• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The NATO

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Ukraine has a 1,974.04 kilometres (1,226.61 mi) long land border with Russia. Therefore, Russia does not want NATO to come there. It will do all in its power to stop that.
I fail to see why this is Ukraine's problem. They are allowed to form defensive alliances and trade agreements with whoever they like, as per international law laid down by the UN and the Helsinki Accord, both of which Russia agreed to abide by.

If Ukraine wants to join NATO, they have that right as a sovereign country. Russia can swivel. It does not justify a pretext for invasion, and Putin knows this. It's a flimsy excuse at best.

Please stop repeating fascist propaganda.
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
Ukraine has a 1,974.04 kilometres (1,226.61 mi) long land border with Russia. Therefore, Russia does not want NATO to come there. It will do all in its power to stop that.
It's really a clash of ideologies.
Both sides feel as if they are in the right, but neither has the true moral high-ground, imo.

The fact is, that the leaders of a powerful federation has decided to invade its poorer neighbour .. which is on the borders of the EU.
..better for Putin to seek a peaceful settlement, rather than stage illegitimate elections.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
That probably includes use of nuclear weapons, and it is Ukrainians who are going to suffer the most. I am neither an American stooge nor a Russian stooge. I am an Indian, with independent views. I am only expressing my views. We too have a long border with China and Pakistan (much longer than the Russian Ukrainian border) and are concerned about that. But geo-politics requires us to walk but geo-politics requires us to walk gingerly. Unfortunately, Ukraine (and others) did not do so.
My question is - Is the West ready for that eventuality?
Translation: countries with nuclear powers can get away with whatever they want, and their weaker neighbours should not expect any help when being invaded by them.

I'm sorry, but this "I am really only concerned for the people of Ukraine" act is just not going to fly with me.

Oh, I am sure you don't want the Ukrainian people to die... You just don't mind them being invaded and slaughtered and having their national sovereignty violated as long as it means not upsetting an imperialistic dictator sitting on a bomb. The ultimate conclusion of your logic not only denies Ukraine it's free will, but defies international laws and agreements that Russia itself agreed to abide by.

You may think your attitude is that of anti-war, but really it is just pro-appeasement. Which, historically, doesn't exactly mean the same thing.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Translation: countries with nuclear powers can get away with whatever they want, and their weaker neighbours should not expect any help when being invaded by them.
The ultimate conclusion of your logic not only denies Ukraine it's free will, but defies international laws and agreements that Russia itself agreed to abide by.
You may think your attitude is that of anti-war, but really it is just pro-appeasement. Which, historically, doesn't exactly mean the same thing.
Yeah, that is true. Israel is an example. That is why we too had to develop nuclear weapons. We had no other option.
Free will of nations or individuals is limited by circumstances. Absolute free-will comes with a cost.
IMHO, Ukraine will be served better by peace talks rather than war with weapons from NATO countries.
BTW, India has asked all its citizens in Ukraine (mostly students) to leave the country immediately 'by whatever means available'.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
The fact is, that the leaders of a powerful federation has decided to invade its poorer neighbour .. which is on the borders of the EU.
..better for Putin to seek a peaceful settlement, rather than stage illegitimate elections.
That is what USA too did in Vietnam and Iraq. Nothing new there.
Putin knows what is better for him, as does Biden and the European countries. Democracy and fair elections are not the only way many countries are managed. We have to deal with whoever is in power.
If Allah did not want Putin to rule Russia, Putin would not have lasted even for 5 minutes ("lā ḥawla wa-lā quwwata ʾillā bi-llāhi").
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I fail to see why this is Ukraine's problem. They are allowed to form defensive alliances and trade agreements with whoever they like, as per international law laid down by the UN and the Helsinki Accord, both of which Russia agreed to abide by.
If Ukraine wants to join NATO, they have that right as a sovereign country. Russia can swivel. It does not justify a pretext for invasion, and Putin knows this. It's a flimsy excuse at best.
Yes, Ukraine has the right and is paying for what it has done. Why complain?
It was coming since they removed Andriy Klyuyev and integrated with Europe (Wikipedia).
Has Putin tried to justify Ukraine invasion? He has acted because he believes Ukraine's action is harmful for Russia.
Not all that happens in the world can be justified.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I would like to know why Ukrainian soldiers and civilians (and Russian soldiers and civilians) are supposed to die for the sake of a pointless territorial dispute, whereas the élites stay safe and warm in their luxurious buildings, giving orders. It's utterly unjust. It's unbearable.
I do not think it is a pointless dispute. India has supported Ukraine's territorial integrity. But the way to that is peace talks and not war.
Regarding soldiers, they don't have much choice, sometimes even to refuse fighting. That is how it happens all over the world in all history.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
No, it isn't. NATO is a defensive pact. While it is aligned with western interests, it only exists as such as an explicit response to Russian imperialism. i.e: ACTUAL imperialism.

So what? You want Ukraine to die and it's people genocided because... it's better than leaning towards western interests?

The fact that you have to keep ignoring these facts in order to place America and NATO as the villains in your comedy/tragedy of global politics is baffling.
No matter what some historically and politically illiterate people may have told you "America bad" is not the only position worth a damn in the global political landscape. There are worse things and worse countries than America.
If it is aligned to some interests, then it is against some other interests. That is where the conflict starts.
They might not have leaned so heavily towards the western interests and thereby may have avoided war.
NATO is certainly the villain since they started incorporating CIS countries in their ranks.
USA is neither wholly black nor wholly white, it is salt and pepper, as are all other countries. They are strategic partners to us.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I do not think it is a pointless dispute. India has supported Ukraine's territorial integrity. But the way to that is peace talks and not war.
Regarding soldiers, they don't have much choice, sometimes even to refuse fighting. That is how it happens all over the world in all history.
There are countless political-territorial disputes in Europe. The Catalan struggle for independence, South Tyrol, North Macedonia...etc. Zero wars.
Why? Because the EU and the EU member states solve or try to settle them through diplomacy.
And they would have solved the Donbas question through diplomacy too.
They didn't do that because the Donbas question is a shameless pretext to push for an anti-Putin Crusade.

These billionaire elites will not rest until they
1) dethrone Putin
2) occupy Russia
3) buy or take possession of all Russian raw materials and natural resources.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
I would like to know why Ukrainian soldiers and civilians (and Russian soldiers and civilians) are supposed to die for the sake of a pointless territorial dispute, whereas the élites stay safe and warm in their luxurious buildings, giving orders.
It's utterly unjust. It's unbearable.

And how does that differ from any other war?
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
I am growing increasingly tired of your inability to accept the reality of this situation.
Russia are refusing peace talks. What options, short of giving Russia exactly what they want, is going to lead to peace here?
Why should the will of the Ukrainian people be silenced because of your refusal to accept the fact that Russia started this war and had all the power to end it from the beginning?
Your reality is not my reality.
IMHO, th best way to start peace talks is to be without pre-conditions. Who says that the Ukrainian people should be silenced?
As for who started the war, we have different opinions.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Even if Putin goes, Russian interests and stock pile will still be there (> 6,000 bombs).
You are disregarding China.
Those elites are disregarding her. Not me.
I think they are self-destructive and stupid.
Greed drives them nuts.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Yeah, that is true. Israel is an example. That is why we too had to develop nuclear weapons. We had no other option.
Again, the people of Ukraine would disagree, and we should honour that. You cannot simply allow a country to be swallowed up by its neighbour because they have nuclear arms.

Free will of nations or individuals is limited by circumstances. Absolute free-will comes with a cost.
Which Ukraine is willing to pay, and that will should be respected.

IMHO, Ukraine will be served better by peace talks rather than war with weapons from NATO countries.
Russia is not engaging with peace talks. It is widely believed that any peace talks Russia previously engaged in were all for show. So our options now are feed the Ukrainian people to Russia or assist them in their efforts to resist and repel Russian aggression. I think assisting them is the better option. The decision to invade and the decision not to engage with peace talks all fall squarely on Russia, not on NATO.

BTW, India has asked all its citizens in Ukraine (mostly students) to leave the country immediately 'by whatever means available'.
It's war. Threats of escalation happen.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Yes, Ukraine has the right and is paying for what it has done. Why complain?
What do you think I'm complaining about? I'm complaining about you mis-characterising this not as a war for Ukrainian independence that the Ukrainian people are fighting, but for pretending that this is purely some kind of proxy war between the US and Russia. It isn't. You are the one essentially saying that it is worth Ukrainians dying or being ruled over by a foreign power against their will rather than suffer the heinous indignity of... being able to actually fight back of their own free will.

It was coming since they removed Andriy Klyuyev and integrated with Europe (Wikipedia).
Ahhh, I see. It's Ukraine's fault for not wanting a Russia sock-puppet like Yanukovych who mass-murdered protesters in charge of their country. They should have just ACCEPTED that Russia has a right to subvert the will of the Ukrainian people and kill its citizens who displease them. They should have just been a happy little vassal of the Kremlin and put up with human rights violations, suppression of free speech and being a sock puppet to a foreign state. That's clearly the ideal scenario.

Once again "they didn't want to be controlled by Russia, so they had it coming" is not a justification for invasion.

Has Putin tried to justify Ukraine invasion? He has acted because he believes Ukraine's action is harmful for Russia.
No, he does not. No sane human being would believe that. He did it because he wants to own Ukraine. This is what he has always wanted. He has explicitly said in the past that he wants to restore the former Soviet Union borders. That is why he is invading.

Not all that happens in the world can be justified.
Like Russia's invasion. Hence why we should support Ukraine.
 
Last edited:

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
If it is aligned to some interests, then it is against some other interests. That is where the conflict starts.
So? Again, if Russia doesn't like it, Russia can swivel. You can't justify an invasion because a sovereign country chooses to ally itself with people not aligned with your interests. You know what else isn't in a nation's interests? Declaring war on its neighbours purely for the sake of imperialist land grabs and political clout.

They might not have leaned so heavily towards the western interests and thereby may have avoided war.
Ukraine is a free state. It has a the right of association to any organisation, trade agreements and unions it so desires. Russia doesn't get to threaten violence if it doesn't like what Ukraine chooses. And, to use your logic:

Maybe there is a reason Ukraine wanted to enter a DEFENSIVE PACT with other nations aligned against Russia - especially considering the DECADES-LONG history of Russia interfering directly in their elections, funding separatist groups and enciting violence against the Ukrainian people.

Seriously, your logic here is completely one-sided. When Russia engages in a war with its neighbours it's all "Well, maybe they had their reasons", but when Ukraine wants to enter into a defensive pact with other countries it's "Well, they just ASKING for war!"

Did it ever occur to you that maybe you haven't the first clue about this situation, and that maybe you're just being a contrarian for the sake of it? I recommend you read up on Ukraine's history with Russia, and maybe then you will understand why exactly Ukraine felt it necessary to reach out to NATO in the first place - as if the fact that Russia are currently engaged in INVADING UKRAINE didn't make this obvious enough.

NATO is certainly the villain since they started incorporating CIS countries in their ranks.
I'm sorry, but this is absolutely disgusting logic.

How is NATO the villain because countries neighbouring Russia wanted to join them? This is like watching someone getting beaten by their husband, and when they call the police who come to stop it you call the police villains for preventing the husband from freely beating their partner. Your logic is identical. NATO prevents Russian interfering with its neighbours, and Russia doesn't like this and may threaten further violence, so therefore NATO is bad.

Maybe Russia should stop beating it's neighbours. Maybe, just maybe, Russia is the villain here.


This is utterly repellent. Countries have a right to join whatever organisation they wish if it is in their interest and it is their will to do so. It is just and correct that a country should not be allowed to bully their neighbours out of whatever agreements they wish to make via threat or use of force.

USA is neither wholly black nor wholly white, it is salt and pepper, as are all other countries. They are strategic partners to us.
Obviously. You need not explain to me that the US engages in geopolitics.
 
Last edited:

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
Your reality is not my reality.
Clearly. My reality is the one that actually takes Ukraine and its people into account.

IMHO, th best way to start peace talks is to be without pre-conditions.
Russia is setting the pre-conditions. They have already been offered an assurance that Ukraine will not join NATO as part of a peace agreement. That peace agreement was rejected by Russia, and now they are refusing to hold any further peace talks.

Who says that the Ukrainian people should be silenced?
Russia.

Russia is saying that.

As for who started the war, we have different opinions.
Correct. One of us has the right opinion, and the other has the wrong opinion.

You have the wrong one, for the record.
 
Top