Striving to make sense of the Ukraine war

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

Jesus H. What is this bloke on?

"You claimed that Zelensky had said he was prepared to cede Ukrainian land to Russia in peace talks."

Zelensky doesn't actually attend peace talks. His negotiators do. So what's your point?

The articles used were quite telling and sufficiently enough for this dispute. 

As I said,  others will judge.

I just loved your last sentence. One of your all-time favourites that. I've lost count of the number of posters on this forum who have lacked self-awareness, according to you.

Most will know to whom that particular slur really applies.

 

 

Edited May 1, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

40 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That just shows your memory is as bad as your reasoning, or you're as dishonest as Putin himself because you challenged my statement that Ukraine was a functioning democracy in this very thread, and even stuck to your guns when I showed you the conclusions of the council of Europe's observers that it was. You're increasingly looking like you're arguing in bad faith.

Oh. I get you now, having delved back.

When you made the point that Putin had invaded a functioning democracy, I pointed out that this wasn't the case if you take into account the people of the rebel held areas of the Donbas who mostly welcomed the Russians. Lubansk and Donetsk both have separate governments which are functioning independently of Kyiv.

You just claimed that I said that Ukraine, was "not really a democracy."

Hardly. 

Context, not bad faith.   

 

 

Edited May 1, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[horsefly 4,310]

14 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Jesus H. What is this bloke on?

"You claimed that Zelensky had said he was prepared to cede Ukrainian land to Russia in peace talks."

Zelensky doesn't actually attend peace talks. His negotiators do. So what's your point?

The articles used were quite telling and sufficiently enough for this dispute. 

As I said,  others will judge.

I just loved your last sentence. One of your all-time favourites that. I've lost count of the number of posters on this forum who have lacked self-awareness, according to you.

Most will know to whom that particular slur really applies.

 

 

Oh dear o dear! What a sad and pathetic attempt to distract from your lies. 

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

2 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Oh dear o dear! What a sad and pathetic attempt to distract from your lies. 

 

Is that meaningless broken record all you have left?

Edited May 1, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[horsefly 4,310]

4 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Oh. I get you now, having delved back.

When you made the point that Putin had invaded a functioning democracy, I pointed out that this wasn't the case if you take into account the people of the rebel held areas of the Donbas who mostly welcomed the Russians. Lubansk and Donetsk both have separate governments which are functioning independently of Kyiv.

You just claimed that I said that Ukraine, was "not really a democracy."

Hardly. 

Context, not bad faith.   

 

 

No! Simply another of your lies and another pathetic attempt to squirm out of your persistent repetition of falsehoods. The idea that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was not the invasion of a democratic country because some people living in Ukrainian sovereign territory "welcomed" the Russians, has got to be one of the most laughably disingenuous falsehoods ever posted on this site. What a joke!

[kirku 1,336]

On 29/04/2022 at 16:26, BroadstairsR said:

What exactly do you mean by "full appeasement" and "semi-appeasement?" Terms I have never used.

They are summaries of what your position appears to be.

You advocated for appeasement prior to Russia's invasion as a way to avoid bloodshed: "full appeasement"

You criticised the current position of NATO for supplying weapons but not direct military action: "semi appeasement".

Your recent post indicated a "hope" that appeasement would satisfy Putin - this is despite all the evidence and rhetoric to the contrary. It doesn't seem like a plausible hope to me.

[horsefly 4,310]

21 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

 

Is that meaningless broken record all you have left?

You have demonstrated time and again that you do not intend to engage in debate seriously. Whenever anyone (not just me) points out a falsehood in what you have claimed you resort immediately to dissembling nonsense and abuse. You are not worthy of taking seriously anymore so I will simply treat you as a joke.

Edited May 1, 2022 by horsefly

[littleyellowbirdie 2,585]

15 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Oh. I get you now, having delved back.

When you made the point that Putin had invaded a functioning democracy, I pointed out that this wasn't the case if you take into account the people of the rebel held areas of the Donbas who mostly welcomed the Russians. Lubansk and Donetsk both have separate governments which are functioning independently of Kyiv.

You just claimed that I said that Ukraine, was "not really a democracy."

Hardly. 

Context, not bad faith.   

 

 

Breakaway regions of a democratic state fuelled by covert activity by the illegal aggressor don't get take into account in any reasonable, good faith argument.

[horsefly 4,310]

6 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Breakaway regions of a democratic state fuelled by covert activity by the illegal aggressor don't get take into account in any reasonable, good faith argument.

Spot on! Just another example of his desperate attempt not to admit that yet again he got the facts wrong. 

[kirku 1,336]

FWIW, Zelenskyy's quote about "discussing" the status of Crimea and Donbass is not an implication at all that he is willing to cede those areas.

It's easy to see why, in English, you may come to that conclusion.

Because the unspoken part of it would be:

We can discuss the price (because I am willing to accept less.)

My experience of Ukraine would offer this alternative:

We can discuss the price (and I can tell you to f*** off. Politely, of course.)

Edited May 1, 2022 by kirku

[horsefly 4,310]

43 minutes ago, kirku said:

They are summaries of what your position appears to be.

You advocated for appeasement prior to Russia's invasion as a way to avoid bloodshed: "full appeasement"

You criticised the current position of NATO for supplying weapons but not direct military action: "semi appeasement".

Your recent post indicated a "hope" that appeasement would satisfy Putin - this is despite all the evidence and rhetoric to the contrary. It doesn't seem like a plausible hope to me.

Again, spot on! So the guy who says he has never talked of appeasement said this on the other war thread 12th of March:

"The only victory in all this will result from appeasement and not dying bravely in the streets.  That there is evil involved in the Russian/Putin invasion is as undeniable as the history of the Russo-Ukrainian connection that has caused this atrocity. "

Edited March 12 by BroadstairsR

and:

"To me, this is a small appeasement" 

I can't be bothered to search out the many other examples, as he will only respond by spouting some tripe about he didn't mean appeasement by using the word "appeasement", followed by a stream of personal abuse about me being a geek, etc, etc, etc yawn!

Edited May 1, 2022 by horsefly

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

52 minutes ago, kirku said:

They are summaries of what your position appears to be.

You advocated for appeasement prior to Russia's invasion as a way to avoid bloodshed: "full appeasement"

You criticised the current position of NATO for supplying weapons but not direct military action: "semi appeasement".

Your recent post indicated a "hope" that appeasement would satisfy Putin - this is despite all the evidence and rhetoric to the contrary. It doesn't seem like a plausible hope to me.

Incorrect. I first mentioned appeasement a few weeks after the invasion and when the bodies were beginning to pile up and when peace talks were initiated.

I questioned NATO's position, as I do not believe that Ukraine can win this war alone. When asked if you thought the opposite, you gave no reply.

Taking my stance, then the provision of arms to the country serves to just pro-long the carnage. The Ukrainians are just left to take the brunt of the aggression, whilst the West constantly demonstrates that it has no intention of sacrificing its own 

With my stance, the only options for the West would seem to be to fully engage with the Russians and embark upon WW3, which nobody wants, or to appease Putin by presenting him with off-ramps sufficient to claim victory in his homeland and now in time for the May 9th celebrations.

My position is that I would like to see dialogue between Moscow and Washington re-opened. At the very least, this might alleviate fears of nuclear escalation and at the very most this might lead to a cessation of hostilities in Ukraine. It's probably a wish too far to hope for a UN peace keeping force to be mobilised in the area.

Each day I look for mention in the press of a breakthrough in the peace negotiations, which I believe are still taking place in Turkey. Each day I read of more horrors and a path towards the total destruction of Ukraine.

I am guessing that you have even less trust of Putin's Russia than most. Should defeat face Zelensky, would you then favour Western involvement on the ground?

Should defeat face Putin, do you not fear the consequences?

 

 

Edited May 1, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Spot on! Just another example of his desperate attempt not to admit that yet again he got the facts wrong. 

Horsey must be severely hurt. He can't contain himself. He's frantically jumping in, wind in his little sails, at every opportunity and even into discussions he's not been party to and despite limited contextual knowledge. 

Wounded? Transparent or what?

Edited May 1, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

41 minutes ago, kirku said:

FWIW, Zelenskyy's quote about "discussing" the status of Crimea and Donbass is not an implication at all that he is willing to cede those areas.

It's easy to see why, in English, you may come to that conclusion.

Because the unspoken part of it would be:

We can discuss the price (because I am willing to accept less.)

My experience of Ukraine would offer this alternative:

We can discuss the price (and I can tell you to f*** off. Politely, of course.)

I'll accept that except for the fact that he mentioned on the television interview that he was concerned about the citizens of the Donbas who wanted to remain in Ukraine, suggesting some form of cessation to Russians/Russia.

[horsefly 4,310]

1 minute ago, BroadstairsR said:

Horsey must be severely hurt. He can't contain himself. He's frantically jumping in, wind in his little sails, at every occasion, and even into discussions he's not been party to despite limited context. 

Wounded? Transparent or what?

Hahahahaha! So utterly predictable. Never answer the proof that he has lied, always attack someone with abuse to distract from his falsehoods. Grow up and take responsibility for what you have said, and what others have called you to account for.

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

Just now, horsefly said:

Hahahahaha! So utterly predictable. Never answer the proof that he has lied, always attack someone with abuse to distract from his falsehoods. Grow up and take responsibility for what you have said, and what others have called you to account for.

Piffle!

[horsefly 4,310]

Just now, BroadstairsR said:

Piffle!

Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahah!!! Self-awareness at last.

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

1 minute ago, horsefly said:

Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahah!!! Self-awareness at last.

Eh?

[kirku 1,336]

7 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

I'll accept that except for the fact that he mentioned on the television interview that he was concerned about the citizens of the Donbas who wanted to remain in Ukraine, suggesting some form of cessation to Russians/Russia.

Zelensky brushed aside the idea of letting Moscow take over the Donbas and part of eastern Ukraine to stop the conflict.

He added: "Ukraine and its people are clear. We have no claim to anyone else's territories but we are not going to give up ours".

[kirku 1,336]

7 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

Incorrect. I first mentioned appeasement a few weeks after the invasion and when the bodies were beginning to pile up and when peace talks were initiated.

...

I am guessing that you have even less trust of Putin's Russia than most. Should defeat face Zelensky, would you then favour Western involvement on the ground?

Should defeat face Putin, do you not fear the consequences?

I meant that you advocated for appeasement by Ukraine prior to the invasion, that Zelenskyy and his government should've acquiesed to Russian demands in order to avoid the war.

----

Everybody should be worried about what Putin might do when cornered, but that also shouldn't result in outright appeasement.

None of the options are good options, because Putin's bloody rampage has taken any good options off the table.

Russians don't want to die in nuclear hellfire any more than you or I do, so you have to trust that self-preservation kicks in at some point.

I think the Russian public's attitude towards full mobilisation will tell us quite a lot. Are they willing to be sent to fight and potentially kill their own family, as will be the case for millions of them?

If they accept that possibility then we're likely closer to a nuclear exchange than we may be comfortable with. Not because it's likely to result in major military changes (as far as my extremely rudimentary understanding goes), but more about the mentality and capacity for outright evil lunacy from the wider Russian population.

I have to say, I'm not overly hopeful.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

On 30/04/2022 at 15:42, Indy said:

It does amaze me how posters resort to cutting out parts of a full response in order to fit their narrative to support their point. 

It's often useful to cut out parts to which one is not responding to make it clear to everyone to the parts to which one is responding.

See what I did there?

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

7 hours ago, kirku said:

Zelensky brushed aside the idea of letting Moscow take over the Donbas and part of eastern Ukraine to stop the conflict.

He added: "Ukraine and its people are clear. We have no claim to anyone else's territories but we are not going to give up ours".

Zelensky's stance seems to have hardened of late. The Mail Online header on Saturday suggested as much:

"Ukraine's heroic leader reiterated he will give up no land in eastern Ukraine, contradicting his previous reported willingness to compromise on contested regions."

It is the Daily Mail, but David Averre (the chief foreign correspondent) has been reporting on the war since day one and seems well-informed.

Articles on the matter are not hard to find. In an interview given to the Washington Post on March 27th. he had sounded more conciliatory:

"Zelensky acknowledged in the new interview that Moscow would not liberate all contested territory and suggested further negotiations over “the complex issue of Donbas,” the eastern Ukrainian region where pro-Russian separatists have fought for years. In a video posted later to Telegram, Zelensky said, “We are looking for peace, really. Without delay.”

Although it could seem that Zelensky now envisages eventual victory that particular horse might have all but bolted as more and more of the territory is invaded, and he has previously suggested that he did not think that Ukraine could regain it by force as things stand.

It could also be that Russian intransigence has forced his current stance:

https://thehill.com/policy/international/3257523-chief-russian-negotiator-rejects-idea-of-putin-zelensky-meetin

https://www.ft.com/content/b8e7489d-bfa9-4a1f-aa1e-ba441bb0d354

I feel for the man. He has called the war "a battle for the world's freedom," whilst having to accept the fact that the world he refers to is unwilling to join that war.

Do we have to pray that Putin settles for his gains as enough to parade victorious on May 9th., before sloping off towards his imminent deathbed?

Edited May 2, 2022 by BroadstairsR

[horsefly 4,310]

The simple fact remains Zelensky has never said he would cede Ukrainian land to the Russians. Ridiculously contorted attempts to suggest he has done so deserve contempt. "compromises on contested regions" does not remotely imply concession of Ukrainian land to Russia. (see the Minsk Agreement) 

Those calling for the appeasement of Russia to bring an end to the killing are simply ignoring the evidence that where Russia has gained (temporary) control of Ukrainian cities such as Bucha, they have used that control to engage in genocidal mass murder of innocent civilians, torture, raping, brutalisation, and pillaging. To refuse to provide Ukrainians with the military resources they need to defend themselves from that fate would be unconscionable. 

[ricardo 7,396]

Finnish  media saying that application  to join NATO will be made 12th May.

Sweden likely to follow.

[kirku 1,336]

[littleyellowbirdie 2,585]

7 hours ago, horsefly said:

The simple fact remains Zelensky has never said he would cede Ukrainian land to the Russians. Ridiculously contorted attempts to suggest he has done so deserve contempt. "compromises on contested regions" does not remotely imply concession of Ukrainian land to Russia. (see the Minsk Agreement) 

Those calling for the appeasement of Russia to bring an end to the killing are simply ignoring the evidence that where Russia has gained (temporary) control of Ukrainian cities such as Bucha, they have used that control to engage in genocidal mass murder of innocent civilians, torture, raping, brutalisation, and pillaging. To refuse to provide Ukrainians with the military resources they need to defend themselves from that fate would be unconscionable. 

If anything, if Zelesky had agreed to conced then it would simply make the continued illegal invasion by Russia, instead of making compromises itself, even more indefensible, if making it more indefensible was possible, which I'm not sure it is. 

Edited May 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,820]

1 hour ago, ricardo said:

Finnish  media saying that application  to join NATO will be made 12th May.

Sweden likely to follow.

Putin, a mastermind of strategic thinking.😀

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

On 01/05/2022 at 23:16, Rock The Boat said:

It's often useful to cut out parts to which one is not responding to make it clear to everyone to the parts to which one is responding.

See what I did there?

Yes Minister

[Yellow Fever 3,818]

How on earth do the Russian's get into a row with Israel on Hitler's Jewish' blood?

I know they are scraping the barrel to promote their diatribe for the truly gullible but this is getting plain ridiculous. 

Edited May 3, 2022 by Yellow Fever

[Indy 3,314]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

How on earth do the Russian's get into a row with Israel on Hitler's Jewish' blood?

I know they are scraping the barrel to promote their diatribe for the truly gullible but this is getting plain ridiculous. 

Funny enough I watched a History Channel programme which did a DNA test on Hitler a few years ago and it certainly did discuss that he has certain markers to confirm he could be of Jewish ancestry.

That said it makes no difference he was a mental case and was obsessed!