• 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!

What Europeans think about this War

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Sino? They attacked indonesia, Philiipines,
numerous island, Britain, Holland and the USA.
Thailand, Burma...forced the
French to surrender territory.

Italy didnt get a raw deal in WW1.

Russia attacked Finland and Poland.


Yeah, the politics of the era was a tragic mess, then and now. And what, collectively, have we learned from the relatively recent past?
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
I personally think that NATO should stay as a defensive alliance.
.
So do I.
I would like to remind the NATO that the Constitutions of Germany (art 26) and Italy (art 11) consider the notion of war as an instrument of attack or aggression, uncostitutional.
It is juridically admissible only and when the territory of these two countries is invaded.
So as an instrument of defense.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Perhaps. But Hitler rose independently of WW1 & Russia.
He could've worked the same duplicitous deal with the Czar.


He certainly didn’t rise independently of WWI. And nothing in Europe between 1917 and 1989 happened independently of the momentous events which occurred in Russia in October 1917. The account of the October revolution written by American journalist John Reed, was aptly titled “Ten Days That Shook The World”.

Hitler’s fragile psyche was certainly scarred by WWI, as was Germany’s collective mindset. The collapse of the Weimar economy in 1923, which helped create the conditions that allowed extremism to flourish, probably wouldn’t happened in anything like the same manner has it not been for the punitive terms inflicted on Germany at Versailles.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
This European thinks the same about this war as he does about every other; that after several millennia of increasingly industrialised, ever more destructive warfare, humanity is faced with a simple choice; either find another way to resolve differences between tribes, cultures, nations and neighbours, or watch the lights go out for ever. The only way to win a war, is for both sides to stop fighting.

There are no civilised sides in war. You can say that in Ukraine Russia is the aggressor, but once you meet aggression with aggression, there is no civility left. War is the ultimate failure of diplomacy, and in every case, both sides have failed.

Advocates of the “just war” philosophy tend to cite WWII as their best example. But even this seemingly existential struggle between good and evil, was a direct result of the failure of diplomacy in 1918, when excessively punitive terms were imposed on Germany by the Treaty of Versailles.

Since there is a war currently going on (in the Ukraine), do you admit that you have also failed and lost your civility?
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This European thinks the same about this war as he does about every other; that after several millennia of increasingly industrialised, ever more destructive warfare, humanity is faced with a simple choice; either find another way to resolve differences between tribes, cultures, nations and neighbours, or watch the lights go out for ever. The only way to win a war, is for both sides to stop fighting.
I absolutely agree. The question though is what do we do when one side wants diplomacy but the other side keeps fighting?
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
I absolutely agree. The question though is what do we do when one side wants diplomacy but the other side keeps fighting?
What the EU has already done - try and wreck their economy to make their war more difficult in the longer term.

This is difficult because EU is quite dependent on Russia in some key areas, of course.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
What the EU has already done - try and wreck their economy to make their war more difficult in the longer term.

This is difficult because EU is quite dependent on Russia in some key areas, of course.
Well that’s what the EU has done, but what can Ukraine itself do?
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Zelensky asked the Italian Parliament to freeze Russians' accounts and to close the ports to their ships.
Yeah...in a parallel universe...maybe
In the interspace.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Zelensky asked the Italian Parliament to freeze Russians' accounts and to close the ports to their ships.
Yeah...in a parallel universe...maybe
In the interspace.
That will happen soon if not already.
Ukraine has offered "heroic" resistance to the Russian invasion, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi said after the Ukrainian leader's speech.

"The arrogance of the Russian government has collided with the dignity of the Ukrainian people, who have managed to curb Moscow's expansionist aims and impose a huge cost on the invading army," he told parliament.

Ukraine war latest: We are on brink of surviving war with Russia says Zelensky - BBC News
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I don't think that an unelected banker represents people's will.
On 17 February, Draghi won a confidence vote in the Senate, with 262 votes in favour, 40 against and 2 abstentions.[77] On the following day, he won a further confidence vote in the Chamber of Deputies with 535 votes in favour, 56 against and 5 abstentions; this margin represented one of the largest ever majorities in the history of the Italian Republic.
The elected representatives love him and want him to lead.
Mario Draghi - Wikipedia
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hold out for as long as possible, try to negotiate a ceasefire.
I guess I’m not sure what that means. Hold out? I don't think Ukraine fired a shot until Russia invaded. Once an invasion begins, should the invaded country refrain from fighting back?
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
I absolutely agree. The question though is what do we do when one side wants diplomacy but the other side keeps fighting?


If by 'we' you mean concerned nations not directly involved in the conflict, I'd say we should do everything possible to get humanitarian aid to the victims, and everything possible to get Putin to the negotiating table with Zelenskyy. That may involve supplying weapons to Ukraine, though personally I'm uneasy about that.

No idea what I'd do as a 60 year old man, if I lived in Kyiv rather than London. Get my family out if I could, then pray for guidance, I suppose. Most people caught up in these conflicts don't have much choice anyway; it doesn't look like those Russian boy soldiers want to be there anymore than anyone else does..
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
I guess I’m not sure what that means. Hold out? I don't think Ukraine fired a shot until Russia invaded. Once an invasion begins, should the invaded country refrain from fighting back?
I meant it in this sense:
1 : to remain unsubdued or unyielding
"where 30 of the … refugees were still holding out"— Anna Tomforde

also : to continue to function or be available
"prayed that the engine would hold out"
"as long as our money holds out"

2 : to refuse to go along with others in a concerted action or to come to an agreement
"holding out for a shorter workweek"
Definition of HOLD OUT
 
Top