Geopolitics

[Kostov]

I wonder, what would happen if let's say, Putin and Russia lose and this animosity stops West vs East. Who would then be the "enemy"? Easy guess is China but even after that? Do some people think that it would finally unite this human race? I doubt it sincerely.

 

[Spoony]

I've burnt my copies of Crime and Punishment and Brothers Karamazov.


feck Dostoevsky

 

[VorZakone]

I wonder, what would happen if let's say, Putin and Russia lose and this animosity stops West vs East. Who would then be the "enemy"? Easy guess is China but even after that? Do some people think that it would finally unite this human race? I doubt it sincerely.

The fundamental problem as I see it is that even if there isn't a clear and proven enemy, sinister politicians might invent one. They'll exploit existing resentments, grievances and such to get power and votes.

It's very important that we don't let societies get hijacked by politicians like that. In my opinion, anyway.

 

[The Corinthian]

 

[Kostov]

The fundamental problem as I see it is that even if there isn't a clear and proven enemy, sinister politicians might invent one. They'll exploit existing resentments, grievances and such to get power and votes.

It's very important that we don't let societies get hijacked by politicians like that. In my opinion, anyway.

My point exactly, but it's already happening and it's been going for decades. It's not just Putin, or Bush or Obama, or Blaire. Societies are already hijacked imo, look at Russia, Russians and Ukrainians are no enemies as ethnic groups. I struggle to think that Russian people want to go to war with Ukraine, but they've been pulled into a conflict by as you describe sinister politicians.

And you can bet that Ukrainians will develop hate for everything Russian after this. It's fecking tragic, I have Russian ancestry and this war pains me on so many levels.

 

[VorZakone]

My point exactly, but it's already happening and it's been going for decades. It's not just Putin, or Bush or Obama, or Blaire. Societies are already hijacked imo, look at Russia, Russians and Ukrainians are no enemies as ethnic groups. I struggle to think that Russian people want to go to war with Ukraine, but they've been pulled into a conflict by as you describe sinister politicians.

And you can bet that Ukrainians will develop hate for everything Russian after this. It's fecking tragic, I have Russian ancestry and this war pains me on so many levels.

I'm not gonna pretend that I'm an expert on Singapore but from my reading, Lee Kuan Yew specifically tried to prevent such things. He wanted to create some sense of common destiny among the Chinese, Indians and Malays. That's what he said anyway in multiple interviews.

We need more politicians like that.

 

[groovyalbert]

Not saying there isn't a racial element or hypocrisy here, but isn't a big part of this due to the visa free travel of Europe Ukrainians have access to?

 

[Kostov]

I'm not gonna pretend that I'm an expert on Singapore but from my reading, Lee Kuan Yew specifically tried to prevent such things. He wanted to create some sense of common destiny among the Chinese, Indians and Malays. That's what he said anyway in multiple interviews.

We need more politicians like that.

I really don't know much about Lee Kuan Yew, I will try to read as much as possible. Thank you.

 

[Sweet Square]

Can't find any official link to this but still worth posting.

 

[Siorac]

Maybe I'm just missing the bigger picture of his lectures, but how can you take anyone seriously as a "realist", when he bases his assumptions on one quote from Putin, which isn't even entirely clear and sort of borrowed from George Bernard Shaw. And decides to basically ignore everything else that's being said and done in favour of his own personal interpretation of that quote, just so he can stick to his conclusion that Putin/Russia's only ambition is to keep buffers on his current borders.

And he ignores all other quotes from Putin, including those that repeatedly state that he doesn't see Ukraine as a sovereign state and that it's rightfully a part of the Russian Empire.

 

[hasanejaz88]

Not saying there isn't a racial element or hypocrisy here, but isn't a big part of this due to the visa free travel of Europe Ukrainians have access to?

I don't think it matters whether you are a national to cross EU borders. If those people have eligible visas to stay in Ukraine, and I'm sure all do, then you are free to move across EU borders. My wife is Pakistani but has a work visa in Germany and therefore can travel to any EU country without any need to check.

EDIT: Ukraine isn't part of the EU though so I guess it wouldn't be the same. That being said, in a humanitarian crisis no one would be disallowed access to neighbouring countries.

 

[groovyalbert]

I don't think it matters whether you are a national to cross EU borders. If those people have eligible visas to stay in Ukraine, and I'm sure all do, then you are free to move across EU borders. My wife is Pakistani but has a work visa in Germany and therefore can travel to any EU country without any need to check.

EDIT: Ukraine isn't part of the EU though so I guess it wouldn't be the same. That being said, in a humanitarian crisis no one would be disallowed access to neighbouring countries.

Sadly, all too often not the case.

Absolutely horrible reading about the experiences of non-white/native refugees so many are currently living through.

 

[The Corinthian]

Not saying there isn't a racial element or hypocrisy here, but isn't a big part of this due to the visa free travel of Europe Ukrainians have access to?

Just echoing what @hasanejaz88 said - these are foreign nationals on work / student visas. So you’d think some care should be given to them other than just keeping them in the country.

Thinking wider, it’s great to see Europe being so accepting of Ukrainian refugees, I just wish the same empathy was given to people escaping war and crises in countries further afield.

It wasn’t so long ago we had stuff like the below occurring with the usual xenophobic rhetoric in the media:

 

[do.ob]

I don't think that the previous discussion fully captured what Mearsheimer is saying. He has a surprising amount of depth and nuance to his arguments and its very much worth listening to what he says. His criticism of US foreign policy is pretty brutal and comprehensive. He doesn't base his view of Putin on one quote, but on a large body of literature in IR. There are also many (former) politicians, advisors, academics, commentators and journalists, many of them with great pedigree, who share his view, that this is primarily about NATO/security concerns. This is not a fringe position, despite it getting ignored by active politicians (in the USA). I am not a Neorealist and I am not trying to convince anyone to become one. If you push Neorealists long enough, they'll always end up arguing that its only about balancing/security concerns/high politics. This view is missing important dynamics/motivations. Still, he makes lots of convincing arguments.

I assumed that there is more to his opinion, since he seems to be a respected academic. I guess I'll try to listen/read some of his material if I find the time, but the bolded part seems kind of hard to ignore for me.

Can't find any official link to this but still worth posting.

It's obviously a video from Germany, but beyond that I couldn't find any reports on an incident like that on google. All hits I get when looking for Russia and supermarkets is that most chains seem to have taken Russian products off their shelves.
I wouldn't be surprised if someone did something like that, but when you check the accounts who post/talk about the video you often see antivaxxers, so I would take it with a grain of salt, until someone verifies that it's actually current.

For example the Twitter account you're sharing here followed it up with this:

 

[redshaw]

So I've tried very hard to not talk about anything other than Ukraine in the thread dedicated to the conflict there, but I have an unpopular opinion I want to express.

I want to caveat first, that I do not endorse the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

What bothers me is how the reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, has been so different to;
- Other occupations
- Other invasions (including those done by Russia)

It's not the wrong reaction. To condemn Russia and sanction it and isolate it for it's actions is exactly the right reaction, BUT what really gets on my tits, is where has all this sympathy and empathy been for so many other conflicts, in particular those waged against Muslim nations.

Russia destroyed Chechnya twice and nobody batted an eye lid. They lay siege to Grozny and killed at least 8000 people.

America and it's allies destroyed Iraq in 2003 on a false pretence. There is a universal defence of that along the lines of "yeah but Saddam was this and that". Saddam was all that when he was utilised to attack Iran too, he didn't change, America's use for Saddam changed, and his eye on Saudi oil changed their perspective on Saddam.

Libya is another example of a dictatorship, which was destroyed by America and it's allies. There was no legal justification for any of it. The "yeah but Gaddafi was a bad man" bullshit won't work. The Americans were talking to both Gaddafi and the rebels, trying to see who would be the best horse to bet on even whilst the conflict raged on.

Saudi Arabia is a perfect example of this hypocrisy. They are a vile dictatorship (who's money i would happily take to play fantasy football), they are responsible for the utter destruction of Yemen (and Iran tbh who has been backing the Houthis). Meanwhile nobody has condemned them, nobody has stopped buying their oil, or sanctioned them. They get a free ride because it benefits the economic interests of America and it's European allies.

Israel - the worst of them all. There isn't a law written they haven't broken. They've pushed the frontiers of inhumanity in their treatment of the Palestinian people and instead of condemning them, Western governments and Western corparations are busy trying to muzzle any political opposition to them. The BDS movement has been deemed anti semitic in some places. It's like Black Mirror come to life.

India is one close to my heart. I'm a Pakistani or Kashmiri origin. My family were refugees of ethnic cleansing. In the last 40 years, India has violently oppressed the Kashmiri people, they are competing with the Israeli's in terms of human rights abuses, especially in the last few years. Mass graves, rape as a weapon of war, civillians as human shields, enforced disaparances, blinding protestors, destroying farms, toruture - you name it, it is happening in Kashmir today. Yet people go on about India like it's some beacon of democracy. I'm not even going to start on the extremist hindu groups targeting Muslims across India. You only have to visit the India thread to read how fellow Indian members are disenfranchised by what is happening there. Yet no sanctions, no condemnation, most countries now actually ignore the UN resolutions on the matter and ask "India and Pakistan" to resolve it bilaterally. If India and Pakistan faced 50% of the sanctions Russia faces today, the matter would be resolved in months, if not weeks.

India is also a victim in this. China has taken Indian territory twice in the last few years. They only took a break because of COVID. Who stood by India? Who stopped buying stuff from China or moved their factories elsewhere?

China is a huge culprit in terms of human rights violations. They shut down the HK protests violently. They've been doing all sorts of abusive stuff in Xinjiang province against their uighurs muslim population. Re-education camps, rape, demolishing places of worship - it's like North Korea there. Yet everyone went to the Winter Olympics, everyone still makes stuff there, buys from there.

There are loads of other conflicts I've not mentioned. The Rohingya genocide in Burma, Sudan's war on South Sudan, the regular bombing of Somalia by the US, the shitshow that started off as the Syrian civil war and is now the battlefield for a Proxy war of about 5 different countries. The list goes on.

Just to circle back to where I started, the people of Ukraine deserve our support unconditionally. It just makes me sick how everyone can be so concerned for them, and not give a shit about the suffering elsewhere.

There's lot of places around the world not taking a stand against Russia. It's mostly Western countries trying to sort out a western invasion problem without sending in the planes and soldiers.

Feels like you seem to be implying the world is the western world when it's not, not at all. The west can equally look around and say where is the support around the world, in your words we could be seething but instead of crying about vast areas of the world not caring about Russia we'll just get on with doing our own sanctions. Perhaps you should be asking where was the sanctions of places around India when China took parts of India who have a better idea of what's going on instead expecting some big revolt in the western world. Also at the same time Russia took Crimea and we had non of this so yes regions here can be taken without the uproar. I can't expect India or Singapore to be up in arms over Russia taking Crimea and this is now a full invasion of Ukraine and I'm sure if we heard a full invasion of India by China there would be uproar. You seem to be looking very hard for hypocrisy in all your posts like everything should be processed in a balance sheet when the reality is it's still a big world and one can't be understanding of everything going on in equal measure and all the incidents are different in scale.

Things closer to home will always be of more concern

 

[The Corinthian]

 

[Zlatattack]

There's lot of places around the world not taking a stand against Russia. It's mostly Western countries trying to sort out a western invasion problem without sending in the planes and soldiers.

Feels like you seem to be implying the world is the western world when it's not, not at all. The west can equally look around and say where is the support around the world, in your words we could be seething but instead of crying about vast areas of the world not caring about Russia we'll just get on with doing our own sanctions. Perhaps you should be asking where was the sanctions of places around India when China took parts of India who have a better idea of what's going on instead expecting some big revolt in the western world. Also at the same time Russia took Crimea and we had non of this so yes regions here can be taken without the uproar. I can't expect India or Singapore to be up in arms over Russia taking Crimea and this is now a full invasion of Ukraine and I'm sure if we heard a full invasion of India by China there would be uproar. You seem to be looking very hard for hypocrisy in all your posts like everything should be processed in a balance sheet when the reality is it's still a big world and one can't be understanding of everything going on in equal measure and all the incidents are different in scale.

Things closer to home will always be of more concern

The thing is, nobody else around the world takes up the mantle of world police. Nobody asked NATO countries to go around imposing democracy via bombs everywhere there is oil. The governments of Western European countries and the USA took it upon themselves to interfer around the world. If you weren't getting involved in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya etc - then nobody would hold you responsible for the mess there. Nobody is involved out of any moral crusade, it's always about securing resources and defending those regimes who act like your local thugs in your persuit of resources.

China doesn't sanction people for not being communist, India doesn't export hinduism and Bollywood beyond their borders using force. The Russians don't make up excuses around human rights when they try and sell you weapons or gas. Western European nations and the Americans do all this. They hold these double standards, which is why they get called up on them.

Iraq is a perfect example. Iraq attacked Iran for 9 years - no problem.
Iraq gassed the Kurds - no problem. At the time the US blamed Iran.
Iraq invades Kuwait - big problem. Kuwait sells oil to the western world and even worse than that, he threatened Saudi, where ARAMCO were busy making big bucks.

Now if your governments have just said "f**k you thats our petrol pump you're attacking" and bombed the sh1t out of Iraq, it'd be completely understandable. Instead we get all this BS about freedom, human rights, democracy and two wars against Iraq until you finally got their oil too.

It's the double standards and the false pretences that are annoying.

 

[shamans]

“It’s like Durham, it’s very modern," he said. "They have nightclubs. They have coffee shops. They have bodegas.”

source: https://www.wral.com/amid-growing-c...mployees-out-of-ukraine/20165445/?version=amp

This was in my local paper today. A very liberal and inclusive town as well (Americans here who have been in/around Duke/Durham would attest that). This sort of language and sentiment is just acceptable and just shows you the attitudes towards Ukraine that rub some like myself the wrong way.

Oh right so they have coffee shops, and night clubs. Makes it way more crazy! This is normal people getting bombed folks!

 

[IWat]

The thing is, nobody else around the world takes up the mantle of world police. Nobody asked NATO countries to go around imposing democracy via bombs everywhere there is oil. The governments of Western European countries and the USA took it upon themselves to interfer around the world. If you weren't getting involved in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya etc - then nobody would hold you responsible for the mess there. Nobody is involved out of any moral crusade, it's always about securing resources and defending those regimes who act like your local thugs in your persuit of resources.

Afghanistan and Libya were both approved by the UN. Iraq 1991 again was UN approved, 2003 is a stain, most in the West agree. A lot weren't happy at the time. What is happening in Syria is also very-iffy, it is mainly SOF which makes it all weird shades of grey.

These are cyclical arguments that are just going around in circles.

 

[do.ob]

The thing is, nobody else around the world takes up the mantle of world police. Nobody asked NATO countries to go around imposing democracy via bombs everywhere there is oil. The governments of Western European countries and the USA took it upon themselves to interfer around the world. If you weren't getting involved in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya etc - then nobody would hold you responsible for the mess there. Nobody is involved out of any moral crusade, it's always about securing resources and defending those regimes who act like your local thugs in your persuit of resources.

China doesn't sanction people for not being communist, India doesn't export hinduism and Bollywood beyond their borders using force. The Russians don't make up excuses around human rights when they try and sell you weapons or gas. Western European nations and the Americans do all this. They hold these double standards, which is why they get called up on them.

Iraq is a perfect example. Iraq attacked Iran for 9 years - no problem.
Iraq gassed the Kurds - no problem. At the time the US blamed Iran.
Iraq invades Kuwait - big problem. Kuwait sells oil to the western world and even worse than that, he threatened Saudi, where ARAMCO were busy making big bucks.

Now if your governments have just said "f**k you thats our petrol pump you're attacking" and bombed the sh1t out of Iraq, it'd be completely understandable. Instead we get all this BS about freedom, human rights, democracy and two wars against Iraq until you finally got their oil too.

It's the double standards and the false pretences that are annoying.

Get a grip man. You're writing this as the Russians are currently demolishing a country under the pretext of toppling its goverment because of it's supposed ideology.

 

[Zlatattack]

Afghanistan and Libya were both approved by the UN. Iraq 1991 again was UN approved, 2003 is a stain, most in the West agree. A lot weren't happy at the time. What is happening in Syria is also very-iffy, it is mainly SOF which makes it all weird shades of grey.

These are cyclical arguments that are just going around in circles.

The UN is a big part of the problem. It's a talk shop and has no power of it's own. It's also very biased. The 5 nations that form the security council make a mockery of it.

 

[Zlatattack]

Get a grip man. You're writing this as the Russians are currently demolishing a country under the pretext of toppling its goverment because of it's supposed ideology.

I am not making excuses for the Russians. I'm just saying that America and some other NATO countries, mainly the UK and France are as bad as Russia - in terms of the attrocities they carry out around the world.

At some point these countries should realise it's not a race to the bottom.

 

[shamans]

Get a grip man. You're writing this as the Russians are currently demolishing a country under the pretext of toppling its goverment because of it's supposed ideology.

And it hasn't happened before right?

 

[IWat]

I am not making excuses for the Russians. I'm just saying that America and some other NATO countries, mainly the UK and France are as bad as Russia - in terms of the attrocities they carry out around the world.

At some point these countries should realise it's not a race to the bottom.

You're painting lines with a very thick brush. I spent 6 months in Afghan which I spent:

1. Trying to train a bunch of Hashish smoking, incompetently led recruits on how to defend their country from some pretty despicable people
2. Working with the Afghan army to try to stop groups from running riot through villages. I assure you the bombs getting dropped cost far more than the entire economic output of some of these villages and valleys we were trying to defend

Did I hear of some actions where soldiers had disgraced their nation? Yep. Same with the Afghan army, the same that has happened in literally every conflict, anywhere.

What I saw, on the whole, were petrified people who were genuinely thankful we were there. That is in no way comparable to the current situation in Ukraine.

 

[Sweet Square]

American exceptionalism is the idea that the United States is inherently different from other nations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

 

[VorZakone]

What's the latest on the Ethiopian conflict with Tigray? And how does the African Union deal with it? It's been fizzling out in the media but I recall the Tigrayan forces being close to the capital?

 

[hasanejaz88]

Afghanistan and Libya were both approved by the UN. Iraq 1991 again was UN approved, 2003 is a stain, most in the West agree. A lot weren't happy at the time. What is happening in Syria is also very-iffy, it is mainly SOF which makes it all weird shades of grey.

These are cyclical arguments that are just going around in circles.

Being approved by the UN doesn't mean anything, it's just a superpower using their influence to win opinion and boost their narrative. Doesn't change the fact that it was an invasion that did nothing to benefit the country and murdered thousands of innocent people.

The lust for influence, and the lack of acceptance of their actions, within the West, is why there will still remain conflict in the world even if Putin is removed (I mean it's not as if they'll stop funding Saudi if Putin is removed).

And this is throughout history, it's no different to any period. Empires come and go and people are murdered for it's growth, it's the sad reality of humanity.

 

[IWat]

Being approved by the UN doesn't mean anything, it's just a superpower using their influence to win opinion and boost their narrative. Doesn't change the fact that it was an invasion that did nothing to benefit the country and murdered thousands of innocent people.

The lust for influence, and the lack of acceptance of their actions, within the West, is why there will still remain conflict in the world even if Putin is removed (I mean it's not as if they'll stop funding Saudi if Putin is removed).

And this is throughout history, it's no different to any period. Empires come and go and people are murdered for it's growth, it's the sad reality of humanity.

I mean, it makes it legal under international law?

Let's take Afghan for example. That was a 15-0 vote from US, UK, France, Russia, China, Bangladesh, Colombia, Ireland, Jamaica, Mail, Mauritus, Norway, Singapore, Tunisia, Ukraine. Pretty much as diverse a range of countries as you could wish to get.

 

[The Corinthian]

I mean, it makes it legal under international law?

Let's take Afghan for example. That was a 15-0 vote from US, UK, France, Russia, China, Bangladesh, Colombia, Ireland, Jamaica, Mail, Mauritus, Norway, Singapore, Tunisia, Ukraine. Pretty much as diverse a range of countries as you could wish to get.

How many UN resolutions do you think Israel have broken? What are the consequences of them breaking them?

 

[hasanejaz88]

I mean, it makes it legal under international law?

Let's take Afghan for example. That was a 15-0 vote from US, UK, France, Russia, China, Bangladesh, Colombia, Ireland, Jamaica, Mail, Mauritus, Norway, Singapore, Tunisia, Ukraine. Pretty much as diverse a range of countries as you could wish to get.

Don't you think there is something fundamentally wrong with just 15 countries (5 of whom decide everything) in the world deciding whether to invade, and potentially destroy, a country, who doesn't even get a vote in this?

Like I said, being legal doesn't make it right. There were plenty of things that were legal but were very wrong, and plenty of things still are.

 

[shamans]

You're painting lines with a very thick brush. I spent 6 months in Afghan which I spent:

1. Trying to train a bunch of Hashish smoking, incompetently led recruits on how to defend their country from some pretty despicable people
2. Working with the Afghan army to try to stop groups from running riot through villages. I assure you the bombs getting dropped cost far more than the entire economic output of some of these villages and valleys we were trying to defend

Did I hear of some actions where soldiers had disgraced their nation? Yep. Same with the Afghan army, the same that has happened in literally every conflict, anywhere.

What I saw, on the whole, were petrified people who were genuinely thankful we were there. That is in no way comparable to the current situation in Ukraine.

In some cases maybe, and you did your job in a genuine way. I'm sure that was the same up your command chain as well but it's not like these Russian soldiers are beasts. The problem is what these wars mean. Forces in Afghanistan turned a blind eye to known pedophiles and rapists. The hashish smoking incompetents you are talking about, I'm sure you know, many were seen as scum of society who took part in bacha baazi.

I can't go into too much detail here, but there's a reason no one bothered to take up arms when forces left Afghanistan. The idea of liberating from the tyrants was for the most part, manufactured. U.S just chose one set of nastier warlords (northern alliance) to go against another.

 

[IWat]

Don't you think there is something fundamentally wrong with just 15 countries (5 of whom decide everything) in the world deciding whether to invade, and potentially destroy, a country, who doesn't even get a vote in this?

How would you propose it works? I'd personally be in favour of doing away with the 5 permanent members and requiring some form of a supermajority for the use of force. But ultimately, history has shown there are times where it's very likely the use of force is/will be required.

 

[shamans]

I mean, it makes it legal under international law?

Let's take Afghan for example. That was a 15-0 vote from US, UK, France, Russia, China, Bangladesh, Colombia, Ireland, Jamaica, Mail, Mauritus, Norway, Singapore, Tunisia, Ukraine. Pretty much as diverse a range of countries as you could wish to get.

But it should not.

 

[Raoul]

How would you propose it works? I'd personally be in favour of doing away with the 5 permanent members and requiring some form of a supermajority for the use of force. But ultimately, history has shown there are times where it's very likely the use of force is/will be required.

This wouldn't work since the power rests with the major states who currently comprise the security council (the US, China, and Russia specifically). Therefore you could never have a majority or supermajority type situation where small countries count as much as the superpowers.

 

[IWat]

In some cases maybe, and you did your job in a genuine way. I'm sure that was the same up your command chain as well but it's not like these Russian soldiers are beasts. The problem is what these wars mean. Forces in Afghanistan turned a blind eye to known pedophiles and rapists. The hashish smoking incompetents you are talking about, I'm sure you know, many were seen as scum of society who took part in bacha baazi.

I can't go into too much detail here, but there's a reason no one bothered to take up arms when forces left Afghanistan. The idea of liberating from the tyrants was for the most part, manufactured. U.S just chose one set of nastier warlords (northern alliance) to go against another.

I have sympathy for the average Russian soldier, they are not the ones making the decisions and they're just trying to survive.

I wasn't there during the invasion period, so I can't really comment on that with any real knowledge, but by the time I was there, we weren't the criminal justice system. There were plenty of unsavoury people that in my opinion should have been in cells, but that was not within our remit.

From my reference frame, there was an astonishing lack of naivety and a complete lack of political desire to deal with the ultimate problem that it was a complete lost cause. And so the can got kicked down the road, and down the road... The different tribes, factions, ethnic groups had been brought to heel by the Taliban via their strict implementation of Sharia law in kind of the same way Saddam had ruled with an iron fist in Iraq. When you take them away, you're left with a power vacuum and chaos. They knew our rules of engagement, they exploited them excellently.

 

[hasanejaz88]

How would you propose it works? I'd personally be in favour of doing away with the 5 permanent members and requiring some form of a supermajority for the use of force. But ultimately, history has shown there are times where it's very likely the use of force is/will be required.

A majority vote for all nations is definitely needed in my opinion.

Other than that, deciding on a war isn't an easy question for sure. Certainly, before such a decision is made, more consideration should be taken place before deciding to invade a country and potentially destroy the lives of millions, who likely won't even want them there.

Given that most invasions in modern history have little to do with actually wanting to improve a country, but rather hold political power in a region (or pure revenge as in the case of Afghanistan), it's no surprise there isn't much thought put in for how to improve a country once invaded and destroyed (of if it geniunally is, it's very poor).

Obviously the insigators of war are wrong and will want to go in for their own personal reasons, but other countries voting should be more rigurous before deciding, which doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Raoul]

A majority vote for all nations is definitely needed in my opinion.

Other than that, deciding on a war isn't an easy question for sure. Certainly, before such a decision is made, more consideration should be taken place before deciding to invade a country and potentially destroy the lives of millions, who likely won't even want them there.

Given that most invasions in modern history have little to do with actually wanting to improve a country, but rather hold political power in a region (or pure revenge as in the case of Afghanistan), it's no surprise there isn't much thought put in for how to improve a country once invaded and destroyed (of if it geniunally is, it's very poor).

Obviously the insigators of war are wrong and will want to go in for their own personal reasons, but other countries voting should be more rigurous before deciding, which doesn't seem to be the case.

Which is obviously not going to happen given that larger, more powerful states aren't going to needless cede power to smaller, less powerful ones. This is what makes international organizations like the UN and all of the so called international law legal bodies, completely useless when dealing with issues related to superpowers.

 

[JPRouve]

I just can’t think of a country being placed under such pressure and isolation in the modern world. It will only get worse too.

How much will the Russian people take too?

Wouldn't Iran be a comparable example, especially when you consider the length?

 

[TheReligion]

Wouldn't Iran be a comparable example, especially when you consider the length?

Possibly? You might know more details. Certainly non comparable by the sheer size and power of the actual country being sanctioned.

 

[RedTiger]

Not saying there isn't a racial element or hypocrisy here, but isn't a big part of this due to the visa free travel of Europe Ukrainians have access to?

Probably. You can't discount the historically well known aversion to dark skin in eastern Europe though.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/...after-dark-skinned-refugees-from-ukraine.html