Jump to content

The Ukraine War


Day

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Coneheadjohn said:

Wouldn’t it be worse to leave them open?

Not really, They were having supply problems anyway, It's been reported that all staff will be paid, There are some 840 McDonalds in Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Olton Ram said:

The alarm bells started ringing when he referred to the Russians as 'liberating' Syria from 'jihadists'. When he moved on to the 'denazification' of Ukraine his viewpoint became even more obvious.

Not knowing who he was I checked out his previous YouTube videos, and it's the usual mish-mash of pro-Trump, pro-Putin, anti-EU, anti-liberal talking points. If you want a real laugh check out his video from the 6th December where he rubbishes the idea of a Russian military build up and a possible invasion of Ukraine. 

(Also, the first advert that popped up on his YouTube channel was Nigel Farage trying to sell me stuff)

200-1.gif.2886c571dfa362ea2020679093ce26e5.gif

 

You deserve a medal for visiting those asshat crackpot sites so we don't have to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the question of if Putin is a fascist, I wouldn't say it's automatically true he doesn't necessarily fit any typologies of fascism.  Fascism like most political categories are difficult to pin down precisely and set borders to but is rather a more fluid category. One way to categorise fascism would be an anti-liberal regime that fosters the creation of a new nationalist authoritarian state. This is combined with fostering   a new regulated multiclass integrated national economic system and has the goal of empire or imagines a radical change with its relationship with other powers. This is accompanied with an emphasis on political choreography, the positive use and evaluation of violence and a specific tendency towards an authoritarian, charismatic style of personality. 

I'm not an expert on the inner workings of Putin's regime or the domestic goals of Putin's Russia but from a brief look on the outside in it doesn't immediately appear a million miles away. But i may be wrong and Baalocks I am sure knows more about the inner and domestic functioning of Putin's regime to be able to say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

Not quite sure you got my point, or maybe I didn't explain it as I intended. What I was saying is that the Tory leadership are seriously compromised by light of having been wiling to take funding from those that now are the very people they are expected to rail against. I won't post here as it takes us a bit off thread but it's up on the Internet if you want to go look for it - links between Gavin Williamson's knighthood, the Russia report, Lord Lebedev. And not some crackpot 18 year old conspiracy theorist but trusted and respected journalists like Carol Cawalladr and transcripts of statements given under oath. It's there if you want to go looking for it - which is a point in itself.

There is much in the actions of Ukraine in the past few months that Russia will have seen as aggressive - breaking the Minsk agreement, banning the speaking of Russian, turning a blind eye to routine torture of Russian citizens living in Ukraine. Russia was clear, go down this path and there will be consequences, Zelensky chose to ignore that and the promised consequences came in exactly the manner predicted. Russian forces were on the Ukranian border for more than a month before they invaded, on every single one of those days Zelensky could have reversed decisions seen as aggressive - decisions he had previously agreed to. And no, no suggestion they brought this on themselves, just that there were opportunities before we got here to resolve it.

So it is wrong what is happening but take the analogy of the bloke in the pub getting pushed and nudged continually by some other punter - he says "do that again and I'm going to thump you" and guess what, he not only does it again but he also tips his drink over the bloke's head (extend the analogy, maybe because he thinks he's got some big mates who will step in if it kicks off). The bloke says "one more time and I'm going to thump you" and he does and the bloke thumps him. The bloke gets the criminal charge, he was in the wrong but he does not mean the other side's protestations of "he just hit me for no reason" don't really hold water for those prepared to understand.

That is all I am saying, it's beyond the view of me, or anyone on here, whether or not it is right of Russia to make the requests they have but it is also clear that just framing it from one view will not help us resolve it.

P.S. Putin is a dictator, a bully and guilty of war crimes as we stand. He is not a Fascist, by any (recognised) definition. I'm not his defence lawyer but it weakens arguments when errors like that are within them.

But (in general) I'm posting less on here the last few days, and in general, because it is thoroughly exhausting being taken to task by people (not you personally) who think they now have the in depth knowledge of the region to clearly call out exactly what is going on, what needs to be done and (black and white) who are the right 'uns and who are the wrong 'uns. And also to try and recognise the tone of discussion, the level of bombast, the total inability to listen (at all levels, including the most senior politicians) to the views of others, if only to try and advance a conclusion.

I'd pretty much guarantee that if I gave the average soapbox expert five questions on Ukraine (what religion are they, name five cities, who was the President before Zelensky, what did the country look like before Communism, what is the population) they'd struggle to get three right. It's not to say I am some big know it all, but ask me to comment on why Derby beat Chelsea in 1968 I won't be able to tell you as I wasn't there and don't know. Yet today we all (myself included) seem to think that three Twitter feeds and ten minutes watching Dan and Sally on the sofa is enough to make me an expert.

Personally I find your posts very balanced and informative, there seems no easy answer to sorting this mess out with the least bloodshed possible but ffs we as ordinary people really need to be getting on top of our politicians and large corporates to try to stop this stuff just keep running on repeat , I thinks that’s happening to a degree as the open eyes on Blair showed and continues to show but that only happens if we continue to be able to speak openly without fear of being labelled as uncaring or on one side or the other??‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said:

Baalocks I am sure knows more about the inner and domestic functioning of Putin's regime to be able to say. 

That's Comrade Baalocks to you. To the other point on Facism, it feels a bit like Godwin's Law to me though I do agree that extreme right wing and extreme left wing often hit each other coming in the other direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

That's Comrade Baalocks to you. To the other point on Facism, it feels a bit like Godwin's Law to me though I do agree that extreme right wing and extreme left wing often hit each other coming in the other direction.

I get what you mean on the first point. I'd say there is a difference between simply invoking Hitler comparisons (Nazism was at the very edge of fascist doctrine) and discussing if someone fits a fascist typology. I'd say Putin is not Hitler (almost no-one is which is why Godwin's law exists in the first place) but it's not necessarily clear that Putin doesn't fit inside a typology of fascism. It's not clear cut (theory and practice almost never is) and I don't know enough about the functioning of the Russian regime to give a definitive answer but I wouldn't say there's no theoretical type of fascism that Putin couldn't come under such as the definition I presented. 

I'm not a massive fan of the horseshoe theory of politics myself. The thing it tends to emphasise I think is to what degree ideologies attain centralised methods of coercion and under what circumstances do they allow for coercion to be applied. But I find that a bit narrow to judge a political doctrine and the supposed similarities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ramarena said:

Looks like Mariupol Children’s hospital has been destroyed……..errrr I mean de-nazified!

 

This is nothing new to war unfortunately 

Kunduz hospital in Afghanistan was destroyed/liberated. 

Of course it doesn't justify any of it. But this is nothing new. It's just now we're being shown the human cost of war more than in previous years. 

I'm obviously not saying feck the Ukranian kids. 

But it goes back to a point made previously. When it's Western cities being leveled and civilians being killed you have far more care and concern from your average Joe. And the media is more interested in talking about the horrors of war. 

Spend some time looking into America's reckless behaviour in military campaigns. You'll see cover ups exposed too. Hellfire missiles killing an aid worker and civilians in a case of mistaken identity and drone strikes taking little to no consideration of the civilian losses

That's the cost of war. Even wars that some will say are for freedom and democracy. Necessary casualties? 

When Putin declared war on Ukraine he condemned innocent children and every day folk to death, homelessness and tragedy.

I can't justify that. 

But it's interesting to see how some look more now at the cost of war than ever before. I hope its something that people continue to do because the info is all out there if they want to go beyond western propaganda. 

I predict though that the general public will go back to thinking we're the good guys fighting the good fight and beyond our borders it's all wild barbarians. The wars across the globe are just filler for the ITV news at 10.

Will we put our leaders under such scrutiny? I doubt it. But we should. We absolutely should. Especially as we're the "free world" we should hold them to the highest standard. 

We won't because not enough of the general public care. And our leaders know that which is why you can tell most of them Putin is evil and they just eat it up. 

Maybe Putin is evil. I don't know or even care about judging him. Who gives a feck what I think. But I think people should try to gain much better understanding of the history and situation before they start broadcasting opinions over social media etc. Because social media is insanely powerful tool as much we mock it.

(Actually I don't think Putin is evil. Extremely dangerous idealist. Like Trump. Imagine Trump in power for 20 years.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not surprised some people can't tell the difference between an error in combat operations such as mistaken identity (which does happen unfortunately and probably cannot be completely prevented) and the deliberate destruction of hospitals and schools resulting in the murder of civilians constituting a war crime. This is nothing new to the Russians, they've been doing the same in Syria for years, similar to the 'ceasefires' that they then break and the 'humanitarian corridors' that are no such thing. 

Edited by Leeds Ram
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

I'm not surprised some people can't tell the difference between an error in combat operations such as mistaken identity (which does happen unfortunately and probably cannot be completely prevented) and the deliberate destruction of hospitals and schools resulting in the murder of civilians constituting a war crime. This is nothing new to the Russians, they've been doing the same in Syria for years, similar to the 'ceasefires' that they then break and the 'humanitarian corridors' that are no such thing. 

I'm not saying you're wrong. But is there any reason that the destruction on a children's hospital is on purpose? 

I'm not defending the actions of Putin. I'm comparing it to the bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan and the drone strike on an aid worker surrounded by civilians though

Why is the hospital attack an intended war crime but many of the other instances an unfortunate error.

Trump revoked a law that meant the US do not have to publish the number of civilians killed in drone strikes. 

"The unearthing of these strikes in Syria came only months after the U.S. military admitted that a high-profile drone strike in Afghanistan last August killed ten civilians, including seven children—and not a suspected terrorist, as the Pentagon first claimed. And in December, the Times released a trove of Defense Department documents that reveal careless targeting, years of civilian deaths, and little accountability in Washington. Together, these events underscore that the U.S. military’s overall record on civilian harm is shameful. Many of these newly revealed strikes appear to be violations of the laws of armed conflict; others represent possible war crimes. Worse yet, many of the problems now coming to light are the same ones that Human Rights Watch, where I work now, and other groups have been documenting for years—to little avail." https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/01/25/lost-innocents#

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...