he’s committing such alienating missteps in an already unfavorable European political and economic environment that his leadership is unfortunately easy to question. — neomac
I don't know what leadership you are talking about — Olivier5
you may be assessing Macron against unreasonable expectations. — Olivier5
May I ask if you live in the EU, or follow EU politics closely? — Olivier5
Irrespective of what the Parisian journalists you quote may opine, there's no way any single nation will lead Europe. Even Merkel with the weight of the German economy behind her and her amazing personal qualities and exceptional length in service, was never an unchallenged leader of the EU. — Olivier5
Considering France's strong economy plus greater military capacity and geopolitical projection (e.g. Africa, Middle East, Asia) than Germany or Italy, Macron's pro-active attitude and ambitious plans for the EU, he clearly had good cards in his hands to be more influential than he's turning out to be. My impression is that's not just fault of bad luck. — neomac
It's unlikely he will meet his strategic goals for Europe if he doesn't address Eastern Europeans' security concerns in a persuasive way (especially if predictable national interests lurk behind his behavior). — neomac
wave of assaults carried out by Russian mercenaries and poorly-equipped reservists
Nukes have their military use, which is to wipe out all mankind and give the earth a well-deserved break from us critters. — Olivier5
That is where nuclear weapons work: deterrence. If this would be a non-nuclear armed country attacking Ukraine, it is likely that a no-fly zone would have been enforced. — ssu
But I wasn’t talking about the American invasion of Iraq, I was talking about Russian invasion of Ukraine. To repeat it once more:
I listed facts that support that claim, like the fact that Russia didn’t halt its invasion even after a UN resolution against it as widely voted by West/NATO/US, with ensuing sanctions and continued military support to Ukraine by the West. If that’s not an act of defiance by Russia against West/NATO/US, then I don’t understand your usage of the word “defiance”: if X is warned, condemned and sanctioned by Y for a certain choice, and X knowingly pursues its choice despite of that, that’s for me enough to call X’s behavior defiant toward Y. EVEN MORE SO, if X were to question Y’s authority with “tu quoque” arguments (as you suggest with “but also the US has little respect for international law”)!!!
Your criticism doesn’t address my claim and plays with words (“maverick”, “justification”) in interpreting my original claims which weren’t using such terms. Your conceptually confused or caricatural way of rendering my claims is good to mislead or brainwash you, not me. Anyways yes the Western reaction against Russia is justified on geopolitical and legal grounds. — neomac
I posted 6 videos of Western journalists investigating Nazi's in Ukraine and all concluding that there definitely seems to be Nazi's in Ukraine.
— boethius
Sure, Nazis, and they're a problem, wherever, anywhere (even in Russia). — jorndoe
Again you don't understand.Makes no sense. — boethius
This is just a word salad and has nothing to do with your original argument.
Your original argument tied "defiant" to justification of Western policies ... you've just moved the goal posts to Russia is doing things the West doesn't like. Yeah, no shit.
Now, does not liking what someone is doing justify any particular course of action? No. — boethius
If Russian "defiance" against the West justifies Western policies, then the Ukrainian "defiance" of Russia justifies Russian policies. — boethius
And you've already laid your cards on the table, in that you simply want the West to win this confrontation, so you support Western policies regardless of justification or trying to reconcile with what they West itself does and rights it claims (pre-emptive war, shock and awe, etc.) — boethius
and regardless of whether they are a benefit to Ukraine.
You state clearly several times the only objective that needs to be achieved is harming the Russian military (not Ukrainian victory, not any benefits at all for Ukraine, even the total destruction of Ukraine is acceptable if Russia is also harmed). — boethius
So, argue this position, rather than throw out pseudo-intellectual bullshit that is quite clearly just trying to prop up the propaganda (in this case the US's claim of holding up the "rules based international system" as reason to arm Ukraine, is clearly where you sourced your "defiance" justifies Western policies, but you can support that because it's a bullshit argument, so you move the goal posts to simply someone is defying something in this situation, which is clear: Ukraine is defying Russia, therefore, according to your argument, Russia is completely justified in destroying entirely Ukraine to put a stop to that defiance).
You may think of yourself as an astute intellectual, but you are not.
Astute intellectuals make a clear and meaningful point.
Propagandists throw shit against the wall, see what sticks, throw more shit at whatever spot they think has landed, which is what you do. — boethius
Ukraine does not possess nuclear weapons, and it is unclear whether the Americans would be prepared to enter a nuclear conflict with Russia over Ukraine. Most likely not. — Tzeentch
I am happy you agree that Nazi's are indeed a problem — boethius
Pseudo-Ukrainian rabid mongrels with Russian surnames, choking on their toxic saliva, declare that their enemy is located within the borders of Russia, from the West to Vladivostok. Rabies has no cure.
It is much more difficult for us - our enemy has dug in not only in the Kyiv province of our native Little Russia. It's in Europe, North America, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and a whole host of other contemporary Nazi-sworn places.
Therefore, we are increasing the production of the most powerful means of destruction. Including those based on new principles. — Dmitry Medvedev · Dec 11, 2022
↪boethius, if you think something's off then hit the report button/link. It's a small flag at the bottom of posts. — jorndoe
It's about the Ukraine crisis, not just your own take, though that's cool too, despite the occasional curious tunnel vision. — jorndoe
You keep ignoring that Putin, Pavlov, Solovyov, Patrushev, Chernyshov, with Peskov, Matviyenko, and others in tow, speak of liberating Ukraine from a Nazi regime (previous posts, all over actually), a ruse, an excuse, false. For that matter, it's pretty clear that Kremlin has no particular concern for the Ukrainians (also prior posts). — jorndoe
Has there ever been a national political figure who was universally accepted as a natural leader of Europe? — Olivier5
To Europe's great credit, there has not; — unenlightened
Why do you ask? — unenlightened
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.