I still tend to believe that Russia would have taken no action if its demands had been met from the start. When Putin said that Russia had no intention to invade, he was being truthful. — Apollodorus
I think it's self-explanatory. Why would Russia invade Ukraine if it had no reason to do so? — Apollodorus
Russia would have taken no action if its demands had been met from the start. — Apollodorus
How do you know this? This would require you to first assume that any will to restore Russian empire borders are false. — Christoffer
On the contrary, there is no requirement, logical, legal, or otherwise, to assume that there might be "a will to restore Russian empire borders" in the first place! — Apollodorus
How are you sure that the demands are in any way truth and not part of the propaganda and a disinformation campaign? — Christoffer
A few months ago I was talking to my older brother who works for the US government as a translator about the issue of why China is so fired up about trying to retake Taiwan. He thought about the it and made a remark about the age of Xi Jinping being 68 years old (close to the same old as that my brother is) and that "men around that age" are often of a mind set of wondering what kind of what mark that they will leave on the world and they are often desperate to use whatever time/resources they have at their disposal to complete any unfinished business before they pass from this world to the next.My guess is that the size of their entry in Who's Who or a history book is probably not their main motivation, but ego is certainly a factor.
The main thing is power and its attendant benefits -- cash, land, population, control, etc. How does this apply to Putin's case? He already has tons of cash, land, population, control, etc., so it isn't clear to me how wrecking Ukraine would benefit him and his various apparatchiks. Has he been taking steroids? Is he suffering from raging hormones? Is he mentally unstable? Is there some sort of obscure economic motive here? Ukraine is a major grain producer; so is Russia. Maybe Putin wants an even bigger share of food commodity markets? (I'm grasping at straws here) — Bitter Crank
I still tend to believe that Russia would have taken no action if its demands had been met from the start. — Apollodorus
I still tend to believe that Russia would have taken no action if its demands had been met from the start. When Putin said that Russia had no intention to invade, he was being truthful. That’s why he said it would depend on the situation on the ground, i.e., on his requests being met. — Apollodorus
The main thing is power and its attendant benefits -- cash, land, population, control, etc. How does this apply to Putin's case? He already has tons of cash, land, population, control, etc., so it isn't clear to me how wrecking Ukraine would benefit him and his various apparatchiks. Has he been taking steroids? Is he suffering from raging hormones? Is he mentally unstable? Is there some sort of obscure economic motive here? Ukraine is a major grain producer; so is Russia. Maybe Putin wants an even bigger share of food commodity markets? (I'm grasping at straws here) — Bitter Crank
A few months ago I was talking to my older brother who works for the US government as a translator about the issue of why China is so fired up about trying to retake Taiwan. — dclements
The West is so used to acting in bad faith that they cannot even conceive that someone else would not do the same. — baker
I think it is almost a given that things are not really going to plan if Putin and those that support him in Russia where really hoping for Ukraine to capitulate or roll over after a small/quick invasion into their capital and major cities. However since it is plausible that the mindset of those in command of the Russia forces is one where they are willing to lose/sacrifice a lot of their men and resources in order to achieve their objectives, they might still be able to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat just yet...which tells what kind of a clusterfuck and a brainfart this "special military operation" has been. — ssu
Yeah it is kind of ironic that the US has stated that it is willing to protect Taiwan from China, but is unwilling to do the same for Ukraine because we are afraid of triggering "World War III". If we went to defend Taiwan from China then it is almost a given that it could escalate the war much the same way as if we did go in to help Ukraine. I think the only difference is that in the mind of those in power in the US we have been aware of this issue for a longer time and more prepared (perhaps more in a mental sense than anything else) if this actually happens. However to me it really isn't all that different.China has a frontline seat into looking how the US and the West respond to these kinds of actions. And what ought to be noted that Taiwan (or the Republic of China) is for the US a Major non-NATO Ally. That means it will respond far more aggressively to defend Taiwan than with Ukraine. — ssu
To be honest I'm not so sure either, but my guess is that Taiwan has been threaten for decades now by China of a possible invasion where as Ukraine it has been only a few years that this has been going on. As far as I know Russia really hasn't up until now threaten Ukraine with invasion so in their minds they haven't really considered the possibility of war with one of the biggest militaries in the world, so i guessing they haven't planned for it the same way as Taiwan has had to do.If you mean when Russia attacked in 2014, yes. If you refer to the current "special military operation", then I'm not so sure. — ssu
As stated already, there is no logical requirement to assume that everything Russia says is "propaganda" any more than it is to assume that everything America (or Finland) says is propaganda. — Apollodorus
I still tend to believe that Russia would have taken no action if its demands had been met from the start. — Apollodorus
Types of posters who are welcome here:
Those with a genuine interest in/curiosity about philosophy and the ability to express this in an intelligent way, and those who are willing to give their interlocutors a fair reading and not make unwarranted assumptions about their intentions (i.e. intelligent, interested and charitable posters).
I thought we already had a pro-NATO thread (see Ukraine Crisis), so I for one fail to see how having two is going to make the discussion "more objective". — Apollodorus
IMHO, I believe Putin and those that support him in Russia would be more than happy to reintegrate any and all former Warsaw Pact (that are currently on less then friendly terms with Russia) back into the "loving" arms of mother Russia and for all of them and Russia to create a USSR 2.0.BTW, which countries is Russia "willing to occupy" and how have you "realized" this? — Apollodorus
It has been kind of interesting how some in the republican party have become kind of cozy with Putin and those that support his pro-USSR agenda. I'm believe it is a combination of them lately liking to say things that are nor politically correct (likely Trump always does) and a kind of mentality that Putin/Russia is no longer really any threat. Of course it is unlikely that it is going to be easy to stay that way after the war with Ukraine started (which right now feels like it happened months ago). Being a politician that is/was cozy with Russia and Putin is kind of like in one of those science fiction where they are exploring another planet and they come across some cute and fuzzy creatures that look like they might make great pet. However once you get too close they bear their razor sharp fangs and coming at you in the hopes that they can turn you into your dinner.In regard to the EU, it will be interesting to see how the Far Right parties will respond to the attack upon Ukraine. There has been support for Putin from them for the last ten years or so. — Paine
While China's and Russia's goals and situation are not exactly the same, I think it is safe to say that they are not all that different. — dclements
The term was and is mainly applied to Western and Japanese political and economic dominance, especially in Asia and Africa, in the 19th and 20th centuries.
To be honest I'm not so sure either, but my guess is that Taiwan has been threaten for decades now by China of a possible invasion where as Ukraine it has been only a few years that this has been going on. — dclements
Taiwan is pretty much the world's most important factory of semiconductors. Whoever has Taiwan has the say over one of the most important commodities in the world.
Who wouldn't want that?! — baker
The basis for my belief ought to be evident from the context and from my previous posts. It isn't my fault that you still don't understand. At any rate, you may rest assured that I'm not going to waste my time with another discussion on it. — Apollodorus
And no, I don't need to assume that everything Russia says is "propaganda" at all. That is just part of your usual repertoire of weasel words and straw men. — Apollodorus
Well, you can say whatever you like, but I for one think it is irrational to blame others for your failure to understand simple statements that have been explained to you already. — Apollodorus
You said that what I believe doesn’t matter. If that’s the case, then I think it would be more logically consistent for you to ignore my statement than to go on and on about it, ad nauseam. — Apollodorus
Incidentally, as a matter of principle, you shouldn’t get upset just because someone’s views differ from yours. The whole purpose of discussion forums is to have a plurality of views, not to throw temper tantrums when others disagree with you. — Apollodorus
It’s understandable to be upset that Zelensky is losing, but (1) it isn’t my fault, (2) I don’t see why this is of concern to Finland, and (3) according to some, Zelensky is a thug as are the oligarchs behind him, as explained on the other thread, which is why a more balanced, rational, and less emotional, analysis would be preferable. — Apollodorus
As regards Putin’s alleged intention to rebuild the borders of the Russian Empire, (a) I see no evidence to support that claim and (b) as already explained, Ukraine has always been part of Russia, both Ukraine and Russia having been part of the same territory called Russia or “Land of the Rus(sians)” (роусьскаѧ землѧ, rusĭskaę zemlę), a.k.a. “Kievan Rus”.
The fact is that Ukraine became separated from Russia only after being invaded and occupied by foreign powers (Mongols, Lithuanians, Poles). It follows that Putin has a point and his views need to be taken into consideration even if we disagree with his actions. IMO a discussion based exclusively on the views of countries like Finland (or any others) that have nothing to do with Ukraine is not a proper discussion. But if you think it is, go ahead, I’m not holding you back — Apollodorus
I still tend to believe that Russia would have taken no action if its demands had been met from the start. When Putin said that Russia had no intention to invade, he was being truthful. — Apollodorus
IMHO, I believe Putin and those that support him in Russia would be more than happy to reintegrate any and all former Warsaw Pact (that are currently on less then friendly terms with Russia) back into the "loving" arms of mother Russia and for all of them and Russia to create a USSR 2.0. — dclements
Please do some fucking philosophy instead of this low-quality nonsense you're trying. — Christoffer
You may not be aware of it, but doing philosophy is precisely what I'm trying to do. — Apollodorus
Problem, you see, is that in order to philosophize you need to have the facts first, otherwise it's all just empty speculation. — Apollodorus
If you ignore the facts and dictate to others what they should think, that's an approach that isn't going to get you very far. — Apollodorus
My advice would be to acquaint yourself with the facts, especially established and well-known historical facts, first, and then attempt to philosophize. — Apollodorus
If you knew the facts, then I'm sure you'd agree with me that Putin has got a point. To take the example of a trial in a court of law, you'd need to take into consideration both sides, not just one. Very simple and easy to understand, really. — Apollodorus
I still tend to believe that Russia would have taken no action if its demands had been met from the start. When Putin said that Russia had no intention to invade, he was being truthful. — Apollodorus
So, demonstrate (a) that you have knowledge of the relevant historical facts and (b) that you are willing to engage in an objective and balanced conversation. If not, then there is nothing I can do for you .... — Apollodorus
After its formation in 1949 with twelve founding members, NATO grew rapidly by including Greece and Turkey in 1952 and West Germany in 1955. The addition of West Germany into NATO prompted the Soviet Union to adopt their own collective security alliance, informally called the Warsaw Pact in 1955 … The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to a number former Warsaw Pact and post-Soviet states requesting to join NATO. This prompted objection from Russia as it viewed these states as falling within its sphere of influence …
The European Union (EU) has expanded a number of times throughout its history by way of the accession of new member states to the Union.
From a Russian military perspective, I can understand that they were worried when Nato was enlarged … It’s an awkward position for the West. It is true that the US and Nato have used force when they felt they needed to. Sometimes it was justified, as in the Balkans in 1995, but sometimes it was very dodgy like in Iraq. From the Russian perspective, I can see how they can make that argument.
Propaganda in the United States is spread by both government and media entities … The US military defines psychological operations, or PSYOP, as: planned operations to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence the emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals …
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.