And those reasons have gone away now? — Isaac

They are negotiating now, therefore the Ukrainians still reject the Russian proposal, as of date. And nobody even knows precisely what points they are negotiating so I am afraid your questions will have to remain without answers for now.

The whole debate is about which side people chose to support, remember? You wanted to know my reasons for supporting Ukraine. Well now you know. They are the aggressed, therefore I root for them. Zelensky was elected, therefore he is their legitimate leader.

But that's just me. Which side did you chose to support, and why?

Come on, tell us! I'm sure you're a hero in your own mind, battling strawmen left right and center!

Heu... non, on dirait plutôt : "À toi aussi" ou "pareillement", ou (closer perhaps) "je te renvoie/retourne le compliment"... :nerd:

So you've been arguing against my view that Ukraine should accept a deal, for the last eight pages...what? By accident? Was your account hacked by a rabid warmonger? I hate it when that happens. — Isaac

Maybe your own mind was hacked by a rabid warmonger? Because I did not argue that Ukraine should never sign any deal. I argued that they might have good, rational reasons not to sign what the Russian side proposed. For instance, they might wish to negotiate a better deal. And to do so, they might wish to wait a little for the sanctions to bite, especially since the military situation appears to have stabilized.

I meant that Russia attacked Ukraine in spite of having signed numerous deal with her in the past, so any peace deal they sign on now is worth just as much as their previous promises ie little. They cannot be trusted to upheld their end of the bargain for very long, so a peace deal now would offer only a temporary -- if welcome -- respite to Ukraine.

The Ukrainians know that better than anyone and I expect them to ask for some guarantee. I'm not in the secret of those negotiations... Let's see what happens.

It's a never-ending cycle. And we are never truly at peace, are we? — Amity

That is true, sadly. Thanks for the usual wise words.

I assume you're all dead set against this so called 'peace deal'? — Isaac

Nope. Sometimes a leader needs to make painful choices.

European history is full of war AND PEACE. — Olivier5

Baroque Music for War and Peace in Europe during XVII Century -- Jordi Savall conducts Hesperion XXI Capella Reial Catalunya / Concert des Nations.

From the start of 30 Years War (1613) to the Peace of Utrecht (1713).



0:00:00 1613 Attack of Hungary by the Ottoman Empire -- Turkish March (Anonymous)
0:04:00 1614 Massacre of Jews in Frankfurt -- Complaint in Aramaic
0:06:35 1618 Start of 30 years War -- Samuel Scheidt: Gaillarde Battaglia
0:10:13 1624 Spanish Siege to Breda -- Lope de Vega
0:13:40 1635 Peace of Prague -- Johann Hermann Schein: Zion Spricht
0:20:02 1636 Richelieu War Declaration against Spain -- Philidor: Pavane pour la Petite Guerre
0:24:44 1645 War of the Ottoman Empire against Venice -- Dimitrie Cantemir
0:28:44 1648 End of 30 Years War -- Johann Rosenmueller: Siehe an die Werke Gottes
0:35:48 1645 Civil War in England -- John Jenkins: The Newark Siege
0:42:30 1659 Pyrenees Peace -- Jean Baptiste Lully: Jubilate Deo
1:00:10 1669 Venetians Expelled from Crete -- Dimitrie Cantemir
1:03:30 1669 Venetians Expelled from Crete -- Francesco Cavalli: Requiem
1:08:37 1678 Nimegue Treaty -- Jean Baptiste Lully: March from Armide
1:12:40 1697 Ryswick Peace -- John Blow: Praise the Lord
1:18:10 1700 War for Spanish Succession -- Joan Cabanilles: Battalla Imperial
1:24:08 1711 War of Ottoman Empire against Russia -- Vasily Titov
1:29:22 1711 War of Ottoman Empire against Russia -- Dimitrie Cantemir
1:31:48 1713 Utrecht Peace -- Handel Jubilate
Encore:
1:37:58 Arvo Part: Da Pacem Domine

The guy lies and misrepresents others' positions all the time, using sarcastic aggression to do so. — Amity

His passive aggressive tone is getting old. It's also a bit disgusting to debate the Putin trolls here, so I think you do well to stay out of it. It's like fighting a pig in the mud.

But I fear the philosophy of politics, the history of war, hardly gives one hope for the future. — Amity

I think it does. European history is full of war AND PEACE.

hopes of diplomatic progress were raised after Russia and Ukraine gave positive assessments after weekend negotiations.

“Russia is already beginning to talk constructively,” Ukrainian negotiator Mykhailo Podolyak said in a video online. “I think that we will achieve some results literally in a matter of days.”

A Russian delegate to the talks, Leonid Slutsky, was quoted by the RIA news agency as saying they had made significant progress and it was possible the delegations could soon reach draft agreements. Neither side said what these would cover.

(The Guardian today)

The reason to focus on EU / NATO and US policy is because:

A. They have the most leverage with Russia currently. — boethius

That is simply false. China has greater leverage right now.

B. These parties nominally claim and have voters who not only claim but actually believe, unnecessary loss of life should be avoided, and so criticising people who claim to want to do something ... but aren't, is a lot more productive than criticising parties that make no such claims. If you look at India and Africa media: a pretty strong theme is that this is a white person problem that white people are crying about and not their issue, go fuck yourselves (certainly a stronger theme than in the Western Media). — boethius

So the Chinese don't care about Mariupol as much as, say, the Finns, so the Finns should either stop caring, or send a boat to evacuate Mariupol? Otherwise the Finns implement "a bloodlust policy"?

Mmmmokay.

Do you care about the civilians in Mariupol? If yes, why don't you charter a boat and go save them, you bloodlust politician?

Maybe Ukrainians have a way to "win" the war with only handheld weapons, and maybe we'll see that. — boethius

They have anti-aircraft batteries, a few planes left, some armor and artillery. They are not done yet.

So what possible reasons would a rational human being have to keep fighting at this point? — FreeEmotion

Courage?

Mariupole, a port city, is easily evacuated by boat and the EU could, at least try, to negotiate that ... but it doesn't. — boethius

Why the EU? Why not China or Zimbabwe do that? What's the unsaid assumption here?

And the Russians are not letting civilians leave the city by road. Why do you assume they will allow a sea evacuation? Their game is to kill civilians as a way to pressure Ukraine. They want civilians dying in Mariupol. That be why they bomb them...

@Isaac is worse than a crank, he is a serial liar and a very angry one, at that. It is as if he was shocked first and foremost by the Ukrainian resistance, or by our moral support to the Ukrainian resistance. But as I said it is perfectly natural to root for the aggressed, and in fact there is something bizarro in his "surrender already" attitude.

if China gets involved by aiding Russia, then why not Europe, NATO, ...? — jorndoe

Europe and the US are aiding Ukraine alright

I love the way you lie to yourself, adding layers after layers of BS to your own ideas, like a master painter would add layers and layers of paint to canvas. Very creative!

You're saying as long as the election was good, you don't question the decisions of elected leaders. — Isaac

That's a lie.

I am saying that I respect the legitimacy of Zelensky, that he is in charge of a country at war, and that I don't want his job. I will respect his strategic choices. I am not going to question his decisions from the confort of my living room. I have no information, no legitimacy and little interest in second guessing him. From what I can see, he is doing a fantastic job.

Now, does that explain my taking side, or do you still not understand?

What I'm much more interested in is your reasons, which you seem frustratingly reluctant to provide. — Isaac

You see? You are 'frustrated', or pretending to be. Why are you so angry all the time? What do you care soooo much about my reasons? When did you start caring for other folks?

then when I point out that would have applied to Trump you change the subject... — Isaac

Trump was Putin's puppet. He wasn't legitimately elected. You can't compare him with Zelensky.

Why do you think the Ukrainians should keep fighting and not accept the deal? — Isaac

Because Putin cannot be trusted, for one. A deal is nothing to him. Because the Ukrainian forces aren't broken yet, for two.

So you disagree with Zelensky's policies. I don't. I think he does the right thing and he does it well. So what? Do we need to be at each other's throat for it?

I'm not in the business of second-guessing commanders-in-chief. What ground do you have to say Zelensky is illegitimate?

Here are some other folks who chose their side:

Odesa’s Defense Stiffened by Belarusian Volunteers
STEFANIE GLINSKI FOR FOREIGN POLICY
MARCH 13, 2022, 10:54 AM

For hundreds who fled Minsk’s oppression, Ukraine’s fight has become theirs.

ODESA, Ukraine—As Ukrainian army and territorial defenses resist a Russian invasion that has entered its third week, a small legion of Belarusians has joined the defenders, saying they would like to help combat a regime similar to the one that forced them to flee their own country.

Thousands of Belarusians are estimated to live in Ukraine. Many fled their homes after Belarus’s anti-government demonstrations in 2020 and 2021, which resulted in large-scale crackdowns and mass detentions of protesters. And hundreds are believed to have joined the Ukrainian defense forces so far. The majority of the volunteers work alongside the freshly created territorial defense units or offer auxiliary services.

In the critical Black Sea port city of Odesa, a group of about 20 Belarusian men has been deployed. They say there are about 30 more volunteers in the city. Here, they help secure the city center and are on the lookout for possible Russian saboteurs and spies. They check documents and set up checkpoints, saying they won’t let the Russians enter a city that has become their home as well. For more than a week, Odesa has braced for a Russian assault, including from the Black Sea, that has yet to arrive. In the meantime, residents have stiffened the city’s defenses with old-fashioned tank traps and sandbag barricades. ...

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/03/13/ukraine-belarus-territorial-defense/

@ssu and I support what the government of the Ukrainians wants, not what all Ukrainians as a mass want. If Zelensky decides to strike a deal with Putin tomorrow, I will support him too. It's his call, not mine. I've not chosen a side, I respect the will of the Ukrainians themselves.

Again, can't think of a single reason why not. — Isaac

Why then do you question @ssu about why he's chosen their side?

Why then, not side with the aggressed?

All of Ukraine are the aggressed. Do you think all 41 million of them think the same thing, have the same priorities, the same plans, the same ideas about where they want to be and how they want to get there? No. — Isaac

Of course not, but they don't need to be all clones for one to feel sympathetic to them. Why side with the aggressor?

How about supporting the right for a nation to defend itself? — FreeEmotion

I support that. :up:

You've chosen a side and I'm talking to you about your reasons for choosing that side. I'm not asking about that side's reasons for being that side. — Isaac

It's a natural human tendency to support the aggressed against the aggressor.

Yep. It also has a reasonable hope of losing hundreds more of its people and not getting anything more than it's already got. Again, simply presenting one of the two options doesn't constitute an argument for it. — Isaac

Likewise, presenting another option does not constitute an argument for it.

I didn't ask you why they keep on fighting. I'm quite well aware of their motives. I might well feel the same way if I were in their shoes. I'm asking you why you encourage them and vehemently suppress any discussion of alternatives. — Isaac

Oh stop lying, I'm not in the mood. I don't and couldn't suppress anything and you know it. Stop lying. It will do you good.

Bad things can always happen. But to disincentivise ie punish aggression is generally perceived as a good thing in geopolitics.

If Ukraine fights on, it has some reasonable hope of regaining territory and forcing its will onto Putin. I suppose that is why they keep it on. What's your explanation?

All territory is seized by war. — Isaac

Indeed, and all territory can be lost by war.

And you think that's a good thing? — Isaac

Nope. I think that's a bad thing, reason for which I'd rather see him lose this war.

Territories he already has. — Isaac

That he already sized by war, yes. He can lose them too.

And if Putin wins with NATO powerless to stop it? — Isaac

NATO is not willing to get involved, which is not the same thing as being powerless. If Putin won this war, it would have the same effect as the Soviet suppression of the 1956 revolution in Budapest, or the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968: quash democratic aspirations in this part of the world for a generation.

Since the deal on the table represents what is de facto the case already, it's nothing short of warmongering for agents outside of Ukraine to be encouraging them continue their defence instead of taking it. — Isaac

On the contrary, it is war mongering for you and the other guys #trollinforPutin to support the aggressor like you do, since if Putin leaves this conflict with whatever territories he wants, it would give incentives for people to invade their neighbour the world over. Your "surrender already" line is the most dangerous for the world, one that leads to many many wars.

I have an idea! Let's send Noam Chomsky, the greatest intellectual alive, to Donbass. Let him sort it out!

Then we agree. — boethius

You see? Miracles happen.

Maybe it will happen, but it seems a bad strategy to rely on something that has never happened before suddenly happening for the first time, without some causal mechanism under one's control that has some theoretical and practical basis to assume will actually work this time. — boethius

You misunderstood the intent. There is no expectation of a direct cause to effect mechanism to anywhere here, and certainly no hope from my side or theirs that Putin will simply listen to them and stop his killing spree. They are just speaking truth to power. That's all, it's not much I agree, but it's not nothing either. It matters. Everything matters.

Point is, no reason to believe toothless academic criticism and peaceful protests have any better chance of stopping a war by Russia than a war by the USA and buddies. — boethius

Says who? Your cristal ball?

There's a gag on Russian media, and it was breached on prime time yesterday night by a few courageous guests in a propaganda show. I can understand why it pisses you off.

Despite the gag imposed by Vladimir Putin, even Russians are starting to rebel. Yesterday during a talk show on the state TV channel Russia 1, the guests refused to support the Kremlin's propaganda on the war in Ukraine and openly criticized the Russian invasion. And to no avail were the hosts' attempts to call the Russian president's "special operation" to "demilitarize" and "de-Nazify," one of the guests lost his temper.

"Do we have to enter another Afghanistan, but even worse?" blurted out academic Semyon Bagdasarov as Putin's "propagandist in chief," Vladimir Soloviev, tried to interrupt him.

Before him, it was Karen Shakhnazarov, a filmmaker and columnist, who said that the conflict in Ukraine risked isolating Russia. "I have a hard time imagining taking cities like Kiev. I can't imagine what it would be like." And again, "If this film starts to turn into an absolute humanitarian disaster, even our close allies like China and India will be forced to distance themselves from us."

Strong words, especially considering that Russians who criticize the war risk being jailed for 15 years, while independent media in the country face threats of closure or hefty fines if they refer to the military campaign as an "invasion." And it is no coincidence that in recent days the host of "Hello", Ivan Urgant after taking a stand against the war, has disappeared from television. Urgant, known in Italy for his irony on our country, was on air on Pervyj Kanal with "Evening Urgant". The program had disappeared from Pervyj Kanal's schedule soon after the host's post on Instagram, leaving room for alternative programming made up of celebratory concerts, war films and patriotic commemorations.

https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/news/esteri/30788383/semyon-bagdasarov-professore-attacca-vladimir-putin-tv-quindici-anni-carcere.html

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

My guess would be that this debate is the equivalent of a festering religious war or dispute, attracting the kind of fanatic energy and never-ending attention typical of religious wars and disputes. The issue of the mind and its relationships to matter is laden with other questions about God, gods, 'ghosts in the machine' -- that would why materialists are often reluctant to acknowledge themselves as mindful. They are afraid of the possible implications. Likewise the idea of the mind as a mere mechanism, as an evolution-honed capacity, appears odious to God believers, even to those (the majority) agreeing with evolution.

It is also an important historical debate. The late 19th and 20th century are when materialism became a dominant political reality, with capitalism, communism and later fascism. We are still learning how to live without gods. It's been a rocky ride.

Also, just lol the idea of using a weapons platform that can be effectively countered by a paper mask and washing your hands at this exact moment in time. — Count Timothy von Icarus

:smirk:

Putin was heading into Dr. Strangelove territory with this theory: he believed that Americans were collecting Russians' precious bodily fluids in order to develop bioweapons for ethnic cleansing. No one knows where he picked up this nonsense, but it cropped up regularly over the years, and apparently this is what the propaganda decided to go with this tim — SophistiCat

Some crazy stuff... I don't know if related, but a similar ugly rumor has been going around in Africa for decades about AIDS, that is was invented by the Americans to kill black people.

Most welcome.

NPR is not that biased, a bit dull maybe but that's in a sense the price to pay for neutrality... And the New Yorker remains IMO the best magazine in the world, written in the best English. They do top notch radio reporting at
https://www.newyorker.com/podcast/the-new-yorker-radio-hour/