Ukraine has become a dictatorship, it's official

[Kathryn]

There is a serious Nazi problem TODAY in Ukraine. Not 80 years ago, TODAY.

Svoboda (political party) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Opinion | Ukraine's Nazi problem is real, even if Putin's 'denazification' claim isn't

Not acknowledging this threat means that little is being done to guard against it.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[Stevicus]

But which choice would that be?
1) Have Ukraine surrender.
Russia would see that this tactic of expansion works.
It might continue, eventually causing WW3.

We don't know that, but they wouldn't have to surrender. They could just declare a ceasefire and keep the lines as they currently are. Realistically, what other choice do they have? They can't get those territories back on their own, and they're locked in a war of attrition they can't win.

The Russians would likely be careful about any more expansionist designs. I don't agree that they would see how this tactic of expansion works. We have to play it more like a game of chess and consider the entire global situation, as there are other countries in play here. Iran, North Korea, China. There are multiple countries which don't share the Western perceptions of geopolitics, and we have to consider their point of view and how it appears in their eyes.

Or stopping Russian aggression.
2) Continue defending Ukraine.
Risk Russia escalating it to WW3.
3) ____________________________________

All have their risks.

There are definitely risks which could lead to WW3. My view is that, for the moment, just stop fighting. They don't have to surrender or yield anything, but just an agreement to stop shooting at each other. Perhaps they can at least do that for starters, and then slowly try to work towards some sort of peaceful resolution.

What are the other solutions? We could keep sending them military aid and equipment, but their manpower is not inexhaustible. The Russians have a larger pool to conscript from. They grow enough food to feed themselves and they have the resources and infrastructure to go in for the long haul. In 5-10 years, we'll be in the exact same situation, yet more lives will have been lost. What is the purpose in that? At best, it's a stalemate.

Having said that, I acknowledge that we can't tell the Russians or Ukrainians what to do. If they want to keep fighting, then it's really their choice in the end. All we can really do is ask what our government can do about this situation. Is the government even telling us the truth about it? That's a perfectly valid question, I think. You and I both know the government's track record on certain things.

 

[Estro Felino]

But which choice would that be?
1) Have Ukraine surrender.

Ukraine will be turned into a modern EU state.
The constitution will outlaw foreign interference from overseas, from the CIA, from the FBI...etc...

Russia would see that this tactic of expansion works.

Russia won't expand.

 

[Revoltingest]

We don't know that...

Duh.
I spoke of multiple possibilities.

....but they wouldn't have to surrender. They could just declare a ceasefire and keep the lines as they currently are. Realistically, what other choice do they have? They can't get those territories back on their own, and they're locked in a war of attrition they can't win.

The Russians would likely be careful about any more expansionist designs. I don't agree that they would see how this tactic of expansion works. We have to play it more like a game of chess and consider the entire global situation, as there are other countries in play here. Iran, North Korea, China. There are multiple countries which don't share the Western perceptions of geopolitics, and we have to consider their point of view and how it appears in their eyes.



There are definitely risks which could lead to WW3. My view is that, for the moment, just stop fighting. They don't have to surrender or yield anything, but just an agreement to stop shooting at each other. Perhaps they can at least do that for starters, and then slowly try to work towards some sort of peaceful resolution.

What are the other solutions? We could keep sending them military aid and equipment, but their manpower is not inexhaustible. The Russians have a larger pool to conscript from. They grow enough food to feed themselves and they have the resources and infrastructure to go in for the long haul. In 5-10 years, we'll be in the exact same situation, yet more lives will have been lost. What is the purpose in that? At best, it's a stalemate.

Having said that, I acknowledge that we can't tell the Russians or Ukrainians what to do. If they want to keep fighting, then it's really their choice in the end. All we can really do is ask what our government can do about this situation. Is the government even telling us the truth about it? That's a perfectly valid question, I think. You and I both know the government's track record on certain things.

You say "...for the moment, just stop fighting.".
One?
Which?
Both?
Why not say "just stop invading" to Russia?

 

[Revoltingest]

Russia won't expand.

I assume that you mean Russia "won't expand"
beyond the borders it feels entitled to, even
if they're within other countries.

 

[Magic Man]

I haven't seen much in the way of "fact" coming from either of you. It's more like bombastic badgering and faux outrage which is getting very tedious. All I see is sanctimonious, accusatory drivel, but not much in the way of historical fact.

If you haven't seen any facts from us, then I encourage you to actually read what we're saying. Then you'd see the facts we've presented, and this would go much more smoothly.

But yes, there is a lot of sanctimonious, accusatory drivel devoid of historical fact here, coming from you. And that is indeed very tedious. So, if you'd like to stop and try to actually support your claims, that would be an improvement.

 

[Magic Man]

Oh please. Don't give me this. I learned and studied about Russian history largely because of the Cold War. I was curious about them and wanted to find out why they were considered by many to be a dangerous adversary. I wanted to learn about the world around me, not just from our own point of view, but also what it looked like from the other side of the hill. I've read both sides, both points of view and how they look at the world, and I feel qualified to comment on both.

I can assure you that I haven't been the only American to form certain views of the American government and the propaganda techniques used to convince and persuade Americans to support the Cold War policies of global militarism and interventionism. Of course, there was the other side, the ones who, according to you, told me that I was "wrong." They were the warmongers. They were the ones who favored wars in places like Vietnam and interventions and interference all around the world.

The Soviets also did things like this, so I'm not letting them off the hook or buying into their propaganda either. You make a serious miscalculation when you say that I'm buying into somebody's propaganda.

I wasn't really looking at propaganda anyway, but rather pointing how they might see the world and how it differs from the commonly-held perceptions of the West. I think that, in order to coexist with other nations in this world, it's important and vital to understand how they see things and how they look at the world. It's important to understand and appreciate how they perceive us, as the United States.

I will not apologize or be told that I'm "wrong" when I demonstrate an honest understanding and attempt to know about another country and how they see the world. Even if you see them as an "enemy," then it's equally vital to know your enemy. Part of this means having an accurate and objective understanding of their perceptions and motivations.

I believe that we can make peace. Does that make me some kind of villain? Seriously, does it?

You are promoting the idea that all Russia has done is try to defend itself, and that its expansion is just to create a buffer zone because they've been invaded numerous times. And that is all perfectly understandable.

That's Russian propaganda. It's fine to not buy into America's version of events fully. It's fine to be skeptical of American claims about Russia, especially from the 50s-90s. Just don't go so far that you start promoting Russian propaganda like this.

I totally agree it's important to have an accurate and objective understanding of others' perceptions and motivations. That's why I'm correcting you and offering accurate and objective understandings of Russia's perceptions and motivations.

And spare me the passive-aggressive non sequitur. Everyone wants peace. Promoting Russian propaganda is not the way to go about that.

 

[Magic Man]

There is a serious Nazi problem TODAY in Ukraine. Not 80 years ago, TODAY.

Svoboda (political party) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Opinion | Ukraine's Nazi problem is real, even if Putin's 'denazification' claim isn't

Not acknowledging this threat means that little is being done to guard against it.

www.nbcnews.com

Yup, as we've discussed, just like in America and some European countries. Look at the recent French and European elections, where the far right made huge strides. Right now, the far right and Nazis are gaining a lot of ground throughout the west.

Russia is not trying to get rid of Nazis. Putin's own regime has a lot in common with them. He is a right-wing dictator who thrives on anti-minority propaganda. He's more likely to cozy up to Nazis than try to get rid of them. Your own link points out that his justification is BS:

"But even though Putin is engaging in propaganda"

 

[lukethethird]

I haven't seen much in the way of "fact" coming from either of you. It's more like bombastic badgering and faux outrage which is getting very tedious. All I see is sanctimonious, accusatory drivel, but not much in the way of historical fact.

Oh please. Don't give me this. I learned and studied about Russian history largely because of the Cold War. I was curious about them and wanted to find out why they were considered by many to be a dangerous adversary. I wanted to learn about the world around me, not just from our own point of view, but also what it looked like from the other side of the hill. I've read both sides, both points of view and how they look at the world, and I feel qualified to comment on both.

I can assure you that I haven't been the only American to form certain views of the American government and the propaganda techniques used to convince and persuade Americans to support the Cold War policies of global militarism and interventionism. Of course, there was the other side, the ones who, according to you, told me that I was "wrong." They were the warmongers. They were the ones who favored wars in places like Vietnam and interventions and interference all around the world.

The Soviets also did things like this, so I'm not letting them off the hook or buying into their propaganda either. You make a serious miscalculation when you say that I'm buying into somebody's propaganda.

I wasn't really looking at propaganda anyway, but rather pointing how they might see the world and how it differs from the commonly-held perceptions of the West. I think that, in order to coexist with other nations in this world, it's important and vital to understand how they see things and how they look at the world. It's important to understand and appreciate how they perceive us, as the United States.

I will not apologize or be told that I'm "wrong" when I demonstrate an honest understanding and attempt to know about another country and how they see the world. Even if you see them as an "enemy," then it's equally vital to know your enemy. Part of this means having an accurate and objective understanding of their perceptions and motivations.

I believe that we can make peace. Does that make me some kind of villain? Seriously, does it?

Yes, calling for peace will make you a villain on this forum. In fact a poster told me peace advocates can't be trusted. My government along with others make enemies and I refuse to partake in the demonizing of people from other nations. I'm not obedient to the powers that be that call out for war and for that I am considered a Putin sympathiser on this forum. Yagottaluvit.

 

[Magic Man]

My view is that, for the moment, just stop fighting. They don't have to surrender or yield anything, but just an agreement to stop shooting at each other. Perhaps they can at least do that for starters, and then slowly try to work towards some sort of peaceful resolution.

Between this and the "Russia already has enough land, so clearly they're not doing this just to gain more land", it's hard to take anything you post here seriously.

Ukraine is fully ready to stop fighting and shooting. All Russia has to do is stop attacking them and trying to invade their country. Do you go up to a bully beating on a smaller kid and say "Now, if you both would just agree to stop fighting..."?

The peaceful resolution is for Russia to stop its attack, retreat back to their own country and offer aid in rebuilding Ukraine after they destroyed so much of it. It's fully up to Russia to stop the fighting.

 

[Magic Man]

Yes, calling for peace will make you a villain on this forum. In fact a poster told me peace advocates can't be trusted. My government along with others make enemies and I refuse to partake in the demonizing of people from other nations. I'm not obedient to the powers that be that call out for war and for that I am considered a Putin sympathiser on this forum. Yagottaluvit.

What does it mean for you to call for peace? Is your call for peace for Russia to stop its attempt at invasion and go back to its own country?

Calling for peace is great. Everyone wants peace. Everyone wants the fighting in Ukraine to stop (except for Putin, unless it means full Russian victory). You calling for peace doesn't make you a villain. It all depends on how you want that to go. The only proper way for peace to happen is for Russia to end its attempt at invasion. If you're calling for that, we're on the same page. If you're calling for something else, you'll have to explain why.

 

[Stevicus]

Duh.
I spoke of multiple possibilities.


You say "...for the moment, just stop fighting.".
One?
Which?
Both?
Why not say "just stop invading" to Russia?

Both should stop fighting, with no further advances. This would also imply no further invading on Russia's part or any further penetrations into Ukrainian territory.

In the absence of any viable military method, plan, or strategy of extricating them from the territories they currently occupy, then this is the situation at hand. A cease-fire might let things cool off a bit, and somewhere down the line, they might be able to convince the Russians to withdraw. They might be just looking for a way to do so and still save face, so if we can offer them something that allows them to do that, it could be a win-win for all.

However, if the West's goal is to demonize, punish, and humiliate Russia, then they might end up with a hornets' nest on their hands.

 

[lukethethird]

Between this and the "Russia already has enough land, so clearly they're not doing this just to gain more land", it's hard to take anything you post here seriously.

Ukraine is fully ready to stop fighting and shooting. All Russia has to do is stop attacking them and trying to invade their country. Do you go up to a bully beating on a smaller kid and say "Now, if you both would just agree to stop fighting..."?

The peaceful resolution is for Russia to stop its attack, retreat back to their own country and offer aid in rebuilding Ukraine after they destroyed so much of it. It's fully up to Russia to stop the fighting.

This is a proxy war between Russia, USA and it's little lackey allies like Canada and Latvia, etc. Ukraine has little to no say in the matter, theirs is to sacrifice their lives to satisfy those that want to see Russian soldiers die.

 

[Stevicus]

And spare me the passive-aggressive non sequitur. Everyone wants peace. Promoting Russian propaganda is not the way to go about that.

Wrongly accusing others of "promoting Russian propaganda" doesn't seem a very productive exercise either.

 

[Stevicus]

Between this and the "Russia already has enough land, so clearly they're not doing this just to gain more land", it's hard to take anything you post here seriously.

Ukraine is fully ready to stop fighting and shooting. All Russia has to do is stop attacking them and trying to invade their country. Do you go up to a bully beating on a smaller kid and say "Now, if you both would just agree to stop fighting..."?

The peaceful resolution is for Russia to stop its attack, retreat back to their own country and offer aid in rebuilding Ukraine after they destroyed so much of it. It's fully up to Russia to stop the fighting.

Well, you're perfectly free to go there and tell them that. I'm sure they'd listen to you.

 

[Revoltingest]

Both should stop fighting, with no further advances. This would also imply no further invading on Russia's part or any further penetrations into Ukrainian territory.

That sounds like ceding to Russia
the territory already taken.

However, if the West's goal is to demonize, punish, and humiliate Russia, then they might end up with a hornets' nest on their hands.

You show great sympathy for Russians.
Consider that the west wants to defend
Ukraine (& other potential victims)
against the invader.

 

[Magic Man]

This is a proxy war between Russia, USA and it's little lackey allies like Canada and Latvia, etc. Ukraine has little to no say in the matter, theirs is to sacrifice their lives to satisfy those that want to see Russian soldiers die.

That has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said. You said when you call for peace, you're labeled a villain. I pointed out that it depends on how you want peace. If you want Russia to stop trying to invade other countries, which would create peace, then great. That's what most of us want. If you mean something else, you'd have to explain.

 

[Stevicus]

Yes, calling for peace will make you a villain on this forum. In fact a poster told me peace advocates can't be trusted. My government along with others make enemies and I refuse to partake in the demonizing of people from other nations. I'm not obedient to the powers that be that call out for war and for that I am considered a Putin sympathiser on this forum. Yagottaluvit.

I think a lot of people on the forum can handle disagreements without making more out of it than just a disagreement. There might be some posters I disagree with on this topic, but I might agree with them on other topics. It doesn't have to turn into some kind of horrible thing.

 

[Magic Man]

Wrongly accusing others of "promoting Russian propaganda" doesn't seem a very productive exercise either.

Indeed. Luckily, no one is doing that here. You are promoting Russian propaganda, and I'm pointing that out.

 

[Magic Man]

Well, you're perfectly free to go there and tell them that. I'm sure they'd listen to you.

What an amazingly wonderful cop-out! If you're going to offer such drivel, why bother replying?