What are you actually defending here? — Christoffer

The Old World.

The West will probably win, if in no other way, then by destroying the planet with consumerism.

Then we understand eachother.

If it cannot take care of itself, then it doesn't have sovereignity — baker

What? I am not agree. Name one country so powerful that doesn't need depend on others. It is just impossible because we live in a connected world where everyone needs each other. Again, these are only politic and economic matters but is not necessarily being connected with Ukraine's sovereignty.
The same example can be applied to random islands of Oceania like Bassau

The Old World. — baker

What is that? Is that a fantasy utopia?

The West will probably win, if in no other way, then by destroying the planet with consumerism — baker

Sure, but what has this to do with any of the current events? It's like you don't really know what's going on and just blank state anti-consumerist conclusions without it having anything to do with the current war.

Let me ask you... how do we solve this current conflict? How do we deal with Putin?

What? — javi2541997

He's trying to undermine Ukraine's legitimacy as an independent nation. Hmm, sounds an awful lot like someone who invaded them...? Same rhetoric.

Presented without comment. — Baden

Very funny :smile:

However, I think it ought to be obvious that there is a difference between (1) “empire” in the sense of historical "Russian Empire" which was basically Czarist Russia, and (2) “empire” in the sense of expansionist system aiming to acquire territories beyond the original entity, e.g., the British Empire that kept expanding forever beyond the British Isles.

In other words, Russian Empire in sense (1) refers to an established, internationally recognized geographical area, whereas "Russian Empire" in sense (2) is an imaginary construct created by Western propaganda.

I think restoring some of the Russian Empire in sense (1) is legitimate. (Also, note that I said “some”.).

Creating an empire in sense (2) is (a) not legitimate and (b) unsupported by the evidence.

Hence my objection to the use of the phrase "Russian Empire" in sense (2).

Pretty clear and simple IMO ....

The Russian are feared and despised, — ssu

Yes, they are feared and despised by those who have always feared and despised them, like Finland, Poland, and England! :grin:

The fact is, Russia poses no threat to America, so there is no reason for Americans to fear the Russians. Unless you count Ukraine as part of the USA, which you appear to be doing .... :lol:

The fact is, Russia poses no threat to America, so there is no reason for Americans to fear the Russians. — Apollodorus

But why then all the American anti-Russian propaganda?
Sheer contempt, to boost the American ego?

Following are some quotes from a couple of the original documents mentioned in the above article — jamalrob

:cheer:

But why then all the American anti-Russian propaganda?
Sheer contempt, to boost the American ego? — baker

1. Financial profit, forcing Europe to buy American oil and gas instead of Russian.

2. America sees Europe as its backyard.

3. America and its British Poodle (i.e., Wall Street and the City of London), are aiming to expand their Euro-Atlantic Empire, which is why they have created instruments of Atlantic imperialism like NATO (North-Atlantic Treaty Organization), World Bank, IMF, EU, OECD, etc., etc. Russia stands in the way, so it needs to be eliminated.

I wouldn't be surprised if Britain arranged a nice civil war in Ukraine in order to drag Russia into a world war like it did in WW1.

The British media are already preparing the public for the possibility:

UK must be ready for war with Russia - The Guardian

The outgoing head of the UK’s armed forces has said the military will have to be ready for war with Russia after recent tensions in eastern Europe. Gen Sir Nick Carter said Russia was now a greater threat in eastern Europe than it was when he started in the role eight years ago.
He said he “distinctly hoped” there would not be a war with Russia and he did not believe the country wanted a physical war, but Nato would have to be ready.

And British intelligence (MI6) has long said that Russia is an "acute threat" to Britain, and continues to do so:

Putin threat: UK on red alert for 'attack' from Russia as security measures beefed-up - Daily Express

Statements of this kind can be explained only if (a) Britain regards Eastern Europe as its territory and (b) if it plans some kind of action (including military) against Russia.

(1) First, the media prepares the public psychologically through propaganda, (2) this is followed up by political announcements, and (3) action is taken on the ground.

(1). We have seen the media propaganda.

(2). Now we are seeing the political pronouncements:

Senior Tory MP calls on UK to take military action against Russia in Ukraine

(3). The next step will be military action.

Boris Johnson himself has already announced military action against Russia:

President Putin has chosen a path of bloodshed and destruction by launching this unprovoked attack on Ukraine. The UK and our allies will respond decisively. Our mission is clear. Diplomatically, politically, economically, and eventually, militarily, this hideous and barbaric venture of Vladimir Putin must end in failure.

Key points from Boris Johnson announcement as PM threatens Putin with military

Obviously, in a British-Russian conflict America will intervene on Britain's side, so this is a calculated move by Britain. And, as I said before, if Russia loses, British and American corporations will be the first to get their hands on Russian resources, exactly as they did, or tried to do, in the 1990's after the collapse of the USSR.

Either Putin has went looney or he is convinced a genocide is occurring, like he says. Is there any evidence for his genocide claim?

I don’t know why but this video of Russian soldiers allowing CNN to film them is odd.

There is no genocide, that's a fabrication.

He may want to split Ukraine into separate countries. This could have been avoided, but now Putin is going pretty nuts, and others must listen.

Not the way to go, it's a horror.

Well, he doesn't need to actually believe it. Russia needs a motive for its actions, like everyone else. It's kind of standard practice. Remember NATO's "genocide" in Kosovo, America's "Iraqi WMD's" , etc., etc.

Maybe a letter from some relatively powerless local authority members from around the corner in the neighborhood doesn't count for much (I'm not sure), but it's something. — jamalrob

It's a lot, actually.

It's the only thing that will stop imperialists like Putin.

The Russians themselves. Nobody else will do anything. Or can do.

Those scientists and journalists who condemn Russia's actions and speak the truth are very courageous people who at this moment dare to say this. The "cancel culture" in Putin's Russia, especially when the country is at war, is totally different from the woke sillyness in the West.

Likely what those scientists and journalists will get from the West are accusations of being Western stooges. Surely they have links to George Soros!

Yet I believe there are many Russians who understand what is happening and how wrong it is. Many in Russia likely believed the lie, promoted here also, that all this war-talk was just all US hype. That Russia wouldn't invade. Well, Putin did invade, did widen the war to a totally different scale. To many other places than in the Donbass. Russians are fed up with dictators, but as they do have one, they have been still silent. And if in 2014 the case looked different, it is undeniable that many Russian speaking in Crimea were for joining Russia, now attacking Kiev is a different thing. For the Russians, this is similarly futile war as invading Afghanistan.

The costs of such a maneuver are so dire that one wonders the point of it. If I try to put myself in Putin’s shoes, the only reason I would take such a risk—militarily, economically, politically—was to stop a genocide. I just cannot fathom it.

I don’t know why but this video of Russian soldiers allowing CNN to film them is odd. — NOS4A2

Antonov Airport is just next to Kiev. Few kilometers from the city limits. Having there paratroops means that the armored spearheads from Belarus and the Russian border have to quickly come there. The paratroops cannot hang out there alone for a long time, even if they get reinforcements by plane. Hence it's likely that Putin will try to go for the jugular and take (surround) the capital and put a new pro-Russian government into place.

But at least there's one improvement: the CNN journalist is saying that they are Russian paratroops, not "little green men" who people don't know who they are. His observations of what is likely going to happen is quite realistic.

Yeah, the airport is required to create an “air bridge” in order to bring in more troops. What I don’t understand is why they’d let CNN film them, potentially compromising the operation.

@NOS4A2 shows up with the sole aim of spreading an utterly baseless "genocide" narrative. Show one iota of evidence for this or we can just presume you're up to your old tricks of spreading Russian propaganda again. Waiting...

it's likely that Putin will try to go for the jugular and take (surround) the capital and put a new pro-Russian government into place. — ssu

Where would he have gotten that idea from?



https://www.channel4.com/news/ukraine-mccain-far-right-svoboda-anti-semitic-protests

For any that don't know, that's Oleh Tyahnybok, leader of the anti-Semitic Svoboda party, later installed into power by the US.

Yeah, the airport is required to create an “air bridge” in order to bring in more troops. What I don’t understand is why they’d let CNN film them, potentially compromising the operation. — NOS4A2

Likely because they are Russian paratroops and not GRU or intelligence troops. They haven't yet been ordered not to speak to any journalist, so they behave as soldiers typical will behave.

I was asking for evidence for Putin’s claim, so you can keep you conspiracy theories to yourself.

It is hard to tell what exactly is going on on the ground unless you are there. But both sides have been firing at each other for eight years, and in any armed conflict there would be actions taking place that the other side can label "violation of international war", "atrocity", etc.

IMO, "genocide" or not, Russia does actually see itself threatened by NATO. For example, as I said before, if Ukraine were to join NATO, this would be a direct threat to Russia's naval force in the Black Sea and would block its access to the Mediterranean Sea, etc.

There is no evidence because it's pure propaganda. You inserting it here as if it's somehow a matter of reasonable debate is part of a pattern of you repeating such propaganda. And I'll call you out every single time you try that. Prove me wrong by not mentioning the word again until YOU find some evidence that there's anything to it.

The man claims he’s invading Ukraine to stop a genocide, and I’m not allowed to ask if there is evidence for it? Utterly unhinged.

Ah! The Ukrainian government are nazis.

Well, as I discussed with @StreetlightX earlier, there indeed still is this neonazi party in the Ukrainian Parliament. With ONE SEAT. And it is NOT IN THE GOVERNMENT. Zelenskyi's party was formed in 2018 and he was elected President of Ukraine in 2019, beating incumbent president Petro Poroshenko with nearly 73% of the vote to Poroshenko's 25%. So I guess Ukrainians weren't so enthuastic about Poroshenko.

So Zelenskyi's party wasn't even then on the political arena when McCain was roaming around supporting the Maidan...

And actually, Volodymyr Zelenskyi is jewish.

So, anyone believing the imminent need of de-nazification of the Ukrainian government... :roll:

He also claims he's invading to "de-Nazify" the Ukraine. Never mind that their President is Jewish. :lol: Maybe you're just a complete naïf. Hard to tell.

And actually, Volodymyr Zelenskyi is jewish. — ssu

Cross posted. :up:

In the confusion of the Maidan revolution it would be understandable to take in the argument that "these are Nazis", but now, AFTER EIGHT YEARS, to reurgitate the same things again don't work. As if nothing has happened in Ukrainian politics. As if neonazis really had anything to do with Ukrainian politics or held power in the 200 000 strong Ukrainian armed forces. Yes, volunteers were the first response when the war broke out in 2014.

We shouldn't forget that Darth Vader was also political candidate in Ukraine. No, seriously:


Which just shows how pissed off Ukrainians are with their corrupt politicians, but at least they do have democracy.

Zelenskyi's party wasn't even then on the political arena when McCain was roaming around supporting the Maidan...

And actually, Volodymyr Zelenskyi is jewish. — ssu

What's that got to do with anything. You're just like my students who used to answer their essay questions on Millgram by writing everything they know about Millgram, and ignoring the actual question. I used to get at least one like you every year...

The point was about the alternatives to what's happening, so its about what America (and the EU) did, not what may now be the case. Did I in any of my post say that I agreed that the Ukraine needs to be denazified? Did I even mention it, allude to it or even say anything from the same era as it? No.

If you're going to respond, respond to the point, I don't want a load of clichéd, pre-prepared talking points.

now, AFTER EIGHT YEARS, to reurgitate the same things again don't work. As if nothing has happened in Ukrainian politics. — ssu

So, if eight years on from this invasion, the president of Ukraine is less pro-Russian, you'll be happy to let Russia sort out any local disputes using this method then I take it?