The warmongers at the European Union

[Stevicus]

Agree, it obviously spans over a longer period. However, Putin does use the argument that the Ukrainians are Nazis as one of the arguments, which obviously plays on the fear from WW2.

I always thought that was a rather strange argument for Putin to make. I guess it depends on how one defines "Nazi." Considering how botched the opening invasion turned out to be, it's possible that he didn't really plan it well. His pretexts and the arguments behind them seem equally botched.

I wish governments and politicians would just come out and tell the truth.

Yes and no, I think this is the same as referencing WW2, things were different back then, and they made decisions based on whatever was going on at the time. But there have been lots of leaders since then and things happening to correct things. And whether that is the West's fault, or whether one could argue that Russia might also move on and give up the silly idea of them owning former countries and having a right to a security border around them.

And also maybe if the Russian leaders hadn't been so freaking corrupt and treated people and their neighbours better they might have been in a better position and the world would have been different. So you can point fingers at many things, that might have been done better in the past than it was. But that still doesn't change that what Putin does now, is not and should not be acceptable.

Sure the US/West have done bad things, but never with the intention of occupying countries in the style that Russia is doing.

I agree that the world has changed, and perhaps even evolved to some degree. But there still remains a certain amount of criminality, corruption, atrocity, aggression, and war. Nothing as bad as WW2, as that seems to be the worst of the worst (even though Americans called it "the Good War"). Whatever bad things people associate with the U.S. or the West in general, the usual argument is that we were never that bad - not as bad as the Nazis or the Soviets, who are/were viewed as much worse.

However, I don't think the current world situation is anything remotely close to what it was during the time of the Nazis or the Soviets.

He has no interest in it, things are going as he wants them to, the US is stumbling and showing its weakness, and the EU is not particularly prepared for such a conflict, and even a lot of EU countries are very poorly supporting Ukraine. And there is a good chance, that Trump will try to use all his foolishness in an attempt to create a peace that will make Putin come out on top as victorious and make the West look weak. And then the West has to pay for rebuilding Ukraine and probably we also end up having to give Russia money to rebuild the occupied territories because they won't do it.

I'm not entirely sure what Trump might have in mind or what kind of deal both Zelensky and Putin will accept. I don't think it would make the West look weak, or at least, not weaker than Russia. The poor performance of the Russian military and other weaknesses within that country have been revealed throughout all of this. The larger problem in the long run might be China's response to this, as Russia's weakened position could be an opportunity for them to expand their reach.

Everyone lies in these things and getting the exact truth is probably difficult. But this was an era where the US and Russia were battling for both political influence and also as superpowers and who could make the biggest and badest atomic weapons.

One thing I noticed is that, for the most part, they don't tell outright lies as much as find "different ways of telling the truth," although it's often twisted, slanted, and with so much spin that they might as well be lies. The US and USSR were also in an ideological battle - a battle for "hearts and minds." Not unlike missionaries seeking to gain converts to their religion.

Agree and obviously I can only give my personal opinion and that is to not allow people like him to get away with things like this. And then we can talk about how to move the world forward as one race, it's not like we don't have enough problems to deal with already. We don't need to also have to deal with warmongering maniacs.

It's definitely a tough nut to solve. Despite all the nuclear saber rattling, I don't really believe that Putin is so crazy that he would push it that far. But I think we also should try to avoid getting too reckless and crazy ourselves.

The alternative is to support Ukraine.

Why would we expect Putin to live up to any agreement when he has demonstrated that he doesn't care? So making a new one is pointless.

If Russia is losing 1500-1800 soldiers a day, and lots of equipment and military stuff inside Russia, clearly that is not sustainable forever and Putin has nothing to show for it to the Russian people, then eventually they might be tired of it.

And yes it sucks big time, but again I think it should be mainly up to the Ukrainian people to decide, they are after all the ones fighting and dying protecting their country. I don't even think the majority of Russians even know what they are fighting for.

I do agree that it's up to the Ukrainian and Russian people to resolve this between themselves. As for the West's options, sure, we could continue to send military aid to Ukraine and keep going as we have been. How long can we sustain that?

 

[muhammad_isa]

..if we have no particularly big issue with him attacking Ukraine, then why would we if he attacked Poland?
Obviously because of Nato, but still I don't think we ought to live in a world where if you are not part of a military alliance then you are basically up for the grabs because no one cares..

Clearly, many people do care .. I care.

I also care about the fact that "the man that pays the piper calls the tune", and corruption
exists in both Russia and the West.

I therefore cannot rely solely on CNN or BBC for information about these wars that have
escalated into serious political conflicts. I need to know the background, as each party sees it.

..but we fully understand the threat of having a maniac starting to attack Ukraine..

Being a Brit, that is how I saw things for over a year .. but as time passed, I began to realize
that there is a lot more to it. I don't believe that Russia's BRICS partners see Putin as a maniac..
..we are all subject to being brainwashed, whatever nation we belong to.

 

[Nimos]

True, although if the West is attempting to advance a "holier than thou" position, then they're making a comparison which should be thoroughly examined.

Can you discern the difference in the following statements?

"We don't like what country X is doing because it could negatively impact upon our national interests."

"We don't like what country X is doing because we judge it as immoral."

The first statement expresses an amoral point of view similar to capitalism, where decisions are made based solely on making money and profit, without regard for moral principles.

The second statement implies that one has the qualifications and moral standing to judge what is moral or immoral.

Sure, but I don't think you can really split the two, it's not one or the other. One might be more dominating in certain cases than others.

However, I do think we can at least draw some conclusions and based on what we see in the world there is a clear stream of refugees going from these "moral" countries to the immoral EU and US and not the other way.

Sure, we have a part to play in the world and what is going on, but largely it is up to each country and how they are governed and why things go as they do. It is too easy to just point fingers at us and keep in mind that by far the most countries we don't interfere with at all and still they are not doing particularly well, given the system they are ruled under. Which in many cases are oppression and lack of freedom mixed with a lot of corruption.

Seeing how Russia and China treat their own people, do you think that is something that would make for a more moral world if their national interests were the dominating ones?

That said, I don't think that countries are necessarily "up for grabs," as that can be complicated too. But such things can and do happen, as they have throughout history. There is some historical truth to the notion that "the big fish eat the little fish," but the larger, more severe wars happen when the big fish choose to fight each other. NATO might be seen as a "big fish," and countries which align with NATO can be protected by being part of a "big fish."

I agree with you in the sense that it shouldn't be like this. Humanity should strive for higher ideals and higher principles. We can do better than this, but we have chosen the wrong path. People who advocate for capitalism constantly say that "Socialism doesn't work because human nature." Maybe they're right. Maybe it's just in our nature to prey on each other, and there's no way of ever changing that. More is the pity.

I agree, nothing has probably changed about this ever

But it makes sense to at least bet on the least of the worst big fish out there rather than the worst of the worst.

It's not that people don't care or that they're not humanitarians (well, some may not be), but my goodness, it sure does get tiresome over the years. Americans who serve in the military have friends and family who care about them and wouldn't want to see them placed in harm's way unnecessarily or without any reasonable cause. Moreover, when it seems that we're pushing closer to the brink of nuclear destruction, that raises the stakes even higher.

I can fully understand that, but also a lot of it is caused by the US themselves, the Iraq war was basically a lie, yet had no consequences for your politicians who were behind it. The US people didn't care apparently.

Then you/we had the whole terrorist period, which wasn't war against countries really, but against fanatics and again a lot of these were supported and protected by countries that didn't want to deal with them.

The US was already in a conflict with what they saw as "international communism," which goes back to 1917 (or even earlier). We decided that we didn't like them right off the bat, before they even did anything and without even giving them the slightest benefit of the doubt. Obviously, our relationship changed because of our alliance in WW2, and some might have thought that it could lead to a more cooperative and friendly post-war relationship.

The US still suffer from this whole thing, just as Russia does when it comes to Nazis, which is obviously why Putin uses that excuse. The same with the US, you mention socialism and 99% of the US is ready to execute the person who said it.

And it probably could have, but Stalin had other plans, again Russia isn't exactly famous for its good caring politicians. Stalin killed millions of Russians

Putin's competitors seemingly have a huge difficulty standing near windows without falling out of them. So again, the Western allies and the US might not be perfect, but at least it is a hell of a lot better than these other countries.

 

[Nimos]

Clearly, many people do care .. I care.

I also care about the fact that "the man that pays the piper calls the tune", and corruption
exists in both Russia and the West.

I therefore cannot rely solely on CNN or BBC for information about these wars that have
escalated into serious political conflicts. I need to know the background, as each party sees it.

All media is biased but to very different degrees.

I do trust Danish media in general, even if they occasionally are internally politically biased. But they wouldn't get away with openly lying to the Danish people.

Being a Brit, that is how I saw things for over a year .. but as time passed, I began to realize
that there is a lot more to it. I don't believe that Russia's BRICS partners see Putin as a maniac..
..we are all subject to being brainwashed, whatever nation we belong to.

Of course they don't see him as such, because pretty much all these countries are governed by dictators or an elite whose main concern is to maintain power. But that doesn't necessarily reflect the population which flees to the EU constantly from a lot of these countries. If things were as good in those countries why flee?

 

[soulsurvivor]

It's undeniable that at the European Union there are people who wants us Europeans to be at war against Russia.

You are aware that Russia invaded Ukraine and not the other way around, right?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Of course they don't see him as such, because pretty much all these countries are governed by dictators or an elite whose main concern is to maintain power..

There you go again .. arrogantly believing that the west is superior to the global south.

But that doesn't necessarily reflect the population which flees to the EU constantly from a lot of these countries. If things were as good in those countries why flee?

That comes across as provocative .. Europe is filling with refugees from countries that have
been invaded by the West. Of course, they come up with many reasons why they do this, but it
is now beginning to backfire .. all they have done is to increase global instability .. for a perceived short-term gain.

 

[muhammad_isa]

You are aware that Russia invaded Ukraine and not the other way around, right?

It takes two to tango .. the blame game gets us nowhere.

The US invaded Afghanistan .. right?
Ah, but they had their reasons .. so there you go .. don't be so simplistic.

 

[soulsurvivor]

It takes two to tango .. the blame game gets us nowhere.

So, if somebody hits you, is it partly your fault? If somebody rapes you, is it partly your fault?

The US invaded Afghanistan .. right?
Ah, but they had their reasons .. so there you go .. don't be so simplistic.

US invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban refused to arrest and give up Al Qaeda leaders.

However, the US was wrong to invade Iraq just like Russia is wrong to invade Ukraine.

 

[Nimos]

There you go again .. arrogantly believing that the west is superior to the global south.

It has nothing to do with being arrogant.

That comes across as provocative .. Europe is filling with refugees from countries that have
been invaded by the West. Of course, they come up with many reasons why they do this, but it
is now beginning to backfire .. all they have done is to increase global instability .. for a perceived short-term gain.

Syria is a civil war, which led to many refugees. Many others come from Africa which has little to do with Europe. The Ukrainians come because of Russia.

Then you have Afghanistan which obviously was a disaster on many fronts, which I agree is partly due to Europe, but mostly due to the US just leaving and letting everything fall apart after having spearheaded it in their war against terrorism, which the Taliban refused to do anything about, so you can't even blame the US solely for that, and the Afghani people apparently instantly gave up and let Taliban take control once again, and that most of all taught us a lesson.