Striving to make sense of the Ukraine war

[Herman 9,756]

Still pushing Putin's narrative?! 

[The Raptor 1,206]

20 hours ago, Daz Sparks said:

And given that they are Olympic grade liars with gold medals in betrayal, subterfuge and disinformation,

Slight detour here but if you haven't seen that film 'the death of stalin' I'd recommend it. It's basically this!

[Daz Sparks 1,152]

Just now, The Raptor said:

Slight detour here but if you haven't seen that film 'the death of stalin' I'd recommend it. It's basically this!

I will give it a look Raptor, that sort of thing is right up my street.

 

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

8 hours ago, 7HAR1980 said:

Nobody gets forced to join NATO, which is a multilateral defence treaty and not the 'empire' its critics seem to try and portray it as; everybody who joins NATO does so because that sovereign nation has asked to sign up to the mutual defence commitments detailed in the NATO treaty; post-Soviet Union, Russia has engaged in several unprovoked invasions of places such as Georgia and Chechnya; the enthusiasm of Russia's neighbours for joining NATO has been a consequence of Russia's own aggression, bullying, and intimidation of its smaller neighbours; if Russia had been a constructive partner to its neighbours, NATO's expansion would never have happened. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Daz Sparks 1,152]

13 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Nobody gets forced to join NATO, which is a multilateral defence treaty and not the 'empire' its critics seem to try and portray it as; everybody who joins NATO does so because that sovereign nation has asked to sign up to the mutual defence commitments detailed in the NATO treaty; post-Soviet Union, Russia has engaged in several unprovoked invasions of places such as Georgia and Chechnya; the enthusiasm of Russia's neighbours for joining NATO has been a consequence of Russia's own aggression, bullying, and intimidation of its smaller neighbours; if Russia had been a constructive partner to its neighbours, NATO's expansion would never have happened. 

Very well put LYB.

The narrator in the video is clearly a Trump advocate, but unusually has the the ability to deliver a point without appearing totally crazy. (Although still wrong.)

[Herman 9,756]

49 minutes ago, Daz Sparks said:

Very well put LYB.

The narrator in the video is clearly a Trump advocate, but unusually has the the ability to deliver a point without appearing totally crazy. (Although still wrong.)

If he is the guy I think he is then he was once a reasonably respected journalist but who has turned into a Trump and Putin apologist. 

[Daz Sparks 1,152]

10 minutes ago, Herman said:

If he is the guy I think he is then he was once a reasonably respected journalist but who has turned into a Trump and Putin apologist. 

I wonder if we'll ever get to find out how far Trump was into Putin?

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

My only comment is that it's not a given that NATO wouldn't have expanded anyway - even with a peaceful Russia - and it may have actually included Russia in time. The point is that NATO is at heart a mutual self-defence treaty of like minded states. It is not offensive. I can however grasp that the current nationalistic Russian leadership - stuck in a 19th or early 20th century imperialist mindset of Empire defines itself as 'not NATO' or the West and needs then to create an external enemy or threat to justify itself.

All simple nationalists do much the same everywhere - the 'Yellow' peril  and yes even here with the recent anti French / EU rhetoric.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

1 hour ago, Daz Sparks said:

I wonder if we'll ever get to find out how far Trump was into Putin?

During the Soviet era, it was standard practise for the KGB to set up honey traps for visiting business people that would then be photographed and recorded. He was known to have gone there in the 1980s; I find it hard to believe he'd have dodged any such traps, so I've no doubt Russia has plenty of leverage to get him to do its bidding. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

36 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

My only comment is that it's not a given that NATO wouldn't have expanded anyway - even with a peaceful Russia - and it may have actually included Russia in time. The point is that NATO is at heart a mutual self-defence treaty of like minded states. It is not offensive. I can however grasp that the current nationalistic Russian leadership - stuck in a 19th or early 20th century imperialist mindset of Empire defines itself as 'not NATO' or the West and needs then to create an external enemy or threat to justify itself.

All simple nationalists do much the same everywhere - the 'Yellow' peril  and yes even here with the recent anti French / EU rhetoric.

 

You just can't resist the childish false equivalence between the UK and Russia, can you? 🙄 Boris Johnson's like Vladimir Putin... relations between the UK and EU are just like Russia and NATO. Absurd!

Edited September 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

28 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

You just can't resist the childish false equivalence between the UK and Russia, can you? 🙄 Boris Johnson's like Vladimir Putin... relations between the UK and EU are just like Russia and NATO. Absurd!

Think you are quite wrong to call it childish, in fact probably wrong to even suggest it is a false equivalence - you are right that it would be a false equivalence between Johnson today and Putin today but YF was making a general point about nationalists and you seem to be forgetting that Putin has been in the job over twenty years.

If you compare Johnson's three years as PM with Putin's first three years in power then you will see plenty of direct equivalences.

Fortunately we are not (at least I hope we are not) ever going to find out just how much damage Johnson would have inflicted upon the UK if he had managed the three terms in office he was apparently planning for.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Creative Midfielder

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

12 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Think you are quite wrong to call it childish, in fact probably wrong to even suggest it is a false equivalence - you are right that it would be a false equivalence between Johnson today and Putin today but YF was making a general point about nationalists and you seem to be forgetting that Putin has been in the job over twenty years.

If you compare Johnson's three years as PM with Putin's first three years in power then you will see plenty of direct equivalences.

Fortunately we are not (at least I hope we are not) ever going to find out just how much damage Johnson would have inflicted upon the UK if he had managed the three terms in office he was apparently planning for.

It is rubbish. Your problem is you're in a little 'stop the Tories' gaggle egging each other on that buys into this hyperbole, completely forgetting that the aim of the game in politics is to actually win over people who don't necessarily hold all of your own prejudices. 

You can also point to a fair number of things in the Blair era that I'd say tended towards authoritarianism, but I still wouldn't dream of likening him to Putin. 

To any remotely impartial observer, anyone who likens a fairly affable, if somewhat careless and sometimes dishonest,  elected politician who has resigned over illegal parties to a tyrannical war criminal whose political opponents mysteriously fall out of windows/die of Polonium in their tea/are poisoned by novichok in their underwear, just look a bit unhinged. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,772]

18 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Think you are quite wrong to call it childish, in fact probably wrong to even suggest it is a false equivalence - you are right that it would be a false equivalence between Johnson today and Putin today but YF was making a general point about nationalists and you seem to be forgetting that Putin has been in the job over twenty years.

If you compare Johnson's three years as PM with Putin's first three years in power then you will see plenty of direct equivalences.

Fortunately we are not (at least I hope we are not) ever going to find out just how much damage Johnson would have inflicted upon the UK if he had managed the three terms in office he was apparently planning for.

I didn't need to answer it CM - anybody with an IQ over 90 understands the general point I was making about human nature and frankly how it is exploited by nationalists - by definition they use 'us and them'. Root of all wars and religious divides. Putin is clearly misguided but we have to at least 'grasp' his warped mindset.

The larger point as to NATO is that it didn't disband when the Soviet Union fell  - indeed it ultimately expanded (and there were conversations as to Russia joining) as it was seen by many as good alliance anyway - it didn't need an overt enemy. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Yellow Fever

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

7 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I didn't need to answer it CM - anybody with an IQ over 90 understands the general point I was making about human nature and frankly how it is exploited by nationalists - by definitions they use 'us and them'. Root of all wars an religious divides. Putin is clearly misguided but we have to at least 'grasp' his warped mindset.

The larger point as to NATO is that it didn't disband when the Soviet Union fell  - indeed it ultimately expanded (and there were conversations as to Russia joining) as it was seen by many as good alliance anyway - it didn't need an overt enemy. 

Yeah again, if that's a reasonable equivalence then likening shoving someone over to massacring a class of children is also a perfectly reasonable equivalence to draw as 'violent acts'; the absurdity of the comparisons is not in the nature, but in the extent. 

Maybe you need an IQ considerably over 90 to appreciate that sort of nuance instead of treating everything as binary. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

3 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It is rubbish. Your problem is you're in a little 'stop the Tories' gaggle egging each other on that buys into this hyperbole, completely forgetting that the aim of the game in politics is to actually win over people who don't necessarily hold all of your own prejudices. 

You can also point to a fair number of things in the Blair era that I'd say tended towards authoritarianism, but I still wouldn't dream of likening him to Putin. 

To any remotely impartial observer, anyone who likens a fairly affable, if somewhat careless and sometimes dishonest,  elected politician who has resigned over illegal parties to a tyrannical war criminal whose political opponents mysteriously fall out of windows/die of Polonium in their tea/are poisoned by novichok in their underwear, just look a bit unhinged. 

😂😂 I'm afraid you are becoming extremely predictable and whilst I'm tempted to say that your response is rubbish I think it would be more accurate to say that it is poor quality and irritating. I guess none of us particularly like being told we are in the wrong (or even might be in the wrong) and you certainly don't but it would be a more constructive and credible if instead of responding with an attack on several different fronts, all manufactured yourself, you addressed what was actually said.

I know it won't a blind bit of difference but I'll repeat a summary, indeed the core of what I actually said 'If you compare Johnson's three years as PM with Putin's first three years in power then you will see plenty of direct equivalences.' - nothing in your response goes anywhere near that.

😂 Still you do give us some laughs though - I'd be amazed to find a single impartial observer who would characterise Johnson as "a fairly affable, if somewhat careless and sometimes dishonest,  elected politician who has resigned over illegal parties" and that you did says rather a lot about your own prejudices.

Finally on a purely factual point, Johnson didn't resign over illegal parties - he regularly lied throughout his term as PM and on virtually all aspects of his government and on multiple occasions to the HoC. He still didn't resign as he should have done then, nor when he received his fixed penalty notice for the minor illegal party (inexplicably, the Met gave him a free pass for the other five or six much more serious illegalities that he was part of). He only came unstuck when having lost all credibility himself he fell into the habit of sending his Cabinet colleagues to defend the indefensible, and making them look as foolish, untrustworthy and corrupt as he was and it was only when half his government decided they had had enough of it and were not longer prepared to work for him that he, extremely reluctantly, resigned - knowing that otherwise the Tory Party rules would have been amended and his MPs would have chucked him out.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Creative Midfielder

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

2 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😂😂 I'm afraid you are becoming extremely predictable and whilst I'm tempted to say that your response is rubbish I think it would be more accurate to say that it is poor quality and irritating. I guess none of us particularly like being told we are in the wrong (or even might be in the wrong) and you certainly don't but it would be a more constructive and credible if instead of responding with an attack on several different fronts, all manufactured yourself, you addressed what was actually said.

I know it won't a blind bit of difference but I'll repeat a summary, indeed the core of what I actually said 'If you compare Johnson's three years as PM with Putin's first three years in power then you will see plenty of direct equivalences.' - nothing in your response goes anywhere near that.

😂 Still you do give us some laughs though - I'd be amazed to find a single impartial observer who would characterise Johnson as "a fairly affable, if somewhat careless and sometimes dishonest,  elected politician who has resigned over illegal parties" and that you did says rather a lot about your own prejudices.

Finally on a purely factual point, Johnson didn't resign over illegal parties - he regularly lied throughout his term as PM and on virtually all aspects of his government and on multiple occasions to the HoC. He still didn't resign as he should have done then, nor when he received his fixed penalty notice for the minor illegal party (inexplicably, the Met gave him a free pass for the other five or six much more serious illegalities that he was part of). He only came unstuck when having lost all credibility himself he fell into the habit of sending his Cabinet colleagues to defend the indefensible, and making them look as foolish, untrustworthy and corrupt as he was and it was only when half his government decided they had had enough of it and were not longer prepared to work for him that he, extremely reluctantly, resigned - knowing that otherwise the Tory Party rules would have been amended and his MPs would have chucked him out.

 

In Putin's first three years of power, a mother of one of the dead sailors on the Kursk got drugged in broad daylight for  ranting angrily at top navy officers. That was Russia's regime under Putin, and you think you should be taken seriously for arguing a likeness to the UK with Boris Johnson as PM? It's hysterical. 

Here's Simon Jenkin's, who is hardly a Johnson sympathiser making much the same analysis of Johnson as I did: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/13/boris-johnson-tories-labour-voters

Bottom line is, whatever the details, he has been found wanting and has resigned; it's no tyrannical regime where people die if they  dare criticise the leader, nor would it ever have become one. 

You talk about 'predictability' yet at the end of the day, I can guarantee every time I come on here that there'll be yet another unhinged diatribe like this. 

Godwin's law needs updating to include references to Putin with references to Hitler, because you're at that level of stupidity now. You sound like extremists. You're your own worst enemies. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

4 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

In Putin's first three years of power, a mother of one of the dead sailors on the Kursk got drugged in broad daylight for  ranting angrily at top navy officers at senior naval officials. That was Russia's regime under Putin, and you think you should be taken seriously for arguing a likeness to the UK with Boris Johnson as PM? It's hysterical. 

Bottom line is, whatever the details, he has been found wanting and has resigned; it's no tyrannical regime where people die if they.  dare criticise the leader, nor would it ever have become one. 

You talk about 'predictability' yet at the end of the day, I can guarantee every time I come on here that there'll be yet another uninged diatribe like this. 

Godwin's law needs updating to include references to Putin with references to Hitler, because you're at that level of stupidity now. 

😂 Well as I said, you give us a good laugh and, fair play to you, that was very slightly unpredictable in that you did manage a rather tangential reference to what I actually posted.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

29 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😂 Well as I said, you give us a good laugh and, fair play to you, that was very slightly unpredictable in that you did manage a rather tangential reference to what I actually posted.

Fine, you don't take my observations seriously, which is your prerogative. 

You laugh if you want to. If you think your sort of rhetoric hasn't been anything other than a liability for the left for decades, though, then the joke's on you. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

22 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Fine, you don't take my observations seriously, which is your preroragitive. 

You laugh if you want to. If you think your sort of rhetoric hasn't been anything other than a liability for the left for decades, though, then the joke's on you. 

😄 See there you go again, and how very 20th century of you - I've no idea really what you mean by 'the left'.

Nowadays it doesn't appear to mean anything to anyone other than ossified Tories who use it as a generic term of abuse covering everybody who disagrees with them, which if the opinion polls are to be believed currently means about 70% of UK voters.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,547]

16 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

😄 See there you go again, and how very 20th century of you - I've no idea really what you mean by 'the left'.

Nowadays it doesn't appear to mean anything to anyone other than ossified Tories who use it as a generic term of abuse covering everybody who disagrees with them, which if the opinion polls are to be believed currently means about 70% of UK voters.

Enjoyed this comment, if only for the irony, given that 'the right' often gets a lot of discussion on here. 

[Herman 9,756]

Interesting goings on in Kharkiv. 

[Sheva 123]

Internal news blackout.

 

[Herman 9,756]

 

[ricardo 7,385]

On 06/09/2022 at 16:32, Herman said:

Interesting goings on in Kharkiv. 

Making good progress by the look of things.

[1902 1,167]

15 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Making good progress by the look of things.

Quite the choice for the Kremlin if Ukraine can maintain pressure in the East. Do they start to pull resources out of the South to shore up their position / try a counteroffensive in the East or do they continue to attempt to hold an untenable position on the Western bank of the Dniepr. 

Politically, Putin has committed to holding both Kherson and taking the whole of the Donbas. Will be hard to talk of doing both unless the Ukrainians have over extended.

Edited September 8, 2022 by 1902

[Herman 9,756]

18 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Making good progress by the look of things.

 

[1902 1,167]

It certainly looks like the Russian positions are collapsing around Kharkiv. Ukrainian troops seem to be approaching the major rail and road junctions at Koupiansk and maybe even Izioum.

Lots of ifs, but if that's true and if the Ukrainians can secure their gains from air attack and counterattacks against their flanks and have sufficient logistics to support a long stay then we could be looking at the most significant day in the war so far.

 

[kirku 1,332]

Very encouraging news from the Ukrainian counter-offensive. 

"When will North Korea stop enabling this violence and stop their proxy war in Eastern Europe? Are they willing to fight to the last Russian?"

Edited September 8, 2022 by kirku

[Herman 9,756]

 

[Sheva 123]

Putin needs to quickly find a way of making peace with Ukraine and withdrawing his troops. He is no madman, and highly intelligent but he has seriously miscalculated the situation.

Putin and Russians have a high regard  and respect for our monarchy and British traditions, you might see a pause in the fighting at an appropriate time to show respect for our Queens death.

 We have many things in common, we need to see things from there side too.

 I have lost a lot from the invasion, it will drag on for some time yet and could still go nuclear, hopefully nooo! ……but don’t think that they are just the bad and the west is the good guys, it’s not as simple as that, never has been.

 I have no agenda, but lots of experience within Ukraine over many years, spent many years living and working there, at many levels. Lot of the news and information is BS, the US uses Ukraine as a weapon against Russia, the Germans have never been their friends and the French can’t be trusted. China buys up its farmland, Russia wants to rebuild its strength to fight back against, what it see’s as the evils within the west and protect its Christian faith, religion is a high priority.

Let Ukraine force the Russians to leave the south and Crimea, agree on power sharing in the Donbas, agree on rebuilding and payments, probably though cheap gas for many years. 
 

Even now both sides can join hands, it’s a unbelievable characteristic that ‘ Russians’   can fight bloody hard but later shake hands and go to drink.

Thats just for your consideration, without taking sides, …I work for no one.