Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

entropy said:
why do you want to ‘take a chance’ when you have evidence from not so long ago that has resulted in millions suffering? shouldn’t the lesson be to not repeat that mistake. And more importantly isn’t the goal here to stop the war and stop more innocent lives being lost.
Click to expand...

Mate, we're repeating Neville Chamberlain's mistake here. We know that outcome of that. 10s of millions died.

Who is going to come in and be more hardline than Putin? The likelihood that one of his opponents that he wasn't able to kill with Polonium would step in is higher than somene who is actually more dangerous than Putin even existing in Russia and taking over post Vlad.

To put it in terms of risk, appeasing Putin and allowing him to stay in power is a straight loss scenario. Ukraine will lose their independence and possibly Moldova as well. Him being removed from power at least offers the world a chance of gain.
 
entropy said:
christ, do you realize how many lives will be lost before anything of this sort can happen? and you’re casually arguing for a regime change in a country with nukes and the second-largest army in the world.
Click to expand...

First, Russia does not have the second largest army in the world. It only has the 5th at best in terms of active personnel (professionals). I think we all have seen how poorly an army can be run with a majority of those involved being conscripts, and that's before I go on with the odds of a repeat of the 1917 mutinies that led to the Tsar's downfall.

Speaking of nukes, where do they come in the equation if there's a change of government in the Kremlin? I know people feared this or that during the collapse of the Soviet Union, but the nuclear arsenal remained locked or later dismantled in an extent with respect to the START treaty.
 
Red Dreams said:
The US and the West should never have enticed Ukraine about joining NATO.
It was directly threatening to Russia.

Non military benefits should not have been conditional on Ukraine joining NATO.
No one can justify Putin invading Ukraine.
But lets not pretend the West did not have a huge role in what is happening now.
Click to expand...
I actually somewhat agree with that, regarding the level of western hypocrisy there. Especially when you see the whole world is supporting Ukraine now, which is good, but in contrast to how no one cares about Iraq people during Iraq invasion back then, it was just so fecked up. A lot of civilians died in that war for no reasons, over 100,000, and up to a million in total. Which proves most people are fecking hyprocrites.

But back to Ukraine war, I don''t believe Ukraine wanting to join NATO is the main reason why Putin Russia is invading Ukraine now, it just doesn't make sense for all that, I mean, Putin/Russian themselves wants to join NATO several times over past decades too didn't they? He is definitely on something else this time for sure, something out of greed or insanity.
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
Both organizations have standards and requirements for membership. The worst we can say is that perhaps these are too strict and there should be a function to relax requirements and instead prescribe solutions that can be implemented post membership but the suggestion that working toward NATO or EU membership for any former Soviet Republic or Warsaw Pact member is detrimental is ridiculous and diminishes their intellectual standing in my opinion.

This isn't a time to throw out contrarian arguments for the sake of appearing balanced.
Click to expand...

It isn't for the sake of balance. We left them massively exposed and we can say but yeah we're not that bad guy here but that doesn't change anything.

If you enter into talks with NATO you should be under NATO protection. They wouldn't have been invaded had we done so.
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
Both organizations have standards and requirements for membership. The worst we can say is that perhaps these are too strict and there should be a function to relax requirements and instead prescribe solutions that can be implemented post membership but the suggestion that working toward NATO or EU membership for any former Soviet Republic or Warsaw Pact member is detrimental is ridiculous and diminishes their intellectual standing in my opinion.

This isn't a time to throw out contrarian arguments for the sake of appearing balanced.
Click to expand...

The way to get these former Warsaw Pact countries to 'join the west' is not to make NATO any kind of condition.

In fact the goal should be to eventually disband the need for NATO.
 
Klopper76 said:
They live in a different reality to the rest of us.

Click to expand...


As a lawyer, I'm used to, well, bending the truth a little bit every now and then. But if I had to say shit like this, I couldn't sleep at night. What a cnut.
 
harms said:
You don’t understand the Russian (*Putin’s) perspective then. At least not the official line of propaganda.
Click to expand...
It's my understanding that Putin's perspective (saying it was 'Russia's' was perhaps my mistake so I apologize for that) is that Ukraine is a part of Russia and shouldn't be separated from the wider Russian sphere. My point was, what actually is Putin offering the Ukraine that makes this sustainable in the long run?

Every powerful nation needs an ideology to prop it up whether it's the liberty, communism, capitalism, Islamic/Christian fundamentalism etc. Putin's ultra nationalistic, anti-west outlook is not really anything to hang your hat on-it kind of looks ideologically bankrupt to me.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
First, Russia does not have the second largest army in the world. It only has the 5th at best in terms of active personnel (professionals). I think we all have seen how poorly an army can be run with a majority of those involved being conscripts, and that's before I go on with the odds of a repeat of the 1917 mutinies that led to the Tsar's downfall.

Speaking of nukes, where do they come in the equation if there's a change of government in the Kremlin? I know people feared this or that during the collapse of the Soviet Union, but the nuclear arsenal remained locked or later dismantled in an extent with respect to the START treaty.
Click to expand...
still doesn’t answer my question, do you realize how many lives will be lost in the process before we can even get to the point you’re suggesting. who is going to be responsible for the lives lost?
 
TMDaines said:
Ain’t too many people around the world now looking to the UK Prime Minister to be a key player in ending this diplomatically, or to be leading the talks once the war ends.
Click to expand...

The key powers in the world remain UK, US, France and Germany (NATO wise and EU)
 
RedRonaldo said:
I actually somewhat agree with that, regarding the level of western hypocrisy there. Especially when you see the whole world is supporting Ukraine now, which is good, but in contrast to how no one cares about Iraq people during Iraq invasion back then, it was just so fecked up. A lot of civilians died in that war for no reasons, over 100,000, and up to a million in total. Which proves most people are fecking hyprocrites.

But back to Ukraine war, I don''t believe Ukraine wanting to join NATO is the main reason why Putin Russia is invading Ukraine now, it just doesn't make sense for all that, I mean, Putin/Russian themselves wants to join NATO several times over past decades too didn't they? He is definitely on something else this time for sure, something out of greed.
Click to expand...

You mean apart from the millions who demonstrated against the war around the world? And the major countries who opposed it (incl. Germany and France)? It is a myth that nobody cared about the Iraq, but clearly a popular myth.
 
TheReligion said:
The key powers in the world remain UK, US, France and Germany (NATO wise and EU)
Click to expand...

Key powers in NATO and EU for sure; the US obviously also in the world. These other 3 do not matter that much on a global scale, honestly.
 
Red Dreams said:
The way to get these former Warsaw Pact countries to 'join the west' is not to make NATO any kind of condition.

In fact the goal should be to eventually disband the need for NATO.
Click to expand...

Was it a condition? These countries wanted the security that NATO provides to their independence after living under the Russian boot for 70 years.
 
RedRonaldo said:
But back to Ukraine war, I don''t believe Ukraine wanting to join NATO is the main reason why Putin Russia is invading Ukraine now, it just doesn't make sense for all that, I mean, Putin/Russian themselves wants to join NATO several times over past decades too didn't they? He is definitely on something else this time for sure, something out of greed or insanity.
Click to expand...
Russia joining the NATO would have meant to create a new common security architecture in Europe. The decision against that made clear to Russia that NATO exists to oppose the Russians.

Putin wants to restore the Russian empire as it existed before the SU. Ukraine was wrestled away from Russia in WW1
 
RedRonaldo said:
I actually somewhat agree with that, regarding the level of western hypocrisy there. Especially when you see the whole world is supporting Ukraine now, which is good, but in contrast to how no one cares about Iraq people during Iraq invasion back then, it was just so fecked up. A lot of civilians died in that war for no reasons, over 100,000, and up to a million in total. Which proves most people are fecking hyprocrites.

But back to Ukraine war, I don''t believe Ukraine wanting to join NATO is the main reason why Putin Russia is invading Ukraine now, it just doesn't make sense for all that, I mean, Putin/Russian themselves wants to join NATO several times over past decades too didn't they? He is definitely on something else this time for sure, something out of greed or insanity.
Click to expand...

People conveniently forget about Iraq which is actually worse because that war was totally for a made up reason.

Putin/Russia want their 'sphere of influence'.

The only way to avoid what happened and more such events is build trust.
You can do that even with your' traditional enemy'.

Goal? Mutual survival.
 
RedRonaldo said:
I actually somewhat agree with that, regarding the level of western hypocrisy there. Especially when you see the whole world is supporting Ukraine now, which is good, but in contrast to how no one cares about Iraq people during Iraq invasion back then, it was just so fecked up. A lot of civilians died in that war for no reasons, over 100,000, and up to a million in total. Which proves people are fecking hyprocrites.

But back to Ukraine war, I don''t believe Ukraine wanting to join NATO is the main reason why Putin Russia is invading Ukraine now, it just doesn't make sense for all that, I mean, Putin/Russian themselves wants to join NATO several times over past decades too didn't they? He is definitely on something else this time for sure, something out of greed.
Click to expand...

To be fair, there was huge opposition to the Iraq war - France and Germany were against it, and there was the huge march in London. But when the PM has a 100+ majority, there’s not much can be done. Also, Ukraine is our Eastern border (”our” meaning Europe/ UK) and the aggressor has been our historic antagonist and so it’s only natural there is greater scrutiny because there is more at stake compared to Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen etc. There is undoubtedly double standards in terms of how we react to the refugees compared with non-white countries but that’s a topic for the other thread.
 
Red Dreams said:
People conveniently forget about Iraq which is actually worse because that war was totally for a made up reason.

Putin/Russia want their 'sphere of influence'.

The only way to avoid what happened and more such events is build trust.
You can do that even with your' traditional enemy'.

Goal? Mutual survival.
Click to expand...

The fact you’re grading these things is worrying. One worse than the other.
 
MoskvaRed said:
To be fair, there was huge opposition to the Iraq war - France and Germany were against it, and there was the huge march in London. But when the PM has a 100+ majority, there’s not much can be done. Also, Ukraine is our Eastern border (”our” meaning Europe/ UK) and the aggressor has been our historic antagonist and so it’s only natural there is greater scrutiny because there is more at stake compared to Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen etc. There is undoubtedly double standards in terms of how we react to the refugees compared with non-white countries but that’s a topic for the other thread.
Click to expand...

Yes. it seems as if some want to run with a sweeping generalisation that no one in west cares about what goes on in the ME or other parts of the world. Totally wrong and misleading.
 
stefan92 said:
Russia joining the NATO would have meant to create a new common security architecture in Europe. The decision against that made clear to Russia that NATO exists to oppose the Russians.

Putin wants to restore the Russian empire as it existed before the SU. Ukraine was wrestled away from Russia in WW1
Click to expand...

Putin is against the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (1918) and The Treaty of Rapallo (1922).
 
Red Dreams said:
Stop lying.

Where did I say it is mainly the wests fault?
Click to expand...
Against the West:
"The US and the West should never have enticed Ukraine about joining NATO.
It was directly threatening to Russia.
Non military benefits should not have been conditional on Ukraine joining NATO.
But lets not pretend the West did not have a huge role in what is happening now. "

Against Russia:
"No one can justify Putin invading Ukraine."

What's your definition of huge? Mine would be extremely large portion, massive, enormous etc. If you were to split this into percentages, what would you class as "huge"?
 
AaronRedDevil said:
Lying prick. He knows exactly what he’s doing. Blowing up the Haulocaust Memorial the Ukraine built for them sure showed those Nazi’s eh? Murdering bastard.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about this, maybe @harms van enlighten us more, but I am under the impression that Russia does not care so much about the Jews in regard to the Nazi time? Not out of spite but simply due to the atrocities that happened in the war on behalf of both sides. While the German west front was a battle against their own or equal races (according to the Nazis obviously) and therefore a bit less brutal, in the east the fight was against the slavic "subhumans" who weren't treated much better than the jews.
 
TheReligion said:
The fact you’re grading these things is worrying. One worse than the other.
Click to expand...
yeah ive just stopped replying to him. Clearly delusional. Someone needs to do their research on all the mass graves dug during saddams reign. Regardless of how USA prob made some shit up, there were quite a few demonstrations world wide against the invasion, Ukraine isnt anywhere near the same level as that regime.
 
entropy said:
still doesn’t answer my question, do you realize how many lives will be lost in the process before we can even get to the point you’re suggesting. who is going to be responsible for the lives lost?
Click to expand...

So you don't trust anyone in Moscow to do the right thing before it even gets there? Either a disheartened high official will kill the bald cnut or the masses will get rid of the entire regime when boiling point will be met at home.

edit: The Russian constitution has Article 92 as means to remove a president incapable of serving presidential duties if that's the only way to remove the problem peacefully. Should the Duma say that's enough, then there is nothing Putin can do.
 
Last edited:
FerociousCorgis said:
well when you have such shit posters trying to blame a country for allowing themselves to be invaded by russia not much to debate im afraid. My fault for venturing outside football forum to see how trash some people are in reality.

And an edit here, the fact that a staff member can think this is a thread that should see "debate" is frankly insulting. There is no debating this.
Click to expand...

I don't understand it either.
 
TheReligion said:
You’ll need to look back
Click to expand...

Ah, I misinterpreted the context a little bit. But imo his general sentiment seems reasonable - the UK on its own lost a lot of international influence, but is by no means far behind anyone else in Europe bar Germany in France.
 
Sir Matt said:
Click to expand...


The sad thing is that many people watching on Russian TV will swallow this outrageous lie.They have been painting the Ukrainians as nazis and”fashisti” (a word truly impossible to translate as it basically designates the enemy of the day, whether Oceania or Eurasia) for many years. Apparently Stop the War idiiots living in a free country with no censorship also adopt this line.
 
JuveGER said:
You mean apart from the millions who demonstrated against the war around the world? And the major countries who opposed it (incl. Germany and France)? It is a myth that nobody cared about the Iraq, but clearly a popular myth.
Click to expand...
Yeh how about massive global sanctions on the invader, and providing help/weapons to Iraq to defend their home country against the evil? Its nothing like that and you know what I am talking about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.