Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

It’s weird how the whataboutism pops up again and again. It’s daft, unnecessary, irrelevant, and troll like behavior.

There was (and still is, to some extent) massive protests and loud condemnation when the US invaded Iraq, all over the western world.
I think most people in here loathe Saudi Arabia and condemn what is going on in Yemen, even though we don’t protest in the streets.

But really, do the “what about” guys actually think it’s weird, that when a possible world war event is happening in our very own back yard, our voices become a bit louder?
Is it weird that we (well, the Europeans among us, at least) are more afraid, more invested and more vocal now? Do we have to actively and loudly condemn every single war, war crime, invasion in history, before having an opinion on this?

I’m more afraid and angry if my next door neighbor is robbed at gunpoint, than I am when someone is robbed at gunpoint in Australia. I condemn both actions, but I only get emotionally involved in one of them.

@Mciahel Goodman You calling this a “racist narrative” is not cool. You’re a troll. Simple as. Feck off.
 
Droid_Repairs said:
Anybody else concerned that EU and UK arming Ukraine like this will be considered an act of war by Moscow?
Click to expand...
Somebody on twitter said "this war is blurring the lines between conventional and proxy warfare". Usually in a proxy war it's an open secret that bigger powers are involved but they don't say it out loud. Or not that much anyway.

The immense public backing is a very serious threat to Russia. Lethal aid is being sent to Ukraine knowing that Russians are going to get killed with it. How Russia deals with this open backing and how they'll justify potential escalations must have weighed heavily on Western planners' minds I reckon.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
People went to Spain to fight for the people (socialist international). It will be a great PR victory for neocons if they can spin this as remotely similar (except for Ukrainians and other Eastern Europeans who feel strongly or perhaps your general mercenary).
Click to expand...

People are going to Ukraine to fight for the people too.

The Republican side was hardly a democratic ideal. They were so busy killing each other outside Barcelona they made Franco's job a lot easier. They were also sponsored by a tyrannical dictator. Ukraine has a democratically elected President.
 
Droid_Repairs said:
Anybody else concerned that EU and UK arming Ukraine like this will be considered an act of war by Moscow?
Click to expand...
Yes, and no. On the one hand as others have said it gives a pretext for Putin to escalate. On the other, does it change whatever Putin had planned? And he could fabricate that excuse for a plethora of reasons if we didn’t arm Ukraine. The reality is it adds tension yes. But, if Putin is going to escalate, it won’t be because we’ve armed Ukraine. That’s just my take, anyway.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
ukraine-i-will-face-russia-you-have-my-sword-bow-axe-germany-and-my-helmet-lotr-lord-of-the-rings-comic.jpg
Click to expand...


Too accurate :lol:
 
rpitroda said:
Just such a naive post. You’ve created a scenario where people haven’t condemned Iraq and other similar excursions by the west, which is bullshit. You then bring it up in a thread about Ukraine, which is bullshit. Your post implies we have no right to be angry at Russia because of what the west has done, which is bullshit. And you’ve even somehow managed to suggest all these events are somehow comparable, which is bullshit. All while hiding behind a lazy argument and holier than thou attitude, that we are ignorantly berating what’s happening. Which, you guessed it, is also bullshit.
Click to expand...

Vladimir Putin is a war criminal and Tony Blair just got knighted. Please don't try to equate the rightful criticism of Russia with the indifference towards war crimes Iraq.
 
Deery said:
Sadam Hussein was an evil dictator, responsible for murder of thousands of his own people. Where war is wrong and nobody wanted to see innocents die, the world is a better place without madmen in charge.
Click to expand...
The US was responsible, by the end, for more dead people than Saddam (250k dead kids alone prior to 2003).

As for comparisons to condemnation, people are right. There was mass civil condemnation, but it was all ignored and largely did absolutely nothing (Blair just received a knighthood, no?). There was little to no serious diplomatic condemnation (cessation of trade) or talks of warcrimes except by activists who have also been ignored. Don't even want to talk about Iraq, my point is largely that the media consensus will be understood in months to come as a rather unseemly pretext (and that's the similarity between the two: foreign enlistment, celebrating Molotovs, and crowdfunding weaponry. Can we apply these three principles to Palestine and Yemen, now? No, and rightly so. But all of that is falling by the wayside (it will be understood as absolute idiocy and hypocrisy on the part of the media in the context of history).
 
Redlyn said:
I see a lot of parallels here with the Cuban missile crisis. The US couldn't condone Russian missiles on Cuban soil in the same way Russia is not going tolerate NATO missiles in Ukraine. So this was a preemptive strike to quell the risk before it got out of hand.

This video helped me to at least understand Putin's perspective.

Click to expand...

Oh please, not that excuse again.
 
Droid_Repairs said:
Anybody else concerned that EU and UK arming Ukraine like this will be considered an act of war by Moscow?
Click to expand...

I am unsure that it changes anything.

We are talking about Putin who has stated that one of the reasons for this invasion is that the Jewish president is a Nazi.

It gives him an additional tool in his propaganda but he is more than willing to just invent one out of thin air anyway.
 
rpitroda said:
Yes, and no. On the one hand as others have said it gives a pretext for Putin to escalate. On the other, does it change whatever Putin had planned? And he could fabricate that excuse for a plethora of reasons if we didn’t arm Ukraine. The reality is it adds tension yes. But, if Putin is going to escalate, it won’t be because we’ve armed Ukraine. That’s just my take, anyway.
Click to expand...

Good point, yes. If he wanted to escalate with the west, there are a number of other reasons he could shit out.

Edgar Allan Pillow said:
And so what? They going to invade Europe?
Click to expand...

Not invade, no, that would be unwinnable - it might give him the bullshit pretext to use thermobarics in Ukraine or even a tactical nuke, either would put the world on a knife edge. Especially the latter.

I feel like he's a cornered animal, unpredictable and dangerous.
 
Skåre Willoch said:
@Mciahel Goodman You calling this a “racist narrative” is not cool. You’re a troll. Simple as. Feck off.
Click to expand...
It certainly is racist. Why are nonwhite people in warzones right now (ones we are actively sponsoring) of less value? If you have a better answer, I'll gladly feck off.
 
hasanejaz88 said:
Vladimir Putin is a war criminal and Tony Blair just got knighted. Please don't try to equate the rightful criticism of Russia with the indifference towards war crimes Iraq.
Click to expand...

To be fair, and to be pedantic without challenging the other points you made, successive Governments have made Blair a political pariah. The knighthood was a personal honour bestowed by the monarch which cannot be challenged legally or politically.
 
VorZakone said:
Somebody on twitter said "this war is blurring the lines between conventional and proxy warfare". Usually in a proxy war it's an open secret that bigger powers are involved but they don't say it out loud. Or not that much anyway.

The immense public backing is a very serious threat to Russia. Lethal aid is being sent to Ukraine knowing that Russians are going to get killed with it. How Russia deals with this open backing and how they'll justify potential escalations must have weighed heavily on Western planners' minds I reckon.
Click to expand...
A very interesting point. When I try and think how this ends as peacefully as possible, there really isn’t a scenario with wide spread public rejection of what Putin is doing by Russian citizens. I mean, Putin doesn’t care anyway - but if he manages to generate a scenario where Russians buy into what he’s doing and create that seige mentality, that would be a bad omen. I wonder how much things like the west arming Ukraine can be used as propaganda by Putin to change the perceptions of Russian citizens.
 
Foxbatt said:
It's obvious that it's horrendous that Russia has invaded Ukraine. They should get out now. It's a crime.
But where was this condemnation when Iraq was invaded and bombed to stone age?
Click to expand...

Search the internet, you will find endless pages of condemnation. I am sure there are threads about it that are very active that you can use to discuss it somewhere, in the meantime people probably want to use the thread about Russia's invasion of Ukraine to discuss Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
 
Frosty said:
People are going to Ukraine to fight for the people too.

The Republican side was hardly a democratic ideal. They were so busy killing each other outside Barcelona they made Franco's job a lot easier. They were also sponsored by a tyrannical dictator. Ukraine has a democratically elected President.
Click to expand...
It's not for me to question anyone who actually enlists to enter a warzone. Anyone doing that is doing it for something, whatever I think (comparison to Spain being the context). I was more talking about the principle being set by Parliament (can we legally go enlist anywhere now?).
 
Some people are trying to get information about the russian invasion here, please stop getting of topic. I'm pretty sure you guys can create a "is the west as bad as russia" topic somewhere but this is going sideways after 325 fairly good pages.
 
rpitroda said:
Absolutely not saying that reducing nuke numbers is not for the positive, but how many? 500 you say. Why not 100? Or 1000? It’s a fantasy world where having a nuclear cap would work. By definition, the point of having nukes in the first place is what would cause such a measure to fail.
Click to expand...

It is a fantasy I know, but it’s nice to dream.

‘Realistically’ these countries would never agree to having less than they’d need to cause the apocalypse so 500 seems like a fair amount. They can still kill everyone but in the meantime the running costs of the 6000 they no longer have can go elsewhere.

It’s a pipe dream. I think my main point is how in the hell did we get here in the first place?

Why have measures such as the UN and NATO been put into place to reduce the chances of WW3 but no one figured a maximum nuke count wasn’t a wise idea after two entire cities were levelled by them in 1945?
 
spiriticon said:
Tony Blair's knighthood is something given by the Queen. I dont know why. I hate the idea and people have objected it but there's nothing the British public can do about it.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-knighthood-britains-honours-system-is-broken

Anyway...I'm off topic. Sorry guys.
Click to expand...

Personal honours have been awarded by the monarch since the 13th century and Parliament has never bothered to take them away from the King or Queen or regulate their use. Hence why nothing can be done about Blair.

I'll stop now.
 
calodo2003 said:
Hopefully there’s a Stanislav Petrov or two in the mix.
Click to expand...

He wasn't in the situation of refusing an order to be fair, just rightly guessed the equipment was wrong. Who knows even he may have launched under order.

I'd expect a situation where its die hard loyalists or people with families held hostages who would be the ones pressing the button.

There's not a single bit of me that would ever launch a nuke so it's hard to imagine.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
It certainly is racist. Why are nonwhite people in warzones right now (ones we are actively sponsoring) of less value? If you have a better answer, I'll gladly feck off.
Click to expand...

This is a false narrative, as no one in here has said non-white people are of less value.Troll confirmed. Gladly feck off, now.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
The US was responsible, by the end, for more dead people than Saddam (250k dead kids alone prior to 2003).

As for comparisons to condemnation, people are right. There was mass civil condemnation, but it was all ignored and largely did absolutely nothing (Blair just received a knighthood, no?). There was little to no serious diplomatic condemnation (cessation of trade) or talks of warcrimes except by activists who have also been ignored. Don't even want to talk about Iraq, my point is largely that the media consensus will be understood in months to come as a rather unseemly pretext (and that's the similarity between the two: foreign enlistment, celebrating Molotovs, and crowdfunding weaponry. Can we apply these three principles to Palestine and Yemen, now? No, and rightly so. But all of that is falling by the wayside (it will be understood as absolute idiocy and hypocrisy on the part of the media in the context of history).
Click to expand...
Well maybe Russia could have stepped in and tried to sanction American and the UK, but they were probably to busy building nuclear warheads.
 
Skåre Willoch said:
It’s weird how the whataboutism pops up again and again. It’s daft, unnecessary, irrelevant, and troll like behavior.

There was (and still is, to some extent) massive protests and loud condemnation when the US invaded Iraq, all over the western world.
I think most people in here loathe Saudi Arabia and condemn what is going on in Yemen, even though we don’t protest in the streets.

But really, do the “what about” guys actually think it’s weird, that when a possible world war event is happening in our very own back yard, our voices become a bit louder?
Is it weird that we (well, the Europeans among us, at least) are more afraid, more invested and more vocal now? Do we have to actively and loudly condemn every single war, war crime, invasion in history, before having an opinion on this?

I’m more afraid and angry if my next door neighbor is robbed at gunpoint, than I am when someone is robbed at gunpoint in Australia. I condemn both actions, but I only get emotionally involved in one of them.

@Mciahel Goodman You calling this a “racist narrative” is not cool. You’re a troll. Simple as. Feck off.
Click to expand...
Makes them think that they have a high morale ground over everyone else. Pretty sad really…

But whatever floats your boat. I guess because of all the past atrocities committed by the majority of other countries getting as involved as they can in this…Russia should just be left to it?
 
Deery said:
Well maybe Russia could have stepped in and tried to sanction American and the UK, but they were probably to busy building nuclear warheads.
Click to expand...
Yeah, anyway, this will just derail thread. I'm going to stop as people want updates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.