|
Post by oasisserbia on Mar 12, 2022 11:29:20 GMT -5
Ofc, he is an idiot. But still, the only solution for peace is to make Ukraine and Russia friends again, all the other things are leading to never-ending conflict. Even total defeat of Russia in Ukraine wouldn't be good, long term speaking, we would always have tensions and incidents. That country is basically 50% pro Russian, 50% pro west. So, for long term peace in Ukraine, we need peace first and then trying to build friendship between Russia and Ukraine and then Russia and west. Humiliating one side never got us any good. Long term speaking again, Russia and Ukraine should probably one day be part of some reorganized EU without borders and then wouldn't even matter which city is in what country, especially if people are living good. I am sorry but I am allergic on people making statements like "they should hold on battlefield", "we should nuke them" from their bedrooms. Many things lead to this and now its time to stop this. I went threw wars in 90s and you realise that no territory is worth human life. Surrendering against evil shouldn't be an option but I am sorry, now it's late for some things. And Putin still isn't Hitler and he wouldn't kill all Ukrainians after taking some of their territories. Is this worth WW3? I know it is not easy for Ukraine to give their territory just like that, we have similar situation with Kosovo. And then, after all, is it really the answer for all of us to unite and fight against Russians? Let's make long term plans for all of us to unite in our countries, elect new governments and then all be friends and talk about stuff like this and make agreements, not wars.
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Mar 12, 2022 11:32:28 GMT -5
*Crimea is part of the Russia on that map, that is also territory that Russia demands not only those "small" grey and red territories.
|
|
|
Post by RocketMan on Mar 12, 2022 11:53:43 GMT -5
Ask Putin if Ukraine is worth WW3. There’s absolutely no scenario where I would sign a deal with Russia right now. It would make the west look weak and powerless. And honestly, the fear of stumbling into a nuclear war is clouding your judgement. That’s not gonna happen. It’s just a convenient threat
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Mar 12, 2022 11:59:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by RocketMan on Mar 12, 2022 12:05:28 GMT -5
I can’t even watch a horror movie man. And funnily enough, this offer was well received by the German neo-nazi scene. So now they get in serious trouble when they return
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Mar 12, 2022 12:20:20 GMT -5
You can't even watch horror movie but there’s absolutely no scenario where you would sign a deal with Russia right now.
Ok.
Stop for a second and breathe and think. Do you understand how bad is what you and western governments are doing? Sending Ukrainians to war, telling them to hold on, not to surrend but also telling them that you won't send any army.
Come on then, let's all of all us attack Russia, every man from Europe, USA, Canada, Australia... I am in, if you are..
Russia will stop 'in a moment' if Ukraine meets terms:
- Kremlin says it insists on neutrality for Ukraine - Russia "will finish" demilitarisation of the country - Wants Kyiv to recognise breakaway regions, loss of Crimea
If this what Russia wants and their campaign is not as going as well as they thought, there is for sure room for negotiations.
Let me remind you that Crimea was basically part of Russia before all this and breakaway regions were also basically independent, so the only real change would be demilitarisation and neutrality.
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Mar 12, 2022 12:45:38 GMT -5
You can't even watch horror movie but there’s absolutely no scenario where you would sign a deal with Russia right now. Ok. Stop for a second and breathe and think. Do you understand how bad is what you and western governments are doing? Sending Ukrainians to war, telling them to hold on, not to surrend but also telling them that you won't send any army. Come on then, let's all of all us attack Russia, every man from Europe, USA, Canada, Australia... I am in, if you are.. Russia will stop 'in a moment' if Ukraine meets terms: - Kremlin says it insists on neutrality for Ukraine - Russia "will finish" demilitarisation of the country - Wants Kyiv to recognise breakaway regions, loss of Crimea If this what Russia wants and their campaign is not as going as well as they thought, there is for sure room for negotiations. Let me remind you that Crimea was basically part of Russia before all this and breakaway regions were also basically independent, so the only real change would be demilitarisation and neutrality. You can’t on the one hand ask if people want nuclear war and then on the other criticise the west for not sending in armies in that would ultimately make that more likely. Western governments haven’t sent Ukrainians to war. Ukrainians are at war because it’s been forced on them. Of the three things you mention that Russia want, the first is reasonable and could have been achieved without invading. The second I’d be interested for you to tell me what that actually means? What are they demilitarising? The third should have been sorted via an internationally observed referendum. Not arming separatists. A shame to think Russia could have got most of what it wants without murdering Ukrainian civilians. Instead it’s painted itself in to a corner and made it worse with countries like Finland considering joining NATO.
|
|
|
Post by RocketMan on Mar 12, 2022 12:51:44 GMT -5
You can't even watch horror movie but there’s absolutely no scenario where you would sign a deal with Russia right now. Ok. Stop for a second and breathe and think. Do you understand how bad is what you and western governments are doing? Sending Ukrainians to war, telling them to hold on, not to surrend but also telling them that you won't send any army. Come on then, let's all of all us attack Russia, every man from Europe, USA, Canada, Australia... I am in, if you are.. Russia will stop 'in a moment' if Ukraine meets terms: - Kremlin says it insists on neutrality for Ukraine - Russia "will finish" demilitarisation of the country - Wants Kyiv to recognise breakaway regions, loss of Crimea If this what Russia wants and their campaign is not as going as well as they thought, there is for sure room for negotiations. Let me remind you that Crimea was basically part of Russia before all this and breakaway regions were also basically independent, so the only real change would be demilitarisation and neutrality. Lol I’m not doing anything. Im not the West, i don’t represent Germany or the nato. I just tell you what i think about this conflict. That’s all. I don’t want this war, I don’t hate Russians and I don’t want the nato to fight against Russia. Don’t be so dramatic.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Mar 12, 2022 13:40:43 GMT -5
Putin's rationalizations for invading Ukraine are quite similar to that of USA's invasion of Iraq. We got away with it. Putin thinks he can too.
It also begs the question that if U.S had not been impeding on Russia's borders, disrupting the Iron Curtain which led to the downfall of the Soviet Union, as well as further intrusions post-cold war (Soviet collapse), perhaps Putin wouldn't be seeking to rebuild the Soviet states. Western nations have been poking and prodding at Russia and now Russia is aggressive. The West's desire for imperialism is among many reasons why Ukraine is suffering war right now. Bernie Sanders absolutely called it in a recent speech he made. Russia and America might be on opposites sides, but they are very much both the villains.
It's also worth mentioning, we are approaching potential new conflict just half a year after pulling out of Afghanistan, where some 25 million people are starving and 10 million of which are near death. Economic imperialism is still imperialism. It has to end. Stop electing warhawks!
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Mar 12, 2022 13:45:53 GMT -5
The United States made a glaring error when we passed up the VP spot for Henry Wallace and gave it to Truman. Lots of people have died stemming from that mistake.
|
|
|
Post by jezza2 on Mar 12, 2022 14:13:53 GMT -5
The United States made a glaring error when we passed up the VP spot for Henry Wallace and gave it to Truman. Lots of people have died stemming from that mistake. You are very, very, wrong.
|
|
|
Post by tomlivesforever on Mar 12, 2022 14:38:02 GMT -5
Putin's rationalizations for invading Ukraine are quite similar to that of USA's invasion of Iraq. We got away with it. Putin thinks he can too. It also begs the question that if U.S had not been impeding on Russia's borders, disrupting the Iron Curtain which led to the downfall of the Soviet Union, as well as further intrusions post-cold war (Soviet collapse), perhaps Putin wouldn't be seeking to rebuild the Soviet states. Western nations have been poking and prodding at Russia and now Russia is aggressive. The West's desire for imperialism is among many reasons why Ukraine is suffering war right now. Bernie Sanders absolutely called it in a recent speech he made. Russia and America might be on opposites sides, but they are very much both the villains. It's also worth mentioning, we are approaching potential new conflict just half a year after pulling out of Afghanistan, where some 25 million people are starving and 10 million of which are near death. Economic imperialism is still imperialism. It has to end. Stop electing warhawks! How would you say they are similar? I’m not known for defending the US but how are they impeding on Russia’s borders? Disrupting the iron curtain was no bad thing. I also don’t buy that the West is entirely responsible for Russian aggression. This isn’t the first time.
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Mar 12, 2022 15:55:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by oasisserbia on Mar 12, 2022 16:41:22 GMT -5
You can't even watch horror movie but there’s absolutely no scenario where you would sign a deal with Russia right now. Ok. Stop for a second and breathe and think. Do you understand how bad is what you and western governments are doing? Sending Ukrainians to war, telling them to hold on, not to surrend but also telling them that you won't send any army. Come on then, let's all of all us attack Russia, every man from Europe, USA, Canada, Australia... I am in, if you are.. Russia will stop 'in a moment' if Ukraine meets terms: - Kremlin says it insists on neutrality for Ukraine - Russia "will finish" demilitarisation of the country - Wants Kyiv to recognise breakaway regions, loss of Crimea If this what Russia wants and their campaign is not as going as well as they thought, there is for sure room for negotiations. Let me remind you that Crimea was basically part of Russia before all this and breakaway regions were also basically independent, so the only real change would be demilitarisation and neutrality. You can’t on the one hand ask if people want nuclear war and then on the other criticise the west for not sending in armies in that would ultimately make that more likely. Western governments haven’t sent Ukrainians to war. Ukrainians are at war because it’s been forced on them. Of the three things you mention that Russia want, the first is reasonable and could have been achieved without invading. The second I’d be interested for you to tell me what that actually means? What are they demilitarising? The third should have been sorted via an internationally observed referendum. Not arming separatists. A shame to think Russia could have got most of what it wants without murdering Ukrainian civilians. Instead it’s painted itself in to a corner and made it worse with countries like Finland considering joining NATO. Ukrainians wouldn't go to war without west supporting them do that. Putin is wild, crazy animal. You need to learn how to control it. West is playing with the tiger and treats him like it is cat and then cries when tiger bites. It's hard to justify behaviour of an aggressive tiger but when it bites you, and you were provoking, it's hard to tell whose fault it is. I don't know much about demilitarisation, I know that Russia want all nazi parts of Ukrainian army, and they really exist, to disappear. I guess that all that is negotiable but I guess that it means that if they become neutral country, there is no need for army that they have now which could be threat to Russia or Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk. It means probably that Ukraine would have normal army like an average European country has. I agree about referendum. And I already talked about that. Many wars, majority actually, could be stopped if everyone agreed to respect what people say on referendum. Let's settle that than. Putin want Crimea but doesn't allow independent Kosovo. West doesn't recognize Crimea or Catalonia but recognize Kosovo. When there are no rules, this is happening. The law of the strongest. Chechnya, Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Georgia, Syria...
|
|
|
Post by RocketMan on Mar 12, 2022 16:53:07 GMT -5
Putin's rationalizations for invading Ukraine are quite similar to that of USA's invasion of Iraq. We got away with it. Putin thinks he can too. It also begs the question that if U.S had not been impeding on Russia's borders, disrupting the Iron Curtain which led to the downfall of the Soviet Union, as well as further intrusions post-cold war (Soviet collapse), perhaps Putin wouldn't be seeking to rebuild the Soviet states. Western nations have been poking and prodding at Russia and now Russia is aggressive. The West's desire for imperialism is among many reasons why Ukraine is suffering war right now. Bernie Sanders absolutely called it in a recent speech he made. Russia and America might be on opposites sides, but they are very much both the villains. It's also worth mentioning, we are approaching potential new conflict just half a year after pulling out of Afghanistan, where some 25 million people are starving and 10 million of which are near death. Economic imperialism is still imperialism. It has to end. Stop electing warhawks! How would you say they are similar? I’m not known for defending the US but how are they impeding on Russia’s borders? Disrupting the iron curtain was no bad thing. I also don’t buy that the West is entirely responsible for Russian aggression. This isn’t the first time. It’s such a stupid argument too. I’m the first person who would shit on the United States but give me a break. Every country that was part of the Sowjet Union WANTED to join nato, WANTED to join the west. Hell ask people in Poland, the Czech Republic or Hungary what they think about Russia. Nobody was forced to do so.
|
|
|
Post by jezza2 on Mar 12, 2022 17:03:52 GMT -5
You can’t on the one hand ask if people want nuclear war and then on the other criticise the west for not sending in armies in that would ultimately make that more likely. Western governments haven’t sent Ukrainians to war. Ukrainians are at war because it’s been forced on them. Of the three things you mention that Russia want, the first is reasonable and could have been achieved without invading. The second I’d be interested for you to tell me what that actually means? What are they demilitarising? The third should have been sorted via an internationally observed referendum. Not arming separatists. A shame to think Russia could have got most of what it wants without murdering Ukrainian civilians. Instead it’s painted itself in to a corner and made it worse with countries like Finland considering joining NATO. Ukrainians wouldn't go to war without west supporting them do that. Putin is wild, crazy animal. You need to learn how to control it. West is playing with the tiger and treats him like it is cat and then cries when tiger bites. It's hard to justify behaviour of an aggressive tiger but when it bites you, and you were provoking, it's hard to tell whose fault it is. I don't know much about demilitarisation, I know that Russia want all nazi parts of Ukrainian army, and they really exist, to disappear. I guess that all that is negotiable but I guess that it means that if they become neutral country, there is no need for army that they have now which could be threat to Russia or Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk. It means probably that Ukraine would have normal army like an average European country has. I agree about referendum. And I already talked about that. Many wars, majority actually, could be stopped if everyone agreed to respect what people say on referendum. Let's settle that than. Putin want Crimea but doesn't allow independent Kosovo. West doesn't recognize Crimea or Catalonia but recognize Kosovo. When there are no rules, this is happening. The law of the strongest. Chechnya, Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Georgia, Syria... So it's the Wests fault for Ukrainians fighting back? And last time I checked, I don't think anyone recognizes Catalonia as independent. I might be wrong though. I'm sure most countries just deferred their opinions to "Internal Spanish Problem."
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Mar 12, 2022 20:53:03 GMT -5
Putin's rationalizations for invading Ukraine are quite similar to that of USA's invasion of Iraq. We got away with it. Putin thinks he can too. It also begs the question that if U.S had not been impeding on Russia's borders, disrupting the Iron Curtain which led to the downfall of the Soviet Union, as well as further intrusions post-cold war (Soviet collapse), perhaps Putin wouldn't be seeking to rebuild the Soviet states. Western nations have been poking and prodding at Russia and now Russia is aggressive. The West's desire for imperialism is among many reasons why Ukraine is suffering war right now. Bernie Sanders absolutely called it in a recent speech he made. Russia and America might be on opposites sides, but they are very much both the villains. It's also worth mentioning, we are approaching potential new conflict just half a year after pulling out of Afghanistan, where some 25 million people are starving and 10 million of which are near death. Economic imperialism is still imperialism. It has to end. Stop electing warhawks! How would you say they are similar? I’m not known for defending the US but how are they impeding on Russia’s borders? Disrupting the iron curtain was no bad thing. I also don’t buy that the West is entirely responsible for Russian aggression. This isn’t the first time. Well, Putin lied his ass off about why he is invading Ukraine, just like Bush did for Iraq. Putin is literally claiming Ukraine is starting up their nuclear program, which was a claim I think last week. This week now it's suddenly biological weapons. Weapons of mass destruction.
Let this graphic make the case about western aggression and imperialism. /photo/1
I didn't claim the west is entirely responsible.
Disrupting the Iron Curtain was objectively a bad thing since it disrupted the peace established between U.S., Britain and Europe, led to proxy wars over the Middle East and other areas, nearly led to nuclear war and led to the mass destabilization of what is now the former Soviet Union which took decades to recover from.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Mar 12, 2022 20:54:00 GMT -5
The United States made a glaring error when we passed up the VP spot for Henry Wallace and gave it to Truman. Lots of people have died stemming from that mistake. You are very, very, wrong. I am convinced by your argument.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Mar 12, 2022 21:02:42 GMT -5
How would you say they are similar? I’m not known for defending the US but how are they impeding on Russia’s borders? Disrupting the iron curtain was no bad thing. I also don’t buy that the West is entirely responsible for Russian aggression. This isn’t the first time. It’s such a stupid argument too. I’m the first person who would shit on the United States but give me a break. Every country that was part of the Sowjet Union WANTED to join nato, WANTED to join the west. Hell ask people in Poland, the Czech Republic or Hungary what they think about Russia. Nobody was forced to do so. It's simple cause and effect. Soviet Union and later Russia warned about their border countries joining NATO. We ignored that and have slowly brought in more and more eastern European countries against those agreements and in spite of those warnings.
How do you suppose we'd react if Russia put permanent troops on Russian military bases just miles from the border of the United States, using Canada or Mexico (assuming either were welcoming). I'm confident you know how America's government would react. They would see that as a threat. Especially if we had made an agreement that such actions wouldn't be taken and then Russia violated those actions and did it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 13, 2022 2:11:40 GMT -5
I wonder if Russell has ever been to one of Evgeny Lebedev‘a parties with his mate Noel?
|
|
|
Post by RocketMan on Mar 13, 2022 7:16:06 GMT -5
It’s such a stupid argument too. I’m the first person who would shit on the United States but give me a break. Every country that was part of the Sowjet Union WANTED to join nato, WANTED to join the west. Hell ask people in Poland, the Czech Republic or Hungary what they think about Russia. Nobody was forced to do so. It's simple cause and effect. Soviet Union and later Russia warned about their border countries joining NATO. We ignored that and have slowly brought in more and more eastern European countries against those agreements and in spite of those warnings. How do you suppose we'd react if Russia put permanent troops on Russian military bases just miles from the border of the United States, using Canada or Mexico (assuming either were welcoming). I'm confident you know how America's government would react. They would see that as a threat. Especially if we had made an agreement that such actions wouldn't be taken and then Russia violated those actions and did it anyway.
You view it from a geo-strategic standpoint and I can’t argue against that. I view it from the, now obviously naive, standpoint that after the Cold War was over, there was this mutual agreement that no border in Europe will ever be moved again and so joining NATO was merely a gesture of opening up to the west and capitalism.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Mar 13, 2022 10:22:38 GMT -5
It's simple cause and effect. Soviet Union and later Russia warned about their border countries joining NATO. We ignored that and have slowly brought in more and more eastern European countries against those agreements and in spite of those warnings. How do you suppose we'd react if Russia put permanent troops on Russian military bases just miles from the border of the United States, using Canada or Mexico (assuming either were welcoming). I'm confident you know how America's government would react. They would see that as a threat. Especially if we had made an agreement that such actions wouldn't be taken and then Russia violated those actions and did it anyway.
You view it from a geo-strategic standpoint and I can’t argue against that. I view it from the, now obviously naive, standpoint that after the Cold War was over, there was this mutual agreement that no border in Europe will ever be moved again and so joining NATO was merely a gesture of opening up to the west and capitalism. Even post collapse, promises to not expand eastward were made to Russia, just never made official. Mutual agreements that were broken.
I like the idea of NATO, but when a superpower tells you to back off or else, you don't have many options. You can destroy the enemy, but with both entities having nukes, this assures your own destruction too. You can fund proxy wars to destabilize the country, which obviously works, but you still risk moving to actual war. Or you listen to that superpower and back off and save many lives, at the potential cost of increasing the power of that superpower over time. No option is good.
|
|
|
Post by jezza2 on Mar 13, 2022 11:38:55 GMT -5
You are very, very, wrong. I am convinced by your argument. Well, that's the abridged version. I don't have all the time in the world. You said you were convinced, but I'll explain my reasoning anyway. Keeping Wallace off the ballot in 1944 wasn't going to change the fact that the relationship between the USA and the Soviet Union was starting to sour. Wallace wasn't gonna change a damn thing with the body count. You have two superpowers battling each other for global dominance and both began fighting long before Wallace could change anything. Your statement "Lots of people have died stemming from that mistake" makes it seem that Wallace could've stopped Soviet intervention in neighboring countries. Stalin would've walked over him. The words of his speech in 1946: "The Russians have no more business in stirring up native communists to political activity in Western Europe, Latin America and the United States than we have in interfering in the politics of Eastern Europe and Russia" when the Soviets were involved in the Greek civil war got him booed so bad he got fired. He also refused to condone the Czech coup in 1948, which was also spearheaded by the Soviets. So what do you do when your own party abandons you? Create your own and get walloped in the 1948 president election. Obviously, the next thing you do is backtrack literally every pro-soviet statement you've ever made and eventually resign from the party that you fucking created in 1950 because you approve the intervention in Korea. His book Where I Was Wrong is fascinating.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Mar 13, 2022 12:37:42 GMT -5
I am convinced by your argument. Well, that's the abridged version. I don't have all the time in the world. You said you were convinced, but I'll explain my reasoning anyway. Keeping Wallace off the ballot in 1944 wasn't going to change the fact that the relationship between the USA and the Soviet Union was starting to sour. Wallace wasn't gonna change a damn thing with the body count. You have two superpowers battling each other for global dominance and both began fighting long before Wallace could change anything. Your statement "Lots of people have died stemming from that mistake" makes it seem that Wallace could've stopped Soviet intervention in neighboring countries. Stalin would've walked over him. The words of his speech in 1946: "The Russians have no more business in stirring up native communists to political activity in Western Europe, Latin America and the United States than we have in interfering in the politics of Eastern Europe and Russia" when the Soviets were involved in the Greek civil war got him booed so bad he got fired. He also refused to condone the Czech coup in 1948, which was also spearheaded by the Soviets. So what do you do when your own party abandons you? Create your own and get walloped in the 1948 president election. Obviously, the next thing you do is backtrack literally every pro-soviet statement you've ever made and eventually resign from the party that you fucking created in 1950 because you approve the intervention in Korea. His book Where I Was Wrong is fascinating. Wallace wouldn't have dropped the bombs. Wallace wanted peace with Soviet Union. Wallace criticized NATO, its expansion and actively advocated for military budget cuts. This would have objectively prevented many U.S deaths, as well as many casualties we caused other countries via military action or by proxy.
I disagree that Stalin would have walked all over him. I think they would have avoided a cold war. Wallace was the strong successor we needed to continue FDR's vision. Truman on the other hand, now that guy was a pushover and was responsible for a terrible aggressive trend in foreign policy with regards to USSR ...
So what do you do when your own party abandons you? Create your own and get walloped in the 1948 president election.
Yes, his party abandoned him. He was ostracized. He was still right and would have moved America in a better direction and by extension, the world too. Just like Bernie Sanders was right in 2016 and 2020, where his own party actively undermined his campaigns because he didn't rally for the status quo, corporate interest or the military industrial complex. It's almost like it's a trend in politics or something.
The fact that he backtracked is quite sad. Probably has more to do with the legacy he wanted to leave. Ironically he is often forgotten anyway, probably because he didn't remain firm on his beliefs. But it must be questioned that if he had gotten his way, would he have later backtracked? I doubt it. The point is, FDR was extremely popular for a reason. Wallace largely wanted to continue his policy and the world would have been better for it.
|
|
|
Post by RocketMan on Mar 13, 2022 17:46:32 GMT -5
The last two weeks in journalism: Putin is „literally Hitler meme“. Some even say he’s worse. Social media and liberal left journalism is slowly losing it.
Then on on the other side: conservatives trying to figure out if they actually support Putin or not.
We do live in a society
|
|