Striving to make sense of the Ukraine war

[horsefly 4,318]

Well done Vlad! You've just won yourself an extra 810 miles of border with NATO.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/finland-to-join-nato-as-vladimir-putin-s-invasion-of-ukraine-backfires/ar-AAXbpgs?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=056e4fdb105a481a93f7872acc9343ac

[MooreMarriot 313]

One for the Putin apologists :

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61425025

[Yellow Fever 3,841]

20 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

All conflict is bloody, but it wasn't a conquest, and if there are people who can sympathise with Putin's genocidal war on Ukraine for feeling threatened by a small non-nuclear neighbour while he controls the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world then they should flipping well have some sympathy for the Jews that had had enough of millennia of persecution and decided they were going to have their own state whether people liked it or not. 

Two wrongs never make a right LYB.

I have some sympathies with both sides of the argument - Jewish family as some know but also a soldier father in Palestine at the time of the King David. You can guess his thoughts on Menachen Begin' -  a terrorist pure and simple. Frankly the Jews had no more 'right' to return to Palestine than any diaspora especially after 1000 years. Clearly we should give the UK back to the Celts (Welsh) and us Anglo, Saxon or Viking should be pushed out again. Bodicca back ruling in Norfolk speaking Gaelic. It's just as 'current'. 

All that said most orthodox Jews in my experience (NW London) are not terribly enamoured of the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and would rather some rapprochement take place -  two state solution and whatever - then again I know of some with a view that is not printable. Racism in not confined to 'white' Europeans but to the thickos of any sort!

[PurpleCanary 5,587]

21 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

All conflict is bloody, but it wasn't a conquest, and if there are people who can sympathise with Putin's genocidal war on Ukraine for feeling threatened by a small non-nuclear neighbour while he controls the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world then they should flipping well have some sympathy for the Jews that had had enough of millennia of persecution and decided they were going to have their own state whether people liked it or not. 

If it was any other invasion you wouldn't hesitate to call it a conquest. Certainly my eye witness knew it for what it was. And it is odd that you regard the Jews as having a right to return to their homeland (after many centuries) but not the Palestinians to theirs.

Edited May 12, 2022 by PurpleCanary

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

53 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

If it was any other invasion you wouldn't hesitate to call it a conquest. Certainly my eye witness knew it for what it was. And it is odd that you regard the Jews as having a right to return to their homeland (after many centuries) but not the Palestinians to theirs.

I made no argument about returning; I pointed out that the foundation of Israel was established by the UN as an act of international law. Do you respect international law or don't you?

[Herman 9,838]

You've probably seen the footage but this thread is interesting.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Two wrongs never make a right LYB.

I have some sympathies with both sides of the argument - Jewish family as some know but also a soldier father in Palestine at the time of the King David. You can guess his thoughts on Menachen Begin' -  a terrorist pure and simple. Frankly the Jews had no more 'right' to return to Palestine than any diaspora especially after 1000 years. Clearly we should give the UK back to the Celts (Welsh) and us Anglo, Saxon or Viking should be pushed out again. Bodicca back ruling in Norfolk speaking Gaelic. It's just as 'current'. 

All that said most orthodox Jews in my experience (NW London) are not terribly enamoured of the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians and would rather some rapprochement take place -  two state solution and whatever - then again I know of some with a view that is not printable. Racism in not confined to 'white' Europeans but to the thickos of any sort!

Two wrongs don't make a right... unless where people are arguing on behalf of most of the actions of the Arab world and Palestinians against Israel, in which case they apparently do.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

Anyway, back to the topic of the thread. Here's some great footage of some Russian troops busily 'den4zifying' Ukraine by shooting some unarmed civilians in the back. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61425025

[PurpleCanary 5,587]

39 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I made no argument about returning; I pointed out that the foundation of Israel was established by the UN as an act of international law. Do you respect international law or don't you?

You did, actually. saying in any other invasion the displaced would simply have settled in whichever country they found themselves and in effect accepted that. Whereas these annoying Palestinians want to return to the land they inhabited within living memory.

A weird argument on your part, given your belief that the Jews had the right to invade land that stopped being their home many centuries ago. And I doubt you say the Ukrainians forced to flee the Russian invaders have no right of return.

As to international law, best to steer clear of that where Israel is concerned nowadays, given the continuing theft of Palestinian land:

Israel has [today] approved 2,700 housing units in illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, and advanced plans for another 1,600, a military body has said, a move likely to displease Washington before an expected visit to the region next month by the US president, Joe Biden.

An Israeli Civil Administration subcommittee meeting on Thursday approved the building plans and retroactively “legalised” two outposts in Area C, the 60% of the West Bank under full Israeli control. The news came a day after the Israeli military demolished Palestinian homes in an area where about 1,000 people face the threat of eviction to make way for a military training zone.

Since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, approximately 600,000 to 750,000 Jewish settlers have moved to live on land in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank. The practice is considered by most of the international community to be illegal, and a major impediment to achieving lasting peace.

Edited May 12, 2022 by PurpleCanary

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

13 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

You did, actually. saying in any other invasion the displaced would simply have settled in whichever country they found themselves and in effect accepted that. Whereas these annoying Palestinians want to return to the land they inhabited within living memory.

 

The Palestinians have never been allowed to get out to take refuge anywhere else. The Arab neighbours have effectively kept them prisoner there to keep the argument alive. 

And it's definitely worth talking about international law since the resolutions you point to stem from Arab invasions of Israel then that were ignoring international law...

You don't accept Israel's right to exist. Fine. Don't talk about international law at all then and accept that Israel will do whatever it takes to survive. 

Edited May 12, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

5 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

The Palestinians have never been allowed to get out to take refuge anywhere else. The Arab neighbours have effectively kept them prisoner there to keep the argument alive. 

Why should they have to move?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

Just now, keelansgrandad said:

Why would they want to move?

Fixed your question for you. 

[Yellow Fever 3,841]

13 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

You did, actually. saying in any other invasion the displaced would simply have settled in whichever country they found themselves and in effect accepted that. Whereas these annoying Palestinians want to return to the land they inhabited within living memory.

A weird argument on your part, given your belief that the Jews had the right to invade land that stopped being their home many centuries ago. And I doubt you say the Ukrainians forced to flee the Russian invaders have no right of return.

As to international law, best to steer clear of that where Israel is concerned nowadays, given the continuing theft of Palestinian land:

Israel has [today] approved 2,700 housing units in illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, and advanced plans for another 1,600, a military body has said, a move likely to displease Washington before an expected visit to the region next month by the US president, Joe Biden.

An Israeli Civil Administration subcommittee meeting on Thursday approved the building plans and retroactively “legalised” two outposts in Area C, the 60% of the West Bank under full Israeli control. The news came a day after the Israeli military demolished Palestinian homes in an area where about 1,000 people face the threat of eviction to make way for a military training zone.

Since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, approximately 600,000 to 750,000 Jewish settlers have moved to live on land in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank. The practice is considered by most of the international community to be illegal, and a major impediment to achieving lasting peace.

The creation of Israel in Palestine is exactly the two wrongs don't make right. The post WW2 world wanted to make up for the persecution of the Jews and to give them a homeland (Uganda was an option) but the (European and American) Jews largely took  matters into their own hands and returned (one could say illegally) to Palestine under the British mandate forcing many Palestiansi out. A mixture of sympathy, misplaced religious (Christian) thinking and the huge influx of returnees led to the creation of the state.

A Palestine state should have been created at the same time.

Sadly Arab Israeli relationships where the subsumed into the cold war proxy wars. 

The question is really what happens eventually when a democratic secular Israel ceases to be a 'Jewish' state much as is now happening in NI. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

21 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Fixed your question for you. 

The Palestinians and Israelis have to come to some agreement soon or even the US will grow tired of intervening.

I have been to Jerusalem and seen the spread. Fair enough, everyone needs housing. But so do the Palestinians.

We don't like it down here in Cornwall when out of county people buy second homes, drive up the price and make it impossible for locals to live together in the same villages. So why would the Israelis expect the Palestinians to accept the land grab that goes on.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

12 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

The Palestinians and Israelis have to come to some agreement soon or even the US will grow tired of intervening.

I have been to Jerusalem and seen the spread. Fair enough, everyone needs housing. But so do the Palestinians.

We don't like it down here in Cornwall when out of county people buy second homes, drive up the price and make it impossible for locals to live together in the same villages. So why would the Israelis expect the Palestinians to accept the land grab that goes on.

Yeah the land grab had stopped and was being reversed under Sharon as part of the ongoing peace process that Hamas trashed with suicide bombs and rockets. The reemergence of the  settlement programme is not defensible, but it's completely understandable how the Israeli right experienced a resurgence after Hamas destroyed the peace process upon its election in Gaza.

But that said, Isarel is currently governed by a coalition, including Arab parties, which underlines that the Israeli people aren't all the hawks that the Hamas propagandists portray them as. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

42 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

The creation of Israel in Palestine is exactly the two wrongs don't make right.

In other words you don't accept international law, except for in a 'pick and choose where it suits your argument' kind of way. Thanks for clearing that up. 

As for a Palestinian state should have been created at the same time, the mandate that created Israel did just that, except the Israelis accepted the will of the UN and the Palestinians, with the support of the Arab League, didn't, hence Israel is a state and Palestine isn't. 

https://mfa.gov.il/Jubilee-years/Pages/1947-UN-General-Assembly-Resolution-181-The-international-community-says-Yes-to-the-establishment-of-the-State-of-Israel.aspx#:~:text=Israel was admitted to the,from its inception until today.

Edited May 12, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,841]

49 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

In other words you don't accept international law, except for in a 'pick and choose where it suits your argument' kind of way. Thanks for clearing that up. 

As for a Palestinian state should have been created at the same time, the mandate that created Israel did just that, except the Israelis accepted the will of the UN and the Palestinians, with the support of the Arab League, didn't, hence Israel is a state and Palestine isn't. 

https://mfa.gov.il/Jubilee-years/Pages/1947-UN-General-Assembly-Resolution-181-The-international-community-says-Yes-to-the-establishment-of-the-State-of-Israel.aspx#:~:text=Israel was admitted to the,from its inception until today.

Don't be pedantic. I used to walk around Jaffa, in the Golan Heights (with the IDF) so the last thing I am is anti Israel but that doesn’t mean I can't criticise. Just what is your hands on experience ?

The Palestinans clearly have a justified claim and grievance as the world recognizes.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

21 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Don't be pedantic. I used to walk around Jaffa, in the Golan Heights (with the IDF) so the last thing I am is anti Israel but that doesn’t mean I can't criticise. Just what is your hands on experience ?

The Palestinans clearly have a justified claim and grievance as the world recognizes.

I don't see how that tallies with characterising UN resolution 181 as 'a wrong'. 

Jewish settlers had been going to the region for decades previously, mostly running there from persecution elsewhere. It wasn't like there wasn't an already significantly Jewish population in the region. As I've intimated before, if creation of a Jewish state there was so bad, why is everybody so indifferent to the mandate that created Pakistan from India?

Edited May 12, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[PurpleCanary 5,587]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

The Palestinians have never been allowed to get out to take refuge anywhere else. The Arab neighbours have effectively kept them prisoner there to keep the argument alive. 

And it's definitely worth talking about international law since the resolutions you point to stem from Arab invasions of Israel then that were ignoring international law...

You don't accept Israel's right to exist. Fine. Don't talk about international law at all then and accept that Israel will do whatever it takes to survive. 

You got off to a bad start by lying, saying I had started the comparison between Israel/Palestine and Ukraine, and when I pointed I had done nothing of the kind you came up with a grudging non-apology Boris Johnson would have been proud to call his own. And now you have come out with another lie. I am happy to argue with anyone who debates fairly, but you have shown no desire or ability to do that.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

3 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

You got off to a bad start by lying, saying I had started the comparison between Israel/Palestine and Ukraine, and when I pointed I had done nothing of the kind you came up with a grudging non-apology Boris Johnson would have been proud to call his own. And now you have come out with another lie. I am happy to argue with anyone who debates fairly, but you have shown no desire or ability to do that.

Don't call me a liar, you terrorist apologist. I didn't introduce Israel to this discussion, and I didn't want to get in on it on here when it had been covered everywhere for decades, but you decided to try and make something of the fact I didn't want to divert away from the main topic on here.You don't debate fairly, pretending to be even-handed while in the same breath denying Israel's right to exist. And you do exactly that when you challenge the legitimacy of resolution 181 no matter how much YOU lie otherwise. 

And like all of the pro-Palestinian/anti-Israeli freaks, you somehow seem to turn every debate of any conflict in the world into 'what about Israel'. 

You know, that's why the thread's entitled 'striving to understand the Ukraine war' and not 'striving to understand why anyone takes any interest in any conflict other than the Arab/Israeli conflict because that's all I obsess about'. 

You effectively accuse me of being a hypocrite for making a defense of the Israelis, but I say you're a hypocrite for making out the creation of Israel was a crime instead of an expression of the will of the international community in a vote at the UN, while seeming to be fine with the creation of Pakistan on much the same terms. 

But anyway, well done for completely derailing the original thread, you absolute muppet. 

Edited May 12, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

On 11/05/2022 at 15:47, PurpleCanary said:

It may have been internationally sanctioned but it was still a bloody conquest, as I know from conversations with someone who was there at the time.

And by the way, you can't have something that's internationally sanctioned and simultaneously a conquest, bloody or not, you moron. 

Edited May 12, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[horsefly 4,318]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/they-were-furious-the-russian-soldiers-refusing-to-fight-in-ukraine/ar-AAXcImi?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=4fd294e306714346a57256300353a55f

‘They were furious’: the Russian soldiers refusing to fight in Ukraine

 

[Herman 9,838]

7 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

And by the way, you can't have something that's internationally sanctioned and simultaneously a conquest, bloody or not, you moron. 

The Iraq war??

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

18 hours ago, horsefly said:

Well done Vlad! You've just won yourself an extra 810 miles of border with NATO.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/finland-to-join-nato-as-vladimir-putin-s-invasion-of-ukraine-backfires/ar-AAXbpgs?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=056e4fdb105a481a93f7872acc9343ac

And Putin has committed so much of his armed forces to Ukraine that there's nothing he can do about it. 

[1902 1,167]

Another Russian vessel damaged in the black sea according to Ukrainian reports. A brand new support ship. Whether it's true or not is of course impossible to verify at the moment.

At this rate, the black sea fleet will barely exist as a fighting force by July.

[horsefly 4,318]

4 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

And Putin has committed so much of his armed forces to Ukraine that there's nothing he can do about it. 

Indeed! Russia's military performance so far has been little short of an abject strategic debacle. All it has achieved to date is to expose  the reality that its forces do not have the competence, might, and prowess that we had all been suckered into believing they possessed. No wonder Finland has been entirely undeterred by Russian threats, and is powering ahead with its application to join NATO. Nothing since WWII has made a stronger case for NATO's existence than this current appalling war crime inflicted by Putin on the Ukraine.

[horsefly 4,318]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/russian-army-lose-entire-battalion-trying-to-cross-ukraine-river/ar-AAXdMG4?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=60f28fdda7a3463283b47a9eed742c9a

Russian army 'lose entire battalion' trying to cross Ukraine river

[Indy 3,323]

11 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Indeed! Russia's military performance so far has been little short of an abject strategic debacle. All it has achieved to date is to expose  the reality that its forces do not have the competence, might, and prowess that we had all been suckered into believing they possessed. No wonder Finland has been entirely undeterred by Russian threats, and is powering ahead with its application to join NATO. Nothing since WWII has made a stronger case for NATO's existence than this current appalling war crime inflicted by Putin on the Ukraine.

Said weeks ago that there’s no real threat of other countries being invaded by Russia, I don’t ever think that was their goal from the start, they are good at false propaganda, I really believe there was a massive miscalculation by going for Ukraine and the original target was just the Donbas to create that Russia republic.

Long term NATO bleed to embrace Russia into it and lead the way forwards to a calm future, there’s bigger issues looming which will require nations finances and efforts in collaboration. Hopefully this will lead to another turning point for internal Russia, where the rich business takes the lead away from 1980’s ideology!

Edited May 13, 2022 by Indy

[horsefly 4,318]

17 minutes ago, Indy said:

Said weeks ago that there’s no real threat of other countries being invaded by Russia, I don’t ever think that was their goal from the start, they are good at false propaganda, I really believe there was a massive miscalculation and the original target was just the Donbas to create that Russia republic.

Long term NATO bleed to embrace Russia into it and lead the way forwards to a calm future, there’s bigger issues looming which will require nations finances and efforts in collaboration. Hopefully this will lead to another turning point for internal Russia, where the rich business takes the lead away from 1980’s ideology!

I think Putin simply miscalculated on a grand scale. I believe he did think he would overrun the Ukraine in days/weeks, and would then be welcomed into the whole country as a liberator. It would be hard to explain the massing of forces along the entire front, including in Belarus for an assault on the north and Kiev, if his only objective was to take the Donbass region.  

It is now inconceivable that Russia would ever be accepted into NATO. However, it is not inconceivable that NATO would engage in sensitive diplomacy with a post-Putin regime in order to encourage it to declare an end to all of Putin's expansionist ambitions. NATO countries have no ambition to seize Russian land, so there would be no genuine reason why cordial relations between NATO (the EU) and Russia could not be achieved once Russian territorial ambitions are eschewed.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

In reality, NATO is nothing more than a threat. It could be used. But it probably never will. Nuclear will happen before it is ever used  properly and Russia and the US have enough to split the globe in half.