• 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!

Ukraine has become a dictatorship, it's official

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It's about who cares about the ultimate fate of the people of Ukraine. You're saying that as long as people stop dying in a bloody war, you don't care what happens to the people who were invaded and are being repressed by a violent occupier. The Russians could have avoided a bloody war by not starting a bloody war. The people of Ukraine are fighting for their rights to live as free individuals... clearly they are willing to sacrifice their lives in order to maintain their freedom. They BENIFIT by keeping their right to self determination. Why are the Russians willing to sacrifice their lives? In order to BENIFIT from the oppression of other people. If the Russians want to stop sacrificing their lives for that goal, they're welcome to do so at any time, by going back where they came from.

I realize that there's been a great deal of resentment and bad blood between the Ukrainians and the Russians, perhaps going back to the Soviet or even the Tsarist period. The Ukrainians have just cause to be resentful of the treatment they received under Russian and/or Soviet rule back in the day. I would never deny that. (Although, strictly speaking, the Russians also suffered under their own government as well.)

When the Berlin Wall fell, the Warsaw Pact dissolved, and the USSR broke up, I thought we were entering a new era. It seemed that the old Cold War rivalries were ending and we could usher in a new era of peace. I was hopeful and idealistic back then. I grew up in the 60s and all the calls for peace and anti-war messages. During the 70s and 80s, the prospect of nuclear brinkmanship was also foremost on my mind. But I still believed that there could be peace, there would be no need for any war between the superpowers. That's what I cared about then, and I still care about that now.

The thing is, looking back, I realize that it didn't really have to come to this. When the USSR broke up, we had a golden opportunity to establish better relations with Russia which could have been mutually beneficial. Somehow, our relationship soured, for a variety of reasons. That's also another peripheral factor in all this. If we had better relations with them, we might have been able to persuade them to restrain their aggressive impulses.

So, I do care about the people involved, but I look at this situation and other wars around the world, and it just seems like utter madness to me. Why can't people just sit down and talk about their differences like rational adults?
 

lukethethird

unknown member
Then why are you directing all of your anger at targets other than Russia?


Oh, brother. And you wonder why people point out that you're defending Russia. This is why. Your whataboutism is a defense of Russia.
I am very disappointed in Russia, I thought Russia held themselves to a higher standard than the US and UK, not really, but still very disappointed. Now the US and UK, along with their little lackey nato nations have Russia right where they always wanted them, in a proxy war in Ukraine and all at the expense of Ukraines, how convenient is that? The US and the UK can drag this on for a long time, well, "for as long as it takes" they say. Meanwhile Russians and Ukraines are dying and for what?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Yet again, you talk about "practical reality", but your proposed solution is for Ukraine to just magically obtain a ceasefire without concessions or giving in to demands. When I pointed that out, your response was that maybe the western powers and Ukraine should try to negotiate, as if they hadn't done that already. Then when I pointed that out, your response was "well, we can hope, can't we?".

It's all negotiable. It might take a bit of give and take. Diplomacy. Ever hear of it?

And now you're back to pretending you're the one advocating for a "practical option". Ukraine has three options:

Surrender and let Russia win completely.
Agree to a ceasefire and Russia's demands, which means giving up significant territory and not joining NATO.
Keep fighting and trying to defend themselves.

The only "practical option" is for them to keep fighting, unless the pressure finally gets to Putin and he backs off. There is no "just sign a ceasefire with no conditions from Russia" option.

Except for the fact that more of their people will die by picking the third option. And they're not likely to get those territories back anyway. That is the practical reality here.

So, they can fight and die, and still not get back their territory.
Or they can stop fighting and live, and still not get back their territory.

I know it sounds like a bad deal either way, but when you come right down to it, this is the choice they have.
 

lukethethird

unknown member
I know that countries that have a lot of land are still capable of wanting, and conquering, more land.

Incredible, I know. Try to keep your brain from blowing.
Well, we all know Putin's inner thoughts, that he woke up one morning and decided that Russia had to expand for the sake of expanding, and that morning was as good as any morning to proceed with that plan. That's how these things come about, having thoughts about expanding the country for the sake of expanding, it's really brilliant when you think about it. That Putin, you have to admit, he's a crafty one. Good thing that you and Magic Man are on to him.
 
Last edited:

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
It's all negotiable. It might take a bit of give and take. Diplomacy. Ever hear of it?



Except for the fact that more of their people will die by picking the third option. And they're not likely to get those territories back anyway. That is the practical reality here.

So, they can fight and die, and still not get back their territory.
Or they can stop fighting and live, and still not get back their territory.

I know it sounds like a bad deal either way, but when you come right down to it, this is the choice they have.
And CLEARLY they're choosing to fight to retain their freedom and to retake the territories that have been stolen from them. You must have been disappointed with Russia for quite some time now, since they've been invading their neighbors for years prior to invading Ukraine. If Ukraine gives up like you're suggesting, that's just an invitation for Russia to invade yet another nation state.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
And CLEARLY they're choosing to fight to retain their freedom and to retake the territories that have been stolen from them. You must have been disappointed with Russia for quite some time now, since they've been invading their neighbors for years prior to invading Ukraine. If Ukraine gives up like you're suggesting, that's just an invitation for Russia to invade yet another nation state.

I think back to the time when Walter Cronkite told the world that the war in South Vietnam could not be won. The U.S. kept fighting for several more years before finally agreeing to end it. South Vietnam was lost. You win some, you lose some.

And it would also appear that not all Ukrainians are choosing to fight.


 

lukethethird

unknown member
And CLEARLY they're choosing to fight to retain their freedom and to retake the territories that have been stolen from them. You must have been disappointed with Russia for quite some time now, since they've been invading their neighbors for years prior to invading Ukraine. If Ukraine gives up like you're suggesting, that's just an invitation for Russia to invade yet another nation state.
Does Ukraine have a snowball's chance in hell of regaining the territory that they have lost? If this war escalates as some in Washington are eager to suggest, this world will be a dangerous place for everyone, everywhere. Is that strip of land that Russia has taken worth the risk of an all out world war?
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Does Ukraine have a snowball's chance in hell of regaining the territory that they have lost? If this war escalates as some in Washington are eager to suggest, this world will be a dangerous place for everyone, everywhere. Is that strip of land that Russia has taken worth the risk of an all out world war?
If Ukraine decides to let Putin get away with his land grab, do you think there's a snowball's chance in hell that Putin won't see this an an invitation to just grab more? The Ukrainians obviously aren't so foolish... they know that if they let him take part of their country today that he'll be snatching up the rest of it tomorrow.
 

lukethethird

unknown member
If Ukraine decides to let Putin get away with his land grab, do you think there's a snowball's chance in hell that Putin won't see this an an invitation to just grab more? The Ukrainians obviously aren't so foolish... they know that if they let him take part of their country today that he'll be snatching up the rest of it tomorrow.
That is based on pure speculation. I am not privy to Putin's inner thoughts nor to how he and his inner circle go about their strategies. They were foolish enough to send the troops into Ukraine because now they are bogged down in a proxy war with the US and it's nato lackeys. Is it worth gambling with Ukraine lives and a possible escalation by nato forces, all based on our guesses as to what Putin and his inner circle have in mind for the rest of the world?
 
Last edited:

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
I am very disappointed in Russia, I thought Russia held themselves to a higher standard than the US and UK, not really, but still very disappointed. Now the US and UK, along with their little lackey nato nations have Russia right where they always wanted them, in a proxy war in Ukraine and all at the expense of Ukraines, how convenient is that? The US and the UK can drag this on for a long time, well, "for as long as it takes" they say. Meanwhile Russians and Ukraines are dying and for what?
I think this says it all. You thought Russia was better than this, but you didn't think the U.S. and U.K were. It's fine to be disillusioned with the U.S. and U.K. It's incredible to not think Russia is at least as bad, if not worse.

NATO are not lackey nations. The U.S. and U.K. in no way have Russia right where they want them. This is not a proxy war in that way. Russia wanted Ukraine. Putin wanted a war to drum up support. That's the cause of them invading Ukraine. Russians and Ukrainians are dying because of that, not because of anything NATO, or America or Britain have done.

And this is exactly why people point out that you support Russia. Your bias is anti-west and pro-Russia.
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
It's all negotiable. It might take a bit of give and take. Diplomacy. Ever hear of it?
We already went over this. I pointed out that obviously they've already tried that. The fact that you suggest it as if it's some wise move that maybe they haven't thought of yet shows either severe dishonesty on your part of ignorance of how things work. Neither is good.

Your response before was to say "but we can hope, right", to which I already replied. Now you're going back to this again for some reason. It would be better not to keep going back and forth. Obviously they've tried diplomacy. That failed before the invasion, because Russia isn't interested. Putin wanted this war. It's probably taken more out of them that he expected, but he probably still sees it as a net positive.
Except for the fact that more of their people will die by picking the third option. And they're not likely to get those territories back anyway. That is the practical reality here.

So, they can fight and die, and still not get back their territory.
Or they can stop fighting and live, and still not get back their territory.

I know it sounds like a bad deal either way, but when you come right down to it, this is the choice they have.
No, it's not. It's your flimsy version of their choice that only serves to support your incorrect point. It's possible that by fighting they still lose, but then that's always the case in a fight/war.

If their top concern was their citizens not dying, they wouldn't have tried to defend themselves. Their top priority is not being taken over by Russia. For that, they're willing to fight, which is completely understandable. Your decision for them that they should make not dying their first priority is condescending and ignorant. They have chosen this, whether it appeals to you personally or not. They don't want to surrender to Russia. That's all there is to it. So, there options are to keep fighting and hope for the best, or surrender either partially or fully.

This is the whole point of us saying if you want peace, you want Russia to stop and go home. That's what it would take for true peace. Anything less than that is less than true peace.
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
Well, we all know Putin's inner thoughts, that he woke up one morning and decided that Russia had to expand for the sake of expanding, and that morning was as good as any morning to proceed with that plan. That's how these things come about, having thoughts about expanding the country for the sake of expanding, it's really brilliant when you think about it. That Putin, you have to admit, he's a crafty one. Good thing that you and Magic Man are on to him.
I mean, you don't even have to know his inner thoughts, just his actions and his past. Then you'd know that he didn't wake up one day and decide to expand for the sake of expanding. He saw an opportunity in Ukraine to create a pretext for an invasion, and he decided to use it to drum up support for himself at a time when it was waning a bit.

The one thing he didn't do is say "Hey, that mean old west keeps invading us, so I better take over a sovereign country to create a buffer zone and defend Russia".

And yes, he is a crafty one. That's how he's interfered in so many elections in other countries without facing consequences. But good thing you and Stevicus are here to defend him.
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
I think back to the time when Walter Cronkite told the world that the war in South Vietnam could not be won. The U.S. kept fighting for several more years before finally agreeing to end it. South Vietnam was lost. You win some, you lose some.

And it would also appear that not all Ukrainians are choosing to fight.


Wait, an entire population of millions of people don't all feel the exact same way about something!? Are you serious!? That has to be the first time in history that has ever happened!
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
That is based on pure speculation. I am not privy to Putin's inner thoughts nor to how he and his inner circle go about their strategies. They were foolish enough to send the troops into Ukraine because now they are bogged down in a proxy war with the US and it's nato lackeys. Is it worth gambling with Ukraine lives and a possible escalation by nato forces, all based on our guesses as to what Putin and his inner circle have in mind for the rest of the world?
Who's gambling with Ukrainian lives? Again, this isn't a proxy war. Russia invaded Ukraine. Ukraine are defending themselves. They're making the decision of whether or not to fight.

And it's not based on pure speculation. It's based on Putin's history and character. He's a dictator who has already annexed land that wasn't his, held sham elections, killed political opponents and interfered in foreign elections to create strife in the west. To anyone not trying to defend him, it's very clear who he is and what he wants. It's not exactly a secret.
 

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
Sounds like what Mussolini did in the twenties.
Outlawing all parties but his own.
Kind of like what Putin has done. But of course I know you love him, so if he does it, it's OK. It's only when someone you've been conditioned to hate does it that it's a problem. What were you saying about double standards?
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Kind of like what Putin has done. But of course I know you love him, so if he does it, it's OK. It's only when someone you've been conditioned to hate does it that it's a problem. What were you saying about double standards?
But Russia has not applied to join the EU. Ukraine has.
So...well...they really need to exit the Middle Ages and become a democratic state, if they want to become a EU member state.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Kind of like what Putin has done. But of course I know you love him, so if he does it, it's OK. It's only when someone you've been conditioned to hate does it that it's a problem. What were you saying about double standards?
Putin meets PM of Hungary, Orban


For promoting peace. Thoughts? ;)
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
But Russia has not applied to join the EU. Ukraine has.
So...well...they really need to exit the Middle Ages and become a democratic state, if they want to become a EU member state.
But perhaps that is why many were not so fond of Russia joining NATO after the USSR broke up, given they might have required some assurance that Russia was indeed capable of being in the same century as others when all the indications were that it just wasn't. What, with all the oligarchs taking their slices out of Russia and no one to stop them - apart from taking their own percentage. :eek:
 
Top