American Politics

[shionoro]

@Jubei_Kibagami

The battle in Kyiv is roaring. Eating your words yet or still in denial?

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

I just don't there's a realistic place where Russia's behavior isn't propagandized and ever looked upon favorably by any member of NATO regardless of what they do. Of course, in this situation what they are doing in invading Ukraine removes the possibility entirely anyway. I just wonder if that meant the alternatives would be worse for Russia in the long term anyway and that's why we're here now.

What it comes down to for me personally is the notion that Russia is just doing what they're doing now for fun and not in response to any legitimate security threat just seems like sipping the NATO Kool-Aid.

But what kind of threat would that be? Russia borders to Nato states, none of them has ever bahved aggressively to them. When Russia raised a fuss about missiles in Poland, the US ultimately relented.
Finnland+sweden did not join Nato and Russia still kept bullying them.
Russia is aggressive against the non nato state moldova.
Russia is aggressive against the non nato state georgia.

Did Poland ever threaten Russia? Or the baltics? None of them did. Russia was aggressive towards ukraine before ukraine ever wanted to join nato. Ukraine wants to do that because russia threatens it.

So how in the world is there a legitimate security threat to russia by the prospect of ukraine joining nato when it already borders to nato states and none of them had serious troops stationed in them?

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022 ---

I am all for that but tbh to me it looks like russia was always going to invade ukraine and what few meetings there were regarding de-escalation a week or two back look more like merely distractions.

IT is clear to me that this invasion was planned for months, probably years.
Russia prepared for this very strategically. First, they made their economy relatively independent from the west so further sanctions wont hit them that hard.
They slowly built up troops and they als depleted western gas reserves so the west would not have a good gas supply.

This whole game was a farce, russia was always going to attack. There was nothing ukraine could have done (sans basically handing itself over) to prevent this war.

 

[ninjabot]

I just don't there's a realistic place where Russia's behavior isn't propagandized and ever looked upon favorably by any member of NATO regardless of what they do. Of course, in this situation what they are doing in invading Ukraine removes the possibility entirely anyway. I just wonder if that meant the alternatives would be worse for Russia in the long term anyway and that's why we're here now.

What it comes down to for me personally is the notion that Russia is just doing what they're doing now for fun and not in response to any legitimate security threat just seems like sipping the NATO Kool-Aid.

I dunno. I haven't seen it claimed that Putin is doing this for fun. The running theory seems to be that Putin doesn't want Ukraine to become a democracy so he has say over the political future of it, and that NATO has taken too much already. Over time Putin has gradually been preparing for this because NATO has gradually been getting closer and closer to Russia's borders, but that doesn't get any sympathy from me, because NATO has to be joined willingly, and if it seems like that's what the people want, then that's what the people should get.

Knowing that, why the hell should I care that Putin doesn't want Ukraine to join NATO?

 

[kkck]

IT is clear to me that this invasion was planned for months, probably years.
Russia prepared for this very strategically. First, they made their economy relatively independent from the west so further sanctions wont hit them that hard.
They slowly built up troops and they als depleted western gas reserves so the west would not have a good gas supply.

This whole game was a farce, russia was always going to attack. There was nothing ukraine could have done (sans basically handing itself over) to prevent this war.

That's a fair point that i have not really seen brought up elsewhere... This sort of operation definitely takes long times to plan. What I find most infuriating about all of this is that this is probably just a power play from a fossil like putin over some delusion of a grand russia while destabilizing the west... All for the fucking motherland... I don't rule out other hypothesis regarding the motives behind this but putin being an unhinged nationalist remains a better explanation to current events than crocodile tears over security concerns.

 

[shionoro]

That's a fair point that i have not really seen brought up elsewhere... This sort of operation definitely takes long times to plan. What I find most infuriating about all of this is that this is probably just a power play from a fossil like putin over some delusion of a grand russia while destabilizing the west... All for the fucking motherland... I don't rule out other hypothesis regarding the motives behind this but putin being an unhinged nationalist remains a better explanation to current events than crocodile tears over security concerns.

Zhirinovsky is leader of a russian right extremist party and a known populist and drunkard (fake opposition obviously). You can see him as russian trump. He knew about the war months in advance Eerie footage shows Russian politician predicting the exact time of Ukraine invasion - World News - Mirror Online

If that guy knows it, it means it was an open secret and he heard from it from some general or other politician. Nobody can say that Russia was forced to do this or it was ukraine's or nato's actions that led it to do it. Russia wanted to do it, provably for months, likely for years.

My view is by the way that putin is not insane and follows very logical and strategic thinking. He plays insane because that scares us.
I think he very thoroughly knows his endgame and what the west and ukraine is likely going to do.
I think if he miscalculated something, it is about ukrainian resistance and domestic russian opinion of this.

In my opinion, Putins endgame is that everybody is scared of him and he gets out of this as a powerful leader that nato has to respect. If the west is not standing united, for example if trump is reelected or if European states scatter and take back sanctions, then Putin can actually succeed here.
So what if they sanction him now? If Trump pulls the nato defense pact into question, Europe is not going to play rough with Putin if they want to keep the Baltics safe.
If Europeans scatter and take back sanctions, similarly, the US is not going to hold him accountable alone. How would it if Europe keeps buying his gas?

Russia definitely loses if the west keeps standing united, but if the West does this is anyone's guess and I give it a toss up.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

@Jubei_Kibagami

What we can see on this twitter video (no gore, but cruel, so only watch with a strong stomache) is a russian tank curshing a civilian car with an old man inside on purpose.

Balša Božović on Twitter: "Za sve one koji ne žele da vide šta Putin radi u Ukrajini. Ruski narod ne stoji iza ovoga. Ovo je Putinov lični rat. Na obraz medjunarodnoj zajednici koja ovo nemo posmatra. #Ukraine https://t.co/aqfhpMuX9A" / Twitter

Is this the kind of denazification you envisioned? Or is that a surgical strike perhaps?
These are the forces of an invader who has the mission to scare a country into submission.
This war is not about small parts of eastern Ukraine. It is about breaking Ukraine's neck, a country that never threatened Russia, and in order to break its neck, Russian soldiers are going to kill thousands of men and even boys that take part in public resistance.

Putin also unleashed Kadyrow's Brigades now, a guy who is known for his violence and cruelty and on record for saying Ukraine should be part of Russia. 10.000 of them are now going to wreck havic in Ukraine. But I guess that is your typical, run off the mill anti imperialist move too.

 

[kkck]

Zhirinovsky is leader of a russian right extremist party and a known populist and drunkard (fake opposition obviously). You can see him as russian trump. He knew about the war months in advance Eerie footage shows Russian politician predicting the exact time of Ukraine invasion - World News - Mirror Online

If that guy knows it, it means it was an open secret and he heard from it from some general or other politician. Nobody can say that Russia was forced to do this or it was ukraine's or nato's actions that led it to do it. Russia wanted to do it, provably for months, likely for years.

My view is by the way that putin is not insane and follows very logical and strategic thinking. He plays insane because that scares us.
I think he very thoroughly knows his endgame and what the west and ukraine is likely going to do.
I think if he miscalculated something, it is about ukrainian resistance and domestic russian opinion of this.

In my opinion, Putins endgame is that everybody is scared of him and he gets out of this as a powerful leader that nato has to respect. If the west is not standing united, for example if trump is reelected or if European states scatter and take back sanctions, then Putin can actually succeed here.
So what if they sanction him now? If Trump pulls the nato defense pact into question, Europe is not going to play rough with Putin if they want to keep the Baltics safe.
If Europeans scatter and take back sanctions, similarly, the US is not going to hold him accountable alone. How would it if Europe keeps buying his gas?

Russia definitely loses if the west keeps standing united, but if the West does this is anyone's guess and I give it a toss up.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

@Jubei_Kibagami

What we can see on this twitter video (no gore, but cruel, so only watch with a strong stomache) is a russian tank curshing a civilian car with an old man inside on purpose.

Balša Božović on Twitter: "Za sve one koji ne žele da vide šta Putin radi u Ukrajini. Ruski narod ne stoji iza ovoga. Ovo je Putinov lični rat. Na obraz medjunarodnoj zajednici koja ovo nemo posmatra. #Ukraine https://t.co/aqfhpMuX9A" / Twitter

Is this the kind of denazification you envisioned? Or is that a surgical strike perhaps?
These are the forces of an invader who has the mission to scare a country into submission.
This war is not about small parts of eastern Ukraine. It is about breaking Ukraine's neck, a country that never threatened Russia, and in order to break its neck, Russian soldiers are going to kill thousands of men and even boys that take part in public resistance.

Putin also unleashed Kadyrow's Brigades now, a guy who is known for his violence and cruelty and on record for saying Ukraine should be part of Russia. 10.000 of them are now going to wreck havic in Ukraine. But I guess that is your typical, run off the mill anti imperialist move too.

Ah, don't get me wrong, I do not believe putin isn't a rational actor or is suicidal. But as far as I can tell he is a rational actor within the context of his own nationalism. Not exactly or necessarily driven by economics benefits.

Something I had been wondering for a while also kinda makes sense now, I think. A while back you had all these stuff with hunter biden and ukraine coming out... Pretty much every bit of information that came out from that amounted to nothing. And just in general it would have been difficult to even identify a crime since hunter using his dad's name to get a job at a private company is not a crime. You'd have needed joe while he was holding any office to have used the power of said office for there to be a crime (which there was never any evidence for). But it did succeed in getting the US right wing, who is already way too chill with putin, to also not be fans of ukraine.

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

@Jubei_Kibagami

The battle in Kyiv is roaring. Eating your words yet or still in denial?

What words exactly? Putin was involved in Kiev in the first 40 minutes of the invasion - I posted about this before I ever said anything to you. I posted about Belarus' involvement as it was happening - i.e., clearly on the opposite side of the Donbas in Ukraine and proximal to Kiev - and heading that way. Why would I talk about Belarus violating the border mere miles from Kiev if I didn't think there was a clear *military* destination in mind, obviously being Kiev? Why would forces enter from multiple directions (and not entirely in the East) at once if my claim is that he stays in Donbas exclusively and forever? Clearly, I'm talking about his intentions with the country after the operations have ceased: permanent occupation (in Kiev) verses a (time) limited military engagement for regime change. You know, what we've perfected.

This has been the context of what I've said in every post, I even made reference to the size of Donbas potentially being annexed - not the entire landmass of Ukraine (Kiev being the reference for taking the country, like we'd say with about Washington or Moscow). Putin had already violated areas outside of Donbas all the way to and including Kiev - as I reported night one - so I've never once taken the position he'd stay in that region exclusively because I literally posted the opposite from my first posts about the invasion.

I acknowledged the military action/deaths in the capital ALREADY. I said he was targeting military targets (in Kiev) not civilians (and that they seem to be largely fine - referencing the live footage), but that I was worried about the humanitarian outcome - a potential in the future clearly.

I said:

I said it was? In any event, the targets were exclusively military. Nothing shows otherwise. I have respect for keeping the civilians out of this as much as possible, though I fear a humanitarian crisis - again. Just this time it's not something WE have to own.

In response to you saying/asking:

killing people int he capital is just fine?

i.e., we were ALREADY talking about combat in Kiev. Why would I worry about a potential humanitarian crisis (fallout from combat in the capital, the context of our discussion there) if I thought that he was done there entirely?

Obviously I was making the point that he's only targeting the military presence there, and making efforts to avoid/minimize civilian casualties.

Because the context was that you were making it sound like he was just bombarding the capital as a whole, "killing people" as opposed to fighting military targets exclusively.

I said I thought he'd decapitate the government (which obviously involves entering the capital - how else does that work exactly?), demilitarize the country (these are all things Putin explicitly stated), and he only seemed to be targeting combatants (I made reference to the civilians being fine, not targeted indiscriminately). How can he do that without clearing out the militias and remnant militants in Kiev as well?

And that ultimately Ukraine won't stay occupied. <---- this is the context

Not that he won't enter Kiev ever (there were reports of paramilitary presence on night one), but that he won't take it (for good - as in to own it post-invasion). I posted clips of explosions in Kiev the first night. There were and continue to be military presences there, so.... yeah?

I then compared it to us going into Baghdad. Which we did, we just didn't annex it. Your thinking he's rolling on Ukraine to take the entire country, and then he's on to the next former soviet state. I'm thinking this was about 2 territories, and that he has to engage the entire military (across the country, clearly) to 'free' them and then he can be done. But he can't do that from just entering Donbas and staying there, can he? That ship had sailed night one. As I had posted about. As I had discussed.

My entire point is that once he's cut the head off the snake he'll leave Ukraine to Ukraine (after installing a puppet regime there, taking one from our playbook). That involves work throughout the country (shocker: this includes Kiev), but it doesn't necessitate that the presence is permanent.

So sure, if you remove ALL the context and subsequent words I said to you on night one, you can try to create a silly straw man that Kiev is off the table for being a sustained military target, as opposed to the ultimate goal of conquering. I was clearly talking about the difference between owning Kiev and thus all of Ukraine versus ultimately ending up taking out the military presence there and leaving. The context of "pushing for Kiev" was clearly made in reference to 'pushing to own it'.




Now, if Putin pushes to have ALL of Ukraine (Kiev as mentioned being the seat, hence the context), as a newly-annexed mass of Russia, then I'll be wrong. I've maintained from the beginning this is entirely about 'freeing' the newly-acknowledged states in the East, and to do so involves military involvement across the country as a whole, which ofc includes... Kiev.

 

[shionoro]

Ah, don't get me wrong, I do not believe putin isn't a rational actor or is suicidal. But as far as I can tell he is a rational actor within the context of his own nationalism. Not exactly or necessarily driven by economics benefits.

Something I had been wondering for a while also kinda makes sense now, I think. A while back you had all these stuff with hunter biden and ukraine coming out... Pretty much every bit of information that came out from that amounted to nothing. And just in general it would have been difficult to even identify a crime since hunter using his dad's name to get a job at a private company is not a crime. You'd have needed joe while he was holding any office to have used the power of said office for there to be a crime (which there was never any evidence for). But it did succeed in getting the US right wing, who is already way too chill with putin, to also not be fans of ukraine.

Yes, I think that too. Framing Ukraine as a friend of Joe Biden and vice versa succeeded in creating propaganda against US involvement in Ukraine.

It worries me a lot how successful that kind of propaganda is in the US, to be honest.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

What words exactly? Putin was involved in Kiev in the first 40 minutes of the invasion - I posted about this before I ever said anything to you. I posted about Belarus' involvement as it was happening - i.e., clearly on the opposite side of the Donbas in Ukraine and proximal to Kiev - and heading that way. Why would I talk about Belarus violating the border mere miles from Kiev if I didn't think there was a clear *military* destination in mind, obviously being Kiev? Why would forces enter from multiple directions (and not entirely in the East) at once if my claim is that he stays in Donbas exclusively and forever? Clearly, I'm talking about his intentions with the country after the operations have ceased: permanent occupation (in Kiev) verses a (time) limited military engagement for regime change. You know, what we've perfected.

This has been the context of what I've said in every post, I even made reference to the size of Donbas potentially being annexed - not the entire landmass of Ukraine (Kiev being the reference for taking the country, like we'd say with about Washington or Moscow). Putin had already violated areas outside of Donbas all the way to and including Kiev - as I reported night one - so I've never once taken the position he'd stay in that region exclusively because I literally posted the opposite from my first posts about the invasion.

I acknowledged the military action/deaths in the capital ALREADY. I said he was targeting military targets (in Kiev) not civilians (and that they seem to be largely fine - referencing the live footage), but that I was worried about the humanitarian outcome - a potential in the future clearly.

I said:

You said you'd take back your words if Putin marches on Kyiv. He is inside Kyiv. So, will you? There are troops on the ground fighting with ukrainian troops.
This is not 'some military targets'. They are fighting ukrainian civilians now that are armed with molotovs to protect their country.

Now, if Putin pushes to have ALL of Ukraine (Kiev as mentioned being the seat, hence the context), as a newly-annexed mass of Russia, then I'll be wrong. I've maintained from the beginning this is entirely about 'freeing' the newly-acknowledged states in the East, and to do so involves military involvement across the country as a whole, which ofc includes... Kiev.

Ah, moving the goalpost, now it is all of Ukraine. Sure, to be really imperialist, you need to push for all of a country. Just taking half of it plus the capital and killing civilians is not enough.

Clearly, this whole thing is about eastern Ukraine, which is why the map looks like this mdelgu4lgkl7_FMcm_kKWQBMTaGd.jpg (4000×2250) (allmystery.de)

Yeah, quite visible how he is just "protecting" the eastern tiny parts when he moves in from all sides while crushing civilian resistance. Typical anti imp stuff, trying to break a countries neck from 3 sides with soldiers on the ground in its capital.

You are protecting a fascist dictator moving to create a new worldorder.

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

I dunno. I haven't seen it claimed that Putin is doing this for fun. The running theory seems to be that Putin doesn't want Ukraine to become a democracy so he has say over the political future of it, and that NATO has taken too much already. Over time Putin has gradually been preparing for this because NATO has gradually been getting closer and closer to Russia's borders, but that doesn't get any sympathy from me, because NATO has to be joined willingly, and if it seems like that's what the people want, then that's what the people should get.

Knowing that, why the hell should I care that Putin doesn't want Ukraine to join NATO?

Because you aren't familiar with what NATO is and isn't supposed to be, the foundation of it forming and its promised limits of scope, and how it represents an existential threat to Russia that we wouldn't tolerate (nor any other country from a bloc of hostile enemies moving to their borders) if the shoe was on the other foot.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

Yes, I think that too. Framing Ukraine as a friend of Joe Biden and vice versa succeeded in creating propaganda against US involvement in Ukraine.

It worries me a lot how successful that kind of propaganda is in the US, to be honest.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

You said you'd take back your words if Putin marches on Kyiv. He is inside Kyiv. So, will you? There are troops on the ground fighting with ukrainian troops.
This is not 'some military targets'. They are fighting ukrainian civilians now that are armed with molotovs to protect their country.



Ah, moving the goalpost, now it is all of Ukraine. Sure, to be really imperialist, you need to push for all of a country. Just taking half of it plus the capital and killing civilians is not enough.

Clearly, this whole thing is about eastern Ukraine, which is why the map looks like this mdelgu4lgkl7_FMcm_kKWQBMTaGd.jpg (4000×2250) (allmystery.de)

Yeah, quite visible how he is just "protecting" the eastern tiny parts when he moves in from all sides while crushing civilian resistance. Typical anti imp stuff, trying to break a countries neck from 3 sides with soldiers on the ground in its capital.

You are protecting a fascist dictator moving to create a new worldorder.

Ah so you're ignoring ALL I wrote to you just now, and that night.

Context was ownership.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022 ---

You are protecting a fascist dictator moving to create a new worldorder.

Elaborate.

 

[shionoro]

Ah so you're ignoring ALL I wrote to you just now, and that night.

Context was ownership.

I am ignoring the bullshit and keeping count. Fact is you said you would take your words back if Putin marches on Kyiv. He he does, he is inside. Now you move the goalpost.

Fact is you protect a fascist dicator that invades another country just now with some bullshit kremlin propaganda along the lines of 'denazification'

Russia is inside that country fighting civilians that resist it. Fact is ukraine never threatened russia. Ukraine also that there was no recent violence against russian ukrainians in the free parts of ukraine.

This whole war is the war of an imperialist old russian man that wants to let ukraine and his own soldiers bleed for it. And you protect him by repeating his propaganda.

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

You said you'd take back your words if Putin marches on Kyiv. He is inside Kyiv. So, will you? There are troops on the ground fighting with ukrainian troops.
This is not 'some military targets'. They are fighting ukrainian civilians now that are armed with molotovs to protect their country.

Oh, so you're a civilian if you take up arms? How does that work exactly?

I see that the military of one force is engaged against the military of another force. That's changed how exactly since night one discussions?

 

[shionoro]

Oh, so you're a civilian if you take up arms? How does that work exactly?

I see that the military of one force is engaged against the military of another force. That's changed how exactly since night one discussions?

Oh, so you justify violence against civilians. Nice. That is typical anti imp stuff.Bet the guy whose car was crashed by a russian tank was an evil soldier of a nazi force, too, right?

Yes, if a fascist invader invades your country, taking up arms does not make you a soldier. It makes you a hero.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

These are the kinds of people protecting against the russian invaders right now:

NEXTA on Twitter: "#Kyiv residents are preparing to fight back against the occupiers. https://t.co/7lY5wAWMI6" / Twitter

Somewhat overweight or scrawny. Somewhat too young or somewhat too old. That kind of ragtag group is a chunk of the force that is protecting their homecity right now against soldiers sent from far away, that claim to need to denazify or demilitarize them but actually just bomb their capital and force their women and children to seek shelter in the subway.

And you are telling me that these people are soldiers that are fair game to kill. Yeah. Typical anti imp stuff.
I guess they are the people Putin feels threatened by while sitting on a throne of gold surrounded by nukes.

 

[kkck]

Yes, I think that too. Framing Ukraine as a friend of Joe Biden and vice versa succeeded in creating propaganda against US involvement in Ukraine.

It worries me a lot how successful that kind of propaganda is in the US, to be honest.

Hmm, yeah... To add to that, my post was about right wingers of course but on broader terms the US in general is suffering a... crisis of truth? As reports came out not only from US intelligence agencies but media and people from all over the world at this point about how imminent this was you had both right and left wing media in the US not only being skeptical (which is fine and healthy) of this but also immediately believing the opposite is the truth. Being skeptical is fine, healthy and necessary but FSS, there's more than one type of lie. Someone lying to you is not evidence that the opposite is is the actual truth. People at the US are at a point where if you tell someone the sky is black they immediately retort that is must be white.. US government BS combined with russian spread conspiracy theories have simply fried people's brains.

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

I am ignoring the bullshit and keeping count. Fact is you said you would take your words back if Putin marches on Kyiv. He he does, he is inside. Now you move the goalpost.

I never discussed the CONTEXT of fighting in Kiev. I discussed the CONTEXT of pushing to OWN KIEV, as in with a permanent solution. Permanent occupation. Annexation. However you want to classify it. If I renovate a rental house I don't LIVE in it, though I am in it long enough for the renovation. How can I compare it to what happened in Baghdad any more clearly? As Kiev goes goes the entire country. If Putin takes Kiev he takes the entire country essentially.

Fact is you protect a fascist dicator

I've never taken a position that Putin isn't a thug. Nice try. Ukraine can be corrupt and so can Russia. And so can the West. It's not either-or. Putin being a domineering figure has nothing to do with other parties automatically being angels.

Name one thing I have said I liked about Putin as a person. You can't. Name one thing I said was entirely justifiable. You can't.

I simply understand that causes have effects. While you want to lay this on the shoulders of one person entirely like the events have been happening in a vacuum.

that invades another country just now with some bullshit kremlin propaganda along the lines of 'denazification'

When did I say that's the ONLY reason given? I've been involved in PAGES of discussion about NATO expansion.

But, I guess this is where you make the fallacious claim that there aren't literal neo-Nazis embedded and used willingly by Ukrainian brass.

Are you making the claim now that Ukraine doesn't have a legitimate neo-fascist/nazi force in its military?

Russia is inside that country fighting civilians that resist it.

So.... combatants.

Fact is ukraine never threatened russia.

I never claimed it did. It DID however threaten its own civilians inside the Donbas region. And you can't provide a shred of evidence to the contra

Ukraine also that there was no recent violence against russian ukrainians in the free parts of ukraine.

I posted the wiki which clearly outlines violations of the ceasefire (from both sides) well into late 2021. You on the other hand claimed the events in 2014 had ended, which is factually incorrect in every way imaginable. Should I repost? Do you have evidence to the contrary?

You said it was over. It wasn't. Ukraine has had a civil war going on for 8 years, and you aren't aware of this?

This whole war is the war of an imperialist old russian man that wants to let ukraine and his own soldiers bleed for it. And you protect him by repeating his propaganda.

Hilarious. Read your line again and tell me that doesn't sound like a CIA talking point as opposed to something objectively-formed. Talk about propaganda.

 

[shionoro]

Hmm, yeah... To add to that, my post was about right wingers of course but on broader terms the US in general is suffering a... crisis of truth? As reports came out not only from US intelligence agencies but media and people from all over the world at this point about how imminent this was you had both right and left wing media in the US not only being skeptical (which is fine and healthy) of this but also immediately believing the opposite is the truth. Being skeptical is fine, healthy and necessary but FSS, there's more than one type of lie. Someone lying to you is not evidence that the opposite is is the actual truth. People at the US are at a point where if you tell someone the sky is black they immediately retort that is must be white.. US government BS combined with russian spread conspiracy theories have simply fried people's brains.

The most successful part of russian propaganda in the US is merging right and leftwing propaganda.

They saw how divided the democratic party is by the poles of the leftwing and the moderates and they intensified that wedge. As you say, the biggest asset here is mistrust. Most americans do not trust the media any more, no matter what medium it is, and that can easily be abused.

Someone who mistrusts everyone cannot form a firm response and just believes what he usually believes. In case of leftwingers, that is that the US is probably warmongering, no matter whether it is or not. In case of a rightwinger, that is usually that democrats are up to something.

So you give everyone a good enough pseudo reason to believe what you want them to believe, they will.

If Putin says it is Nato who is warmongering, people who like to believe Nato is warmongering will believe it, because Nato has (actually) been warmongering in the past. It is as easy as that. Sadly.

 

[xi0]

I am all for that but tbh to me it looks like russia was always going to invade ukraine and what few meetings there were regarding de-escalation a week or two back look more like merely distractions.

I'm not using hindsight here, I'm talking about now. Perhaps it may be the case that it wouldn't have made a difference, but Russia's actions here make no sense without the finish line being the negotiation table.

I keep seeing people decrying appeasement, when I'm really curious what other option they think is on the table? Open conflict with Russia?

But what kind of threat would that be? Russia borders to Nato states, none of them has ever bahved aggressively to them. When Russia raised a fuss about missiles in Poland, the US ultimately relented.
Finnland+sweden did not join Nato and Russia still kept bullying them.
Russia is aggressive against the non nato state moldova.
Russia is aggressive against the non nato state georgia.

Did Poland ever threaten Russia? Or the baltics? None of them did. Russia was aggressive towards ukraine before ukraine ever wanted to join nato. Ukraine wants to do that because russia threatens it.

So how in the world is there a legitimate security threat to russia by the prospect of ukraine joining nato when it already borders to nato states and none of them had serious troops stationed in them?

This is a reaction to enlargement though. What could Russia do to Poland or the Baltics even if they had threatened Russia?

The confounding situation here is that what he's against is only being reinforced by his actions. Saw mention of Finland reconsidering it not being in NATO.

I dunno. I haven't seen it claimed that Putin is doing this for fun. The running theory seems to be that Putin doesn't want Ukraine to become a democracy so he has say over the political future of it, and that NATO has taken too much already. Over time Putin has gradually been preparing for this because NATO has gradually been getting closer and closer to Russia's borders, but that doesn't get any sympathy from me, because NATO has to be joined willingly, and if it seems like that's what the people want, then that's what the people should get.

Knowing that, why the hell should I care that Putin doesn't want Ukraine to join NATO?

There's been a civil war in Ukraine fought by Russian-backed separatists for a decade now, so he already has a say in it's political future. Ukraine as it is now would have never been allowed to join NATO in the first place.

Why should you care? Well, not sure if that's a rhetorical question or not, but obviously that is related to why he invaded.

 

[shionoro]

I never discussed the CONTEXT of fighting in Kiev. I discussed the CONTEXT of pushing to OWN KIEV, as in with a permanent solution. Permanent occupation. Annexation. However you want to classify it. If I renovate a rental house I don't LIVE in it, though I am in it long enough for the renovation. How can I compare it to what happened in Baghdad any more clearly? As Kiev goes goes the entire country. If Putin takes Kiev he takes the entire country essentially.

The just bombing it down is okay then, alright. Typical anti imp stuff.

I've never taken a position that Putin isn't a thug. Nice try. Ukraine can be corrupt and so can Russia. And so can the West. It's not either-or. Putin being a domineering figure has nothing to do with other parties automatically being angels.

Name one thing I have said I liked about Putin as a person. You can't. Name one thing I said was entirely justifiable. You can't.

I simply understand that causes have effects. While you want to lay this on the shoulders of one person entirely like the events have been happening in a vacuum.

Sure, not a nice guy. Just protecting him, but hey, if he takes all of ukraine, you will reluctantly admit you might have been wrong. That is something i guess! Not brave enough to fully endorse him, but surely willing to defend putin while it matters.

I never claimed it did. It DID however threaten its own civilians inside the Donbas region. And you can't provide a shred of evidence to the contra

So where are the Ukrainian aggressions this year against any of the russians living in the nonoccupied parts of Ukraine?

So.... combatants.

So killing any civilian is fair game as long as they fight back. Noted, typical anti imp stuff.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

his is a reaction to enlargement though. What could Russia do to Poland or the Baltics even if they had threatened Russia?

The confounding situation here is that what he's against is only being reinforced by his actions. Saw mention of Finland reconsidering it not being in NATO.

How is it? What can poland and the baltics do to russia? There were not even moderate amounts of nato soldiers inside these countries and russia was more than influential enough to stop poland's missile deployment back then when Bush wanted these missiles there. Bush relented in the end because Russia told him to. That does not look like someone that can be pushed around by Nato.
So how is it rational to be afraid of an enlargement?

Putin never felt threatened by Nato. That is something he likes to tell, but it is not true. The first time there was talk about ukraine being in nato, russia had no objections. Putin even publicly said russia might join nato one day themselves back then.
If russia did not feel threatened by nato back in 2005 when it was far weaker than it is now, why should it feel threatened now, right when the US wants to mostly pull out of europe anyway?

It is a sham.

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

Oh, so you justify violence against civilians. Nice. That is typical anti imp stuff.Bet the guy whose car was crashed by a russian tank was an evil soldier of a nazi force, too, right?

Yes, if a fascist invader invades your country, taking up arms does not make you a soldier. It makes you a hero.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 25, 2022, Original Post Date: Feb 25, 2022 ---

These are the kinds of people protecting against the russian invaders right now:

NEXTA on Twitter: "#Kyiv residents are preparing to fight back against the occupiers. https://t.co/7lY5wAWMI6" / Twitter

Somewhat overweight or scrawny. Somewhat too young or somewhat too old. That kind of ragtag group is a chunk of the force that is protecting their homecity right now against soldiers sent from far away, that claim to need to denazify or demilitarize them but actually just bomb their capital and force their women and children to seek shelter in the subway.

And you are telling me that these people are soldiers that are fair game to kill. Yeah. Typical anti imp stuff.
I guess they are the people Putin feels threatened by while sitting on a throne of gold surrounded by nukes.

You're no longer a civilian if you take up arms. This isn't hard. You don't have to be young or in shape to be a militant.

You're making this out to be some Warsaw Uprising.

Customary IHL - Practice Relating to Rule 6. Civilians’ Loss of Protection from Attack

Practice Relating to Rule 6. Civilians’ Loss of Protection from Attack

ihl-databases.icrc.org

"
Geneva Conventions (1949)
Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions protects “[p]ersons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause” against “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds”.
Additional Protocol I
Article 51(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides that civilians shall enjoy protection against the dangers arising from military operations “unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities”.
Additional Protocol II
Article 13(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides that civilians shall enjoy protection against the dangers arising from military operations “unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities”. "

These aren't FORCED children conscripts. They are willingly taking up arms/active role in fighting.

 

[shionoro]

You're no longer a civilian if you take up arms. This isn't hard. You don't have to be young or in shape to be a militant.

You're making this out to be some Warsaw Uprising.

You are just repeating how you justify killing civilians by definition games.I already provided you with another video that has a russian tank crush a civilian vehicle.

The shelling of Kyiv also killed several civilians.
You faulting these average joes for fighting back is the cherry on top of your imperialist cake. While making up stories about evil ukraine.

Seemingly, you like to not source any hostilities against russians in the free parts of ukraine. Because there were no recent such hostilities that would ever justify an invasion. No genocide, no insurgency.

 

[kkck]

I'm not using hindsight here, I'm talking about now. Perhaps it may be the case that it wouldn't have made a difference, but Russia's actions here make no sense without the finish line being the negotiation table.

I keep seeing people decrying appeasement, when I'm really curious what other option they think is on the table? Open conflict with Russia?

I mean, if that was the case then wouldn't there be more of a sign of it by now? What concessions is russia looking for at this point? Don't get me wrong, I am definitely for a peaceful resolution. I want that. But is there any evidence so far that russia has interest in that? Help me out here because I am trying to find ANYTHING that points to that and just don't see it. Yet. hopefully.

I think that's the gist of it? Russia is attacking pretty much the whole of ukraine by now. Which is pretty strong evidence that they are playing for keeps. So the options here are:

1.- Open warfare with russia.
2.- Russia takes ukraine, no one does anything about it, the world moves on.

What would a peaceful negotiation look like at this point? Russia retreats from ukraine in exchange for ukraine not joining nato? Ukraine does not join nato and russia installs in ukraine a puppet government which won't join nato anyways?

 

[shionoro]

It was never even on the table for Ukraine to join Nato in the recent times.

Nato did not want to outright say "it is not going to happen", but it was clear that it was not going to happen. And the russian hostilities started when ukraine did not even want to join nato. Let's just not pretend that it was ever about russia feeling threatened.

This is about russia wanting to prevent ukraine drifting to the west socially and becoming a proper democracy. And it is about creating a new order in europe. But certainly not because russia has any actual safety interests that would be hurt by ukraine joining nato.
If anything, Russia would be angry about not being able to bully Ukraine as easily anymore.