The Ukraine War

[Highgate]

8 hours ago, ramit said:

War is a racket is a quote from US Marine Corps general Smedley D Butler who also wrote a book with that title.

Assainated?  Been there, done that, but thanks for your concern.

And it's a very good book, a genuine diatribe from a man who had the experience to know exactly what he was talking about. But you have to remember the sort of wars he was involved in. The great arm-wrestle between European Imperial powers that was WWI, the American-Philippine War, the Banana Wars in central America where the US was involved in 'nation building' that suited their economic interests, and so on.  He died before Japan attacked the US in WWII. Having read his book I really don't think he would have suggested that the US not fight back against the Japanese in 1941. 

It's true that war is a racket and it is promoted by business interests and their sponsored politicians for their own profit. But it is also true that war is sometimes justified. Just like it was justified to wage war against Germany and Japan in WWII, or it was justified for countless colonized nations fighting against their colonial oppressors throughout history, or right now, for Ukrainians to fight against an invading Russia in a war started by a man who doesn't believe that Ukraine has the right to exist. Putin is genuinely an existential threat for the Ukrainian nation.

These are not mutually exclusive concepts, they can both be true at the same time. Just because there will always people who will profit from war doesn't mean that nations have to, or should, surrender when invaded by an aggressive neighbour. 

 

[ramit]

8 hours ago, Highgate said:

And it's a very good book, a genuine diatribe from a man who had the experience to know exactly what he was talking about. But you have to remember the sort of wars he was involved in. The great arm-wrestle between European Imperial powers that was WWI, the American-Philippine War, the Banana Wars in central America where the US was involved in 'nation building' that suited their economic interests, and so on.  He died before Japan attacked the US in WWII. Having read his book I really don't think he would have suggested that the US not fight back against the Japanese in 1941. 

It's true that war is a racket and it is promoted by business interests and their sponsored politicians for their own profit. But it is also true that war is sometimes justified. Just like it was justified to wage war against Germany and Japan in WWII, or it was justified for countless colonized nations fighting against their colonial oppressors throughout history, or right now, for Ukrainians to fight against an invading Russia in a war started by a man who doesn't believe that Ukraine has the right to exist. Putin is genuinely an existential threat for the Ukrainian nation.

These are not mutually exclusive concepts, they can both be true at the same time. Just because there will always people who will profit from war doesn't mean that nations have to, or should, surrender when invaded by an aggressive neighbour. 

 

I understand where you are coming from, even as I disagree on idealistic grounds.  I don't think any war is justified, for citizens should not be considered property of their state to be thrown into battle at the whim of war mongers and merchants.  It is because governments and their financial masters can count on men to do battle when called on that they prepare for and go to war. 

What if they gave a war and no one came?  War is over if you want it?  It really is that simple.  Not doable you may say, well it must become doable for in these times of ever more lethal weapons and technological gadgets, the fate of humanity is at stake.  We can longer afford our barbarity and cave man mentality toward each other.

Edited February 18 by ramit
typo

[Van der MoodHoover]

On 17/02/2024 at 12:07, ramit said:

Yeltsin led Russia into suffering they had not seen since mid Soviet times, there were lots of western goods but most could not afford them, or much else for that matter. 

Have you seen Eastleigh high street Ramit?

[Eddie]

2 hours ago, ramit said:

No more super powers, cooperation between countries, a fair and working UN and the lion shall sleep with the lamb. 

Oh well, one can dream.

The UN will be toothless so long as there is a veto.

[Highgate]

41 minutes ago, ramit said:

I understand where you are coming from, even as I disagree on idealistic grounds.  I don't think any war is justified, for citizens should not be considered property of their state to be thrown into battle at the whim of war mongers and merchants.  It is because governments and their financial masters can count on men to do battle when called on that they prepare for and go to war. 

What if they gave a war and no one came?  War is over if you want it?  It really is that simple.  Not doable you may say, well it must become doable for in these times of ever more lethal weapons and technological gadgets, the fate of humanity is at stake.  We can longer afford our barbarity and cave man mentality toward each other.

Here I agree 100%.  I think I've even said on this thread that I don't ever believe conscription is justified, even in a situation such as Ukraine finds itself in now. It should always be up to the individual to volunteer for war and it should never be compulsory in my opinion. However, I admire those with the courage to join up when their country has been invaded.

Hypothetically what would happen if no one when came when the politicians declared war?  Well that would be marvelous and in this case it would mean that Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine in the first place and all would be well, as Russians would simply have ignored Putin's 'special military operation'.  Ukrainians didn't have this luxury though...because if their soldiers and volunteers hadn't turned up Ukraine would now be part of the Russian state.

 

 

[Crewton]

1 hour ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Have you seen Eastleigh high street Ramit?

I have, but not since around 1995. 

[Crewton]

Look at what happened in Iran when women decided they'd had enough of the regime's oppression of their sex. That's what happens when only one side has guns. Look at Tiannemen Square, the Prague Spring, Hungary 1956, the Paris Commune, the Peterloo Massacre.....the examples are endless. It's exactly what will happen if Ukraine runs out of the means to defend itself. Only one man is responsible for starting that war and for all the death and destruction that has followed and is yet to come, and that is Vladimir Putin.

[ramit]

16 hours ago, Highgate said:

Here I agree 100%.  I think I've even said on this thread that I don't ever believe conscription is justified, even in a situation such as Ukraine finds itself in now. It should always be up to the individual to volunteer for war and it should never be compulsory in my opinion. However, I admire those with the courage to join up when their country has been invaded.

Hypothetically what would happen if no one when came when the politicians declared war?  Well that would be marvelous and in this case it would mean that Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine in the first place and all would be well, as Russians would simply have ignored Putin's 'special military operation'.  Ukrainians didn't have this luxury though...because if their soldiers and volunteers hadn't turned up Ukraine would now be part of the Russian state.

 

 

If there was respect between countries and local politics were left to its inhabitants, the coup in Ukraine would never have happened, an act which directly led to this war, but granted that is another item on the wish list, governments not meddling outside of their borders.

[ramit]

16 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Have you seen Eastleigh high street Ramit?

No I have not, but from what I understand, poverty is increasing in England

[Grumpy Git]

9 minutes ago, ramit said:

No I have not, but from what I understand, poverty is increasing in England

But we have a plan and the plan is working......

[Crewton]

1 hour ago, ramit said:

If there was respect between countries and local politics were left to its inhabitants, the coup in Ukraine would never have happened, an act which directly led to this war, but granted that is another item on the wish list, governments not meddling outside of their borders.

Coup? Do you mean the Maidan popular revolution?

Yanukovych bowed (he said) to "economic pressure and blackmail" from Moscow to drop plans he'd previously supported for Ukraine to sign a free trade and association agreement with the EU, setting himself against the will of the people. He ordered police to break up the protest camp in Independence Square, which they attacked several times, and when eventually those protesters marched on Parliament, the police opened fire and killed nearly a 100 people. Yanukovych subsequently fled into exile in Russia in order to protect himself from arrest. Following his arrest, the extent of Yanukovych's corruption and robbery from the state was revealed : the private estate, the luxury "pirate boat", the holiday home under construction in the Crimea, the $141M in a Swiss bank account....the list goes on and on. He also signed off a further 25 year lease for the Russian Black Sea Fleet base on Crimea, which has proved mightily handy to Putin.

Ukrainians would be quite happy if Russia had never interferred in their lives.

[Van der MoodHoover]

1 hour ago, ramit said:

No I have not, but from what I understand, poverty is increasing in England

Indeed so. The gap between the "haves" and "have nots" appears to be widening. No sign of the British voting in a strongman tho.......

[ramit]

8 hours ago, Crewton said:

Coup? Do you mean the Maidan popular revolution?

Yanukovych bowed (he said) to "economic pressure and blackmail" from Moscow to drop plans he'd previously supported for Ukraine to sign a free trade and association agreement with the EU, setting himself against the will of the people. He ordered police to break up the protest camp in Independence Square, which they attacked several times, and when eventually those protesters marched on Parliament, the police opened fire and killed nearly a 100 people. Yanukovych subsequently fled into exile in Russia in order to protect himself from arrest. Following his arrest, the extent of Yanukovych's corruption and robbery from the state was revealed : the private estate, the luxury "pirate boat", the holiday home under construction in the Crimea, the $141M in a Swiss bank account....the list goes on and on. He also signed off a further 25 year lease for the Russian Black Sea Fleet base on Crimea, which has proved mightily handy to Putin.

Ukrainians would be quite happy if Russia had never interferred in their lives.

The president was duly elected, but was toppled in a western supported coup that you call a popular revolution.  A revolution which aimed it's guns at anything Russian, language, culture or heritage.  The people in the east were never asked what they wanted, they became personae non gratae  in their own country.  We shall have to agree to disagree, even as I will agree with you somewhat in that Yanukovych was not an exemplary leader.

[Grumpy Git]

7 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Indeed so. The gap between the "haves" and "have nots" appears to be widening. No sign of the British voting in a strongman tho.......

Let's be honest, the "haves" have been able to convince at least 45% of their serfs to vote for them since Adam was a lad, (we've almost reverted back to the feudal system).

[Stive Pesley]

Anyone know the deal with Navalny?

Seems to be being lauded as a martyr in the western press, purely because he was an opponent of Putin

But then I've also read that he was quite an extremist right winger with racist views

And then also read that this is misinformation from the Putin regime to discredit him

So a genuine question. Killing your political opponents is not a great look (although Putin's mate Tucker Carlson has shrugged it off as "all leaders kill their opponents, deal with it") but just because he was an opponent of Putin doesn't immediately make him a good guy. The world is more complex than that

[Ram-Alf]

34 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

So a genuine question. Killing your political opponents is not a great look (although Putin's mate Tucker Carlson has shrugged it off as "all leaders kill their opponents, deal with it") but just because he was an opponent of Putin doesn't immediately make him a good guy. The world is more complex than that

It may not be a good look...but in a Country where freedom of speech gives you a death sentence and you become untouchable who's going to do anything 🤷‍♂️

People far far more knowledgeable than you and I concerning the workings of politics in Russia are coming to the conclusion that it's what I've read below...

  https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/experts-on-why-putin-likely-chose-now-to-kill-navalny-now/ar-BB1ip2hq

[Crewton]

37 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Anyone know the deal with Navalny?

Seems to be being lauded as a martyr in the western press, purely because he was an opponent of Putin

But then I've also read that he was quite an extremist right winger with racist views

And then also read that this is misinformation from the Putin regime to discredit him

So a genuine question. Killing your political opponents is not a great look (although Putin's mate Tucker Carlson has shrugged it off as "all leaders kill their opponents, deal with it") but just because he was an opponent of Putin doesn't immediately make him a good guy. The world is more complex than that

I don't know much about the chatter exposing/denigrating* his character (*delete in accordance with your bias) but after opting to go back to Russia following his treatment in Germany for poisoning, I think he probably had more personal courage than the psychotic c**t that had him killed.

[Ramarena]

6 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

Anyone know the deal with Navalny?

Seems to be being lauded as a martyr in the western press, purely because he was an opponent of Putin

But then I've also read that he was quite an extremist right winger with racist views

And then also read that this is misinformation from the Putin regime to discredit him

So a genuine question. Killing your political opponents is not a great look (although Putin's mate Tucker Carlson has shrugged it off as "all leaders kill their opponents, deal with it") but just because he was an opponent of Putin doesn't immediately make him a good guy. The world is more complex than that

Yeah Navalny was no saint and had plenty of problematic views. You could argue he could potentially be Putin-lite.

I think the reason the press have bigged him up is two fold. One, everyone wants an alternative to Putin and weren't to fussy/didn’t look to deeply at his background and views.

Two, even if you disagree with him you can’t help but be impressed with the bravery of a man that stood up against a genocidal tyrant, who doesn’t think twice against signing the death warrants of any opponents. He was always going to die if he opposed Putin and he still went ahead with it.l and stood up to him

Edited February 20 by Ramarena

[Ramarena]

Remember the Russian helicopter pilot who defected last year?

Well he’s dead too!

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russian-pilot-who-defected-ukraine-shot-dead-spain-reports-2024-02-19/

[Alph]

7 hours ago, Ramarena said:

Yeah Navalny was no saint and had plenty of problematic views. You could argue he could potentially be Putin-lite.

I think the reason the press have bigged him up is two fold. One, everyone wants an alternative to Putin and weren't to fussy/didn’t look to deeply at his background and views.

Two, even if you disagree with him you can’t help but be impressed with the bravery of a man that stood up against a genocidal tyrant, who doesn’t think twice against signing the death warrants of any opponents. He was always going to die if he opposed Putin and he still went ahead with it.l and stood up to him

Three, turn the heat and attention back to this conflict because public support for funding Ukraine was starting to change? Like with any war, the general public soon become numb to the images and news stories and attention turns to how it's effecting them? Especially with what's going on in ME, the Putin interview etc was the public shockingly losing sympathy for Ukraine? 

If the pressure can go hard on this story that evil Putin killed a saint who would have freed Russia from tyranny then we're back on to "this must be stopped!" 

Not saying I have a problem with that spin. Not in the slightest.