent, no?
 
The US has never done one thing with no strings attached :D

It was still an election voted on by the Ukrainian people
 
I am trying really really really hard to understand @the pleasure principal point of view and I’m still struggling :D

Like, I’m REALLY trying because he knows I love him

But I genuinely don’t understand how this is America and Ukraine’s fault. Mistakes made? Maybe. Nato a smoke and mirrors exercise for western imperialism? Maybe. Zelensky mislabelled as a saviour? Maybe. I honestly am not smart enough to know for sure.

But that’s all generally speaking. In this thread, in this thread, IN THIS THREAD, we are talking about people dying from war. They are from bombs and tanks from Russia. From an illegal invasion.

Call me stupid, but I don’t see how any of the aforementioned things matter? There is no excuse, reason, rationale, justification, backstory, context, narrative or explanation for what Putin is doing. None. Nada.

That’s all that really bothers me. There’s nuance all day long in politics and propaganda and sovereignty. There is absolutely no nuance whatsoever in illegally invading a country and killing civilians.
 
Looks promising (not sure if paywalled)

Ukraine and Russia draw up neutrality plan to end war
https://on.ft.com/3u0WJ7N

“Ukraine and Russia have made significant progress on a tentative 15-point peace plan including a ceasefire and Russian withdrawal if Kyiv declares neutrality and accepts limits on its armed forces, according to three people involved in the talks.”
 
I think we’re capable of having discussions without resorting to “people are dying so shut up”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJN
the pleasure principal said:
the only place (i think) we differ is that i also place explicit blame on the usa and the ukrainian government for this shitshow. they knew (or at the very least suspected) where this was going and continued down this road. now 3 million and counting people are displaced, not to mention how many have been killed, ukraine is wrecked, people are putting "close the sky" posters on their shop windows, billions are going to the military industrial complex, certain interests are using the conflict to call for doubling down on fracking and drilling, who knows how many people in the third world will be affected indirectly by more poverty and hunger, people are losing their minds from paranoia and anger and, overall, the world has just become a whole lot shittier.

maybe i am naive but i refuse to believe there was no other way for ukraine apart from nato/war or absorption by the russians.
Click to expand...

I get your point but all I’m hearing is Ukraine blaming to justify a Russian invasion. Believe me I’m no stranger to this lack of sympathy with the US and NATO in general. Back home in Lebanon (and I’m guessing the Arab world in general), the general reaction can be summed up as ‘meh, why should we care?’ and it’s understandable, many parallels can be drawn with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and Irak was invaded by the US while the world watched, to name a few. Though I’m yet to see someone actually justifying the invasion by the Ukrainian CHOICES.
 
It is 100% Putin's war. He didn't even inform the Russian FSB before moving in. All the blablabla about Nato, the US "choosing" Ukraine's leaders is literally repeating Kremlin talking points and doing a great disservice to the Ukrainian people who have a better grip about what is going on in their part of the world than most foreign experts. Fact of the matter is, Ukraine wanted control over its own destiny and not to become a Russian vassal state like Belarus, constantly having to clear any foreign policy points by Moscow before proceeding.

Remember, Putin's meddling in Eastern Ukraine started many years before Nato etc was even a topic of discussion. Ukraine was not keen on joining Nato nor becoming beholden to the US in any way. Europe was the direction it wanted to move, in order to become a "normal" country. Elections in Eastern Ukraine were constantly subject to dubious counts, pro-Ukrainian candidates beaten up by groups of "silovniki" or otherwise excluded from the democratic process. Moscow's installed puppet Yanukovich constantly undermining Ukraine's independence - reversing any policy of supporting the Ukrainian language and education and prioritising whatever policy emanated from the Kremlin, whilst libelling all Ukrainian speakers as nazis. This started years ago before most people were even aware Ukraine existed.

It all kicked off when Yanukovich went back on an election pledge to forge closer ties with the EU and instead did a sudden volte-face deciding to join Putin's vainglorious and economically damaging customs union. There was zero support for that anywhere and it led to tents and protests. None of this was out of the ordinary for Ukraine, which had a reasonably robust democratic setup with free reign to protest by eastern European standards. It all went badly wrong, when Yanukovich, on Moscow's orders, sent the boys in to beat the students up.

So here we are.
 
I've been looking at these channels on Telegram that are pro Putin and it's just disgusting. One thing is to see Putin spout bullshit regarding his intentions, another thing is a bunch of people believing him and cheering him. Hourly updates about the Russian troops "liberating" and "protecting" the people in Ukraine, Ukrainians bombing their own buildings and killing their own people. It just makes me so fucking angry.
 
OutSynk said:
I've been looking at these channels on Telegram that are pro Putin and it's just disgusting. One thing is to see Putin spout bullshit regarding his intentions, another thing is a bunch of people believing him and cheering him. Hourly updates about the Russian troops "liberating" and "protecting" the people in Ukraine, Ukrainians bombing their own buildings and killing their own people. It just makes me so fucking angry.
Click to expand...
Have you seen their embassies' tweets? It's FULL of it, 24/7, it's appalling.
 
Maybe NATO is a bad example but if we do get a peace deal on the back of Ukraine committing to neutrality (and honestly is there another option at this point), I don't like the precedent it sets. So, if an independent country wants to unify with a group of other independent countries, a separate independent country can invade and kill civillians until that original independent country changes its mind?

Not exactly diplomatic or democratic is it?

Out of interest, would Putin be as against Ukraine joining the EU? Or is it specifically a NATO thing?

Either way I feel quite uncomfortable that this peace deal will be hailed as some sort of breakthrough and new era, and quickly forget that people needlessly died to get there.
 
Given that Putin is a bad-faith actor, known to systematically renege on all and any international commitments, how can Ukraine be expected to negotiate with him? If they commit to neutrality, what is to stop him simply coming back next year, with rebuilt forces? Even if Ukraine has security assurances, Putin will just threaten to push the nuclear button again, and we'll be back to square one.

Putin is insane. This is not like negotiating with a rational actor.
 
If it hasn't been already made clear, the west is holding dual discussions with Russia. With Putin and with the forces behind him. The latter are more important. They are not necessarily any more likable but they are less batshit and the minute they decide Putin has become a liability rather than a talisman then the talks will start to become substantial. We are not there yet.
 
Are the sanctions likely to be lifted as soon as a deal has been done? You can't just unpunish a country just because they uninvade a country. You can't bring dead innocent people back to life.
 
funky said:
Out of interest, would Putin be as against Ukraine joining the EU? Or is it specifically a NATO thing?
Click to expand...
It's not even NATO. Putin wants to be the czar of Ukraine and the former SU. A Ukraine in the EU will be pulled towards a European army, so Russia won't want that but also a prosperous Ukraine will only cause resentment among Russians wondering why they are lagging behind under a kleptocracy. Part of the reason for Putin's Lebensraum adventures of 2014 were the huge energy finds in Ukraine: oil just off Crimea, shale deposits in the Donbass. With a more advanced (read European) energy policy, Ukraine would be energy independent from Russia, which is a non-starter for Moscow. Nearly all of Ukraine's oil reserves (4x annual consumption) are in West Ukraine, just out of reach of Moscow.

One other thing, China has huge investments in Ukraine, including in the energy field. There are also some 6000 Chinese nationals somewhere in Ukraine. If they come to harm, I can't see China warming up to Russia anytime soon. It seems to be more about saving face having banked on a loser for Xi at the moment. Privately, I'm sure there have been "words".
 
funky said:
Are the sanctions likely to be lifted as soon as a deal has been done? You can't just unpunish a country just because they uninvade a country. You can't bring dead innocent people back to life.
Click to expand...
It might go against natural justice but remember when we punished Germany after WW1 and how that turned out? I think it will be less a case of sanctions and more a case of shunning Russia from now on. Brands will not want to be associated with such a regime.
 
I've seen a few people say "we should humiliate Russia like Germany after WWI" but I realised that the humiliation already happened when the USSR collapsed. What we are living through now is 1939 Act II - the humiliated, revanchist power lashing out at the victorious nations who were party to its downfall three decades earlier.
 
He's only 69. Unless the rumours of him being terminally ill *are* true, we could be waiting quite a while if we're relying on nature to take its course...
 
Heppje said:
It is 100% Putin's war. He didn't even inform the Russian FSB before moving in. All the blablabla about Nato, the US "choosing" Ukraine's leaders is literally repeating Kremlin talking points and doing a great disservice to the Ukrainian people who have a better grip about what is going on in their part of the world than most foreign experts. Fact of the matter is, Ukraine wanted control over its own destiny and not to become a Russian vassal state like Belarus, constantly having to clear any foreign policy points by Moscow before proceeding.

Remember, Putin's meddling in Eastern Ukraine started many years before Nato etc was even a topic of discussion. Ukraine was not keen on joining Nato nor becoming beholden to the US in any way. Europe was the direction it wanted to move, in order to become a "normal" country. Elections in Eastern Ukraine were constantly subject to dubious counts, pro-Ukrainian candidates beaten up by groups of "silovniki" or otherwise excluded from the democratic process. Moscow's installed puppet Yanukovich constantly undermining Ukraine's independence - reversing any policy of supporting the Ukrainian language and education and prioritising whatever policy emanated from the Kremlin, whilst libelling all Ukrainian speakers as nazis. This started years ago before most people were even aware Ukraine existed.

It all kicked off when Yanukovich went back on an election pledge to forge closer ties with the EU and instead did a sudden volte-face deciding to join Putin's vainglorious and economically damaging customs union. There was zero support for that anywhere and it led to tents and protests. None of this was out of the ordinary for Ukraine, which had a reasonably robust democratic setup with free reign to protest by eastern European standards. It all went badly wrong, when Yanukovich, on Moscow's orders, sent the boys in to beat the students up.

So here we are.
Click to expand...

here's a list of us officials and thinkers repeating kremlin's nato talking point (as far back as the late 90s), truly the greatest disservice inflicted upon the ukrainian people to date:



(disclaimer: the compiler lives in china, maybe this too is disqualifying)

in november the us and ukraine signed a partnership and shortly thereafter russian troops started moving leading people to predict imminent military action against ukraine.



maybe nato is a smokescreen but the point is people knew this was coming and nothing was done. they dug their heels in and waited to see if putin was bluffing. and now both sides are waiting to see how much more death and destruction will tilt negotiations.

you're probably right about a lot of things but your analysis lacks any critical perspective outside of putin's desire to subjugate ukraine. i don't know much about ukraine's history, however, i do remember yanukovich's swing from the west to russia - the decision was not "a sudden volte-face" - he wanted eu integration but he was not happy with the conditions offered by the eu and the imf (some say with good reason, but it's obviously more complicated than that). more about it here.
 
See, perhaps the West wasn't bold enough. Ukraine has its agency and desires, it wanted to join NATO, and perhaps if it had been allowed, Russia would have had nowhere to go. Even at the height of a potential NATO encroachment on Russia, NATO is defensive, Russia cannot credibly say that NATO will attack them, and to attack NATO... article 5 and Russia loses badly.

The line of thinking that NATO caused this catastrophe downplays Russia's involvement as a bad actor and Ukraine's desires as an independent nation. Mearsheimer (in that twitter thread), respected scholar, but one I disagree with, he is too cautious, perhaps he's operating on Putin's level with his realism, but by doing so, you concede to Putin's worldview - and Russia's authoritarianism is successful forever.

The West should have been way more involved especially after 2014, the habit of letting 'frozen conflict' zones go unresolved is clearly very dangerous with an authoritarian like Putin in charge. There are certainly failures from NATO in hoping the 2014-2022 status quo would last and assuming that Putin wouldn't attack (I would have agreed with them, I thought Putin wouldn't attack either) but it having a hand in a peace process and ensuring that both Ukraine and Russia don't fall into disarray after this would be some very welcome action from them. NOT that I expect it.
 
Eyes said:
by doing so, you concede to Putin's worldview - and Russia's authoritarianism is successful forever.
Click to expand...

this is where we disagree. you don't concede, you look for common ground. the world is full of people we disagree with, we cannot force our values onto others. it has repeatedly been shown that it does not work!

putin is not russia. he's 69 years old and hopefully on the way out. one way to make sure his successor is just as bad as him is to radicalise russians against the west as is happening now.
 
the pleasure principal said:
this is where we disagree. you don't concede, you look for common ground. the world is full of people we disagree with, we cannot force our values onto others. it has repeatedly been shown that it does not work!

putin is not russia. he's 69 years old and hopefully on the way out. one way to make sure his successor is just as bad as him is to radicalise russians against the west as is happening now.
Click to expand...
bit of a difference between 'values' and dictatorship. Russia will continue to have a government that isn't free so long as it is allowed to have one. Putin may be in power for years more and his successor will almost certainly be as bad as him left alone.

Do I mean forcibly changing it to fit the liberal international order? no, god no. Do I mean starving it out, also no. There's no easy fixes to it. But it's bad and it needs to be fixed and the values of Russian people aren't being ruled by a strongman who is belligerent to his neighbours and ensures he and rich billionaires are the ones who profit from unilaterally ruling a superpower. That's no peoples' values.

See, that's not where we disagree actually. Once Russia ceases their bad behaviour, they should be brought into the fold and not further punished. Absolutely. Putin (or whoever else) will do what keeps them power and if ceasing to attack Ukraine will keep him in power, then great, ideally that's where it goes, with unpopularity even seeping through his propaganda. But Ukraine in NATO would protect them from Russia, not goad them into attacking.

(and of course I agree that several methods of 'sanctioning Russia' that involve denying ordinary Russians services that would never affect its leaders are ineffective and bad but I never said that either - I said that politically and diplomatically the leaders of the West needed to be more forceful in impressing upon Russia that it cannot get away with what it has done in its sphere since Putin came to power and they are not responsible for Putin's warmongering by protecting other states)
 
Flags are terribly exciting for some people, apart from those cruel souls who didn’t vote for Invincible and left poor Carola without her second gong europhonique d’or
 
  • Like
Reactions: D5K
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom