American Politics

[shionoro]

It is very clear what Putin meant by now. And it is also very clear that Ukraine, including its russian speakers, is united against Putin.

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

Clearly, it does. That is why Russia is sanctioned so badly now and was condemned so widely.

Is that why no one is sending ANYTHING? A few stinger missiles that might not even get over the border? Well, I'm certainly glad Zelensky got that standing ovation - that's certainly helping!

Remember when we sanctioned Hitler to death?

YOu could say: "This war was completely unprovoked and is a war crime not seen in Europe since world war 2 and that is why Putin has to be stopped with any effort the western world can take"
Because that is the truth in this conflict.

I like the part where you don't seem to comprehend he's seemingly mad (or at least willing to go all-in on his side) and in command of the largest nuclear arsenal on the earth. "Any effort" virtually assures YOU and I and everyone we know dies. We can't do "any effort," we just can't. And you see that playing out.

As to what I'll say - his actions in invading the entirety of Ukraine is condemnable.

I do *comprehend* the Russian perspective - everyone self-justifies and has their own agenda. Though I don't find it agreeable, the world doesn't revolve around me as you like to point out. The only people I sympathize with are those that have nothing to do with this. That excludes most gov officials from every angle, arms dealers, financiers, military war pigs, and those that join any involved military for any reason other than coercion/stupidity.

Included in my antipathy is Putin. He's hardly the limiting figure here.

And one side is justified. The ukrainian side.

In an alternate reality where Russia didn't invade, would you want UN/NATO peacekeeping troops in Donbas? And if so, to what end? And if not, why not?

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 3, 2022, Original Post Date: Mar 3, 2022 ---

It is very clear what Putin meant by now. And it is also very clear that Ukraine, including its russian speakers, is united against Putin.

I've read multiple reports of anecdotes where someone used to be pro-Russian or even pro-Putin in Ukraine, but now hate his guts. It's not surprising to see that at all, completely believable that he's losing support even from his former supporters - but how many? Of course, you never know how or why you end up reading such stories... even real ones are boosted to garner sympathy one way or another, or could be fabricated, or simply just real.

The flip side is I've read how some are thanking him for finally stepping in concerning Donbas.

Am I to only believe the former, while discounting the later?

 

[shionoro]

Is that why no one is sending ANYTHING? A few stinger missiles that might not even get over the border? Well, I'm certainly glad Zelensky got that standing ovation - that's certainly helping!

Remember when we sanctioned Hitler to death?

Ukraine is getting arms (and relevant arms) from several countries and the sanctions already taken against russia are even more relevant than that.
That kind of cooperated action against a country like Russia are completely unprecedented and it should show you how serious this is taken.

I like the part where you don't seem to comprehend he's seemingly mad (or at least willing to go all-in on his side) and in command of the largest nuclear arsenal on the earth. "Any effort" virtually assures YOU and I and everyone we know dies. We can't do "any effort," we just can't. And you see that playing out.

As to what I'll say - his actions in invading the entirety of Ukraine is condemnable.

I do *comprehend* the Russian perspective - everyone self-justifies and has their own agenda. Though I don't find it agreeable, the world doesn't revolve around me as you like to point out. The only people I sympathize with are those that have nothing to do with this. That excludes most gov officials from every angle, arms dealers, financiers, military war pigs, and those that join any involved military for any reason other than coercion/stupidity.

Included in my antipathy is Putin. He's hardly the limiting figure here.

Those were a lot of words to say "i dont care".
You still are unable to say that this war is russias fault alone and fall back on 'oh well i dont agree with it but certainly there are other opinions'. That is cowardice, certainly not a wellbalanced opinion.

I said the west should do everything we can do to stop Putin. That certainly does not include nuclear warfare as a "step we can take", that should go without saying. But we can certainly destroy russia's economy and send weapons to ukraine and with what we are already doing, russia will be broke in a year or two.

In an alternate reality where Russia didn't invade, would you want UN/NATO peacekeeping troops in Donbas? And if so, to what end? And if not, why not?

If Russia didnt invade, there would be no military conflict in Donbass. Russia instigated this. But in the hypothetical fairy tale scenario where it'd still have happened, yes, i would have liked UN peacekeepers if there had been any danger for civilians until the situation could have been resolved by peaceful means.

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

Ukraine is getting arms (and relevant arms) from several countries and the sanctions already taken against russia are even more relevant than that.
That kind of cooperated action against a country like Russia are completely unprecedented and it should show you how serious this is taken.

Apparently you aren't aware that arms flow like water, even in times of peace. That includes to Ukraine.

Nothing substantial that could actually STOP or REPEL the Russian invaders is being offered. Nothing.

Those were a lot of words to say "i dont care".

Maybe I should just give you my login so you can type what I think since you seem to know more about my opinions than I do.

You still are unable to say that this war is russias fault alone and fall back on 'oh well i dont agree with it but certainly there are other opinions'. That is cowardice, certainly not a wellbalanced opinion.

This war, in the theater of Ukraine, is Russia's fault - i.e., too far. I've been clear about that. To point out that the belly of Ukraine has been involved in a civil war as well, which is not entirely Russia's fault, and relevant to how we got to where we now are, is exactly well-balanced as it is factual.

You burying your head in the sand in your continued denial that the Donbas region was involved in an ongoing turmoil on the other hand...

I said the west should do everything we can do to stop Putin. That certainly does not include nuclear warfare as a "step we can take", that should go without saying. But we can certainly destroy russia's economy and send weapons to ukraine and with what we are already doing, russia will be broke in a year or two.

I did not say WE should escalate to nukes, I said our actions could result in that being an outcome. Why do you think the nations promising Mig fighters reneged?

How do you not understand our hands are effectively tied? We won't even enforce an NFZ.

You think Ukraine - at any level from the gov down to grandma with an AK - can hold out for 2 years?

In other words, Ukraine is getting nothing but moral support.

If Russia didnt invade, there would be no military conflict in Donbass. Russia instigated this. But in the hypothetical fairy tale scenario where it'd still have happened, yes, i would have liked UN peacekeepers if there had been any danger for civilians until the situation could have been resolved by peaceful means.

OK, so in the 8 years leading up to the invasion, where were they? And if the UN wasn't going to step in, why would it be bad for Russia to do so?

 

[shionoro]

Maybe you should think about what you are saying more.

This war, in the theater of Ukraine, is Russia's fault - i.e., too far. I've been clear about that. To point out that the belly of Ukraine has been involved in a civil war as well, which is not entirely Russia's fault, and relevant to how we got to where we now are, is exactly well-balanced as it is factual.

You burying your head in the sand in your continued denial that the Donbas region was involved in an ongoing turmoil on the other hand...

The war is DE FACTO Russia's fault. That is not theatrics. And as long as you cannot admit that, you are downplaying and defending what russia does.

There is no somewhat conceivable way in which ukraine, Nato, EU or another actor has any guilt in this particularl conflict, at least not in the rational realm. The faults you can find in them are on the level of "oh well, they are not perfect too!".

Certainly, Russia creating a war in ukraine by supporting militias is not a good reason to invade the country. The fact that no civil war existed outside of the regions that russia protected and that most russian ukrainians oppose russia should make that crystal clear.

 

[xi0]

Q: Are there Neo-nazis in the Ukrainian military?

A; Yes

Q: Are there Neo-nazis among the Russian forces?

A: Yes


So what is the operative difference there? The US didn't fund or train the latter.


Thanks for coming to my TED Talk

 

[shionoro]

Q: Are there Neo-nazis in the Ukrainian military?

A; Yes

Q: Are there Neo-nazis among the Russian forces?

A: Yes


So what is the operative difference there? The US didn't fund or train the latter.


Thanks for coming to my TED Talk

But the better question is: Did Ukraine drift towards democratic reform once they got rid of Janukovich? Yes.
Did Russia drift towards authoritarianismunder Putin? Yes.

Ukraine is not defending neo nazism against a russia that wants to protect its minorities. There are right extremists in Ukraine. The general mindset of the people living in Ukraine is also certainly less woke than in California. But they are still protecting a democracy against a force that wants to destroy its democracy. And i find it very strange to keep talking about the right extremists in the country when the person in power is a jewish actor and the country drifted towards a more liberal society.

 

[xi0]

But the better question is: Did Ukraine drift towards democratic reform once they got rid of Janukovich? Yes.
Did Russia drift towards authoritarianismunder Putin? Yes.

Ukraine is not defending neo nazism against a russia that wants to protect its minorities. There are right extremists in Ukraine. The general mindset of the people living in Ukraine is also certainly less woke than in California. But they are still protecting a democracy against a force that wants to destroy its democracy. And i find it very strange to keep talking about the right extremists in the country when the person in power is a jewish actor and the country drifted towards a more liberal society.

Those aren't questions regarding anything I said though. And if you think this situation is going to result in anything trending towards further democratic reform, then I think that's pretty naive. Their populace is becoming more and more armed out of necessity, and if they do achieve victory against an unjust invasion and potential occupation, the neo-nazis in the military will be lionized just like anyone else.

I think bringing up Zelensky being Jewish in reponse is akin to saying America stopped being racist once Obama was elected. There are Jewish members of Right Sector, you know? Any Slav being a Nazi itself is completely absurd.

 

[shionoro]

Those aren't questions regarding anything I said though. And if you think this situation is going to result in anything trending towards further democratic reform, then I think that's pretty naive. Their populace is becoming more and more armed out of necessity, and if they do achieve victory against an unjust invasion and potential occupation, the neo-nazis in the military will be lionized just like anyone else.

I think bringing up Zelensky being Jewish in reponse is akin to saying America stopped being racist once Obama was elected. There are Jewish members of Right Sector, you know? Any Slav being a Nazi itself is completely absurd.

I think the point "a fascist autocracy would probably not elect a jew" still stands. If the US had been a fascist Utopia 2008, Obama would not have been elected, period.
Nobody claimed there are no nazis in Ukraine, but certainly, they are not ruling and they do not prevent the country drifting to a more liberal society.
I also made no prediction about what comes after this, I said Ukraine was drifting towards democratic reform before russia started its latest attack.

This is a dictatorship invading a democracy BECAUSE it became a democracy and started making its own decisions. The heavy focus on ukrainian right extremists does not have any relevance to this war, as they did not rule or prevent the coutnry from drifting to democracy and liberalism.

 

[xi0]

I think the point "a fascist autocracy would probably not elect a jew" still stands. If the US had been a fascist Utopia 2008, Obama would not have been elected, period.
Nobody claimed there are no nazis in Ukraine, but certainly, they are not ruling and they do not prevent the country drifting to a more liberal society.
I also made no prediction about what comes after this, I said Ukraine was drifting towards democratic reform before russia started its latest attack.

This is a dictatorship invading a democracy BECAUSE it became a democracy and started making its own decisions. The heavy focus on ukrainian right extremists does not have any relevance to this war, as they did not rule or prevent the coutnry from drifting to democracy and liberalism.

I never said or implied that Ukraine's governing apparatus is autocratic or fascist. I know the Russians like to say that to justify their actions, but no one with any sense believes that. They absolutely are a functional and important part of their military though and are where they are due in part to US "diplomacy".

I think acting like Ukraine hasn't been goaded on by outside forces and that their existence is completely self-deterministic is willful ignorance, but I digress.

 

[shionoro]

I never said or implied that Ukraine's governing apparatus is autocratic or fascist. I know the Russians like to say that to justify their actions, but no one with any sense believes that. They absolutely are a functional and important part of their military though and are where they are due in part to US "diplomacy".

I think acting like Ukraine hasn't been goaded on by outside forces and that their existence is completely self-deterministic is willful ignorance, but I digress.

But you keep saying these things without really making a real case for it. I don#t see how you could "goad" ukraine into this.
The US successfully supported Ukraine's color revolution, but that only worked because there was already a base for it in the country and it did not succeed in making it drift away from russia.

Janukovich then took over and he was very Russia friendly. The Euromaidan movement is not something you can just 'create', especially not when it comes to sustained commitment from ukrainian society.

Ukrainian national identity was not invented by americans or europeans, it was created by the russian aggression they faced after getting rid of Janukovich. And they did not want nato membership at that point yet, they wanted to get into the EU and the EU did not try to turn it against russia either.

You are not "goading" someone by presented a far superior option against their abusive pimp.

 

[ninjabot]

Is America Training Neonazis in Ukraine?

Officially no, but no one in the U.S. government seems to know for sure.

www.thedailybeast.com

So apparently they're okay with training neo-nazis, as long as they aren't neo-nazi's that have been caught committing "gross human rights violations." A process known as the Leahy Vetting process is supposed to help them find out so that they can avoid giving them support.

So, the US is trying to vet out neo nazis. They just have a shitty vetting system. And I get the whole "police actions, not ideologies" bit, but exceptions can be made when your personal opinion is one of hatred, I think.

"Never chalk up to malice would could easily be chalked up to ignorance."

 

[xi0]

But you keep saying these things without really making a real case for it. I don#t see how you could "goad" ukraine into this.
The US successfully supported Ukraine's color revolution, but that only worked because there was already a base for it in the country and it did not succeed in making it drift away from russia.

Janukovich then took over and he was very Russia friendly. The Euromaidan movement is not something you can just 'create', especially not when it comes to sustained commitment from ukrainian society.

Ukrainian national identity was not invented by americans or europeans, it was created by the russian aggression they faced after getting rid of Janukovich. And they did not want nato membership at that point yet, they wanted to get into the EU and the EU did not try to turn it against russia either.

You are not "goading" someone by presented a far superior option against their abusive pimp.

Just to give an example, do you think the Ukrainian government would have been willing to close off water supply to Crimea if they weren't backed up by the US? Is it that outlandish to suggest that such a move was tacitly encouraged even?

 

[shionoro]

Just to give an example, do you think the Ukrainian government would have been willing to close off water supply to Crimea if they weren't backed up by the US? Is it that outlandish to suggest that such a move was tacitly encouraged even?

I think it is outlandish to think that the US or EU would encourage that kind of behavior or that it would feel encouraged by the support it had. Yes. Hollande and Merkel just tried to force a nonmilitary solution by Minsk 2 and Obama endorsed that (and even explicit let them handle it).
And Minsk 2 saw terms which were already more than the Ukrainian side was comfortably willing to execute.

In that kind of setting, which player, US or EU, would be interested in the Ukrainian side escalating the war instead of the situation cooling down? The western countries already settled on the best course of action being the hostilities dying down.

It also has to be said that Ukrainians already fought against the Russia backed Militias long before they got serious western support or supplies.
Maybe you could claim that the west could sternly condemn their actions and work in tandem with russia to curb ukraine, but then I'd ask what we are exactly talking about: The west escalating the situation or, as you said, goading it on, or the west not helping russia to bully ukraine?

I don't think there is any evidence of western countries doing anything but trying to get russia and ukraine to execute minsk 2. Certainly not encouraging ukraine to take hostile actions.
Unless we are counting "we won't let russia invade you" as encouragement.

 

[xi0]

Yeah, I'm sure Ukraine closed off water supply to rectify a standing water "debt" with Crimea only after it was annexed by Russia and not before. Totally procedural and not at all intentional to make them fail agriculturally.

I think what this boils down to is me taking exception with the notion of "western influence = good, everything else = bad". I'm not in that camp, I think most non-neolib analysts looking at the current situation aren't either. My thoughts pretty much line-up with what Jeremy Scahill had to say on it -

A few thoughts about the issue of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the credibility of the US and NATO:
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a bald faced act of aggression, replete with war crimes, and is rightly being condemned as such by large numbers of people and nations across the globe.
The US and other NATO nations are in a dubious position to claim moral high ground in condemning Russia’s actions.
While many statements from Western leaders may in fact be accurate regarding the nature of Russia’s actions, they must be placed in the context of their own militarism and well-documented hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy.
It is intellectually dishonest to ignore the broken promises from the US & NATO regarding NATO expansion. It is lunacy to deny that Russia has legitimate security concerns posed by this expansion even if its response to these concerns is a heinous invasion. Both can be true.
During the 78 day NATO bombing of Serbia and Montenegro in 1999, the US-led NATO alliance committed similar or identical acts that it is now condemning Russia for in Ukraine.
President Clinton sidestepped both the UN and the US Congress in initiating this bombing. Joe Biden was among its biggest cheerleaders.
Under the command of US General Wesley Clark, NATO intentionally bombed Radio Television Serbia, killing 16 media workers, including technicians and makeup artists.
The US-led NATO force used internationally-banned cluster bombs, including on a crowded marketplace in the city of Nis.
The US-led NATO force bombed a civilian passenger train and then released a doctored video, sped up to make it appear as though it was a mistake made in a split second. This was a total fabrication.
The US bombed the Chinese embassy, killing three journalists. The US-led NATO force bombed bridges and civilian infrastructure repeatedly.
These crimes committed by the US and its NATO allies do not in any way excuse or justify Russia’s aggression. At the same time, history and context matter. If the US wants the moral high ground, it should cease its own ongoing war crimes and support for war crimes.
This could begin with such actions as ending all support for Israel’s aggression against Palestine and recognizing the Palestinians’ legitimate right to self defense.
The US could immediately end all support for Saudi Arabia and “make it a pariah,” as Biden promised. The US could stop its drone strikes in Somalia and elsewhere.
The systemic US failure to accept responsibility for its own crimes undermines the credibility of its condemnations of Russia, particularly in the eyes of anyone who knows the history of NATO and US militarism. It is a gift to Putin's cause.
There is no contradiction between standing with the people of Ukraine and against Russia’s heinous invasion and being honest about the hypocrisy, war crimes and militarism of the US and NATO.

You're free to cry whataboutism all you want. But claiming solidarity with Ukraine and then buying 700 million dollars worth of natural gas from Russia right before the new sanctions kick in is also quite... counterintuitive.

 

[Sanity Check]

Spoiler

Are the memes getting out of hand?

 

[Jubei_Kibagami]

This forum, and apparently everywhere else:

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 3, 2022, Original Post Date: Mar 3, 2022 ---

And while the second round of 'peace talks are currently underway, let's not lose focus on the important stories:

No, Steven Seagal is not fighting with Russian special forces in Ukraine

He is not there to karate chop Kyiv.

www.militarytimes.com

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 3, 2022 ---

Profile: Who are Ukraine’s far-right Azov regiment?

The regiment, which has been accused of neo-Nazi ties, has since been absorbed in the national army.

www.aljazeera.com

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 3, 2022 ---

Q: Are there Neo-nazis in the Ukrainian military?

A; Yes

Q: Are there Neo-nazis among the Russian forces?

A: Yes


So what is the operative difference there? The US didn't fund or train the latter.


Thanks for coming to my TED Talk

Who are those in the picture, Wagner group forces?

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 3, 2022 ---

Bulls on Parade

Republicans Vote Against Bill that Calls for Troops Against Russia

Three House Republicans voted against a resolution they argued was so broad it could call to commit American troops.

www.breitbart.com

 

[xi0]

Who are those in the picture, Wagner group forces?

Yes, they're rumored to have gone into Ukraine covertly before the invasion.

 

[Sanity Check]

If Putin offered EU members lower taxes and offered to get rid of aspects of the EU that member states are unhappy with.

If Putin offered to get rid of all COVID restrictions and mandates.

Europe might support Putin invading them. As they might enjoy a better life under Putin, in contrast to what they currently have.

If recent history indicates anything, it may be that specialized skillsets of leadership, war and politics are being neglected and lost, at the highest levels.

Or that there are sinister ulterior motives in play, which restrict expansionism.

 

[xi0]

No one is going to "support" another country invading them unless they're seen as liberators, and that is complete nonsense when it comes to Putin. I know people on the right like to soyface over Europe whenever you can, but get a grip...

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 4, 2022, Original Post Date: Mar 4, 2022 ---

Thanks Lindsey, very cool!