I know this is off topic but it seems like the more things change, the more they stay the same. Keep safe all Timeghosters.
Lack of leadership, false flag operations, separatists movements and brinksmanship diplomacy. I’m not sure if it’s 1938 or 2022 some days. My leader is Joe Biden and it makes me fondly remember Neville Chamberlain.
As the risk of delving into current-day politics (and already seeing comparisons to WWII), here’s my post.
Me thinks Biden’s Chamberlain moment was the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, but hey, assuming the current situation is one – Biden has come a long way from talking tough. He ran on big words, and when Putin pulled a President Polk by tempting Ukraine, Biden blinked.
Whatever you may think of Putin, the man is not Hitler, and it is a testament to either historical illiteracy or blind partisanship if one seriously believes that. Now, you can make comparisons to Chamberlain and Hitler, but that’s up for debate.
This ethno-linguistic map of Ukraine might help explain the situation:
There are parts of Ukraine that are ethnically Russian that want to either secede, or join with Russia. And then there is the Ukrainian government. Tensions have been escalating between the Ukrainian government and separatist republics in the east over the past few years, and Russia wants a buffer between it and the Ukraine, whose government is seeking to join NATO.
Did you just copy and paste what the BBC said about Trump? The BBC isn’t the arbiter of truth, especially in recent years – no news outlet is. Seriously folks, look at this:
You (and the BBC) skipped the part where it becomes obvious he’s mocking Putin’s “peacekeeping” excuse:
Wars of aggression are illegal in international law according to the UN Charter. That is part of why Trump found it so “genius” to turn it into a peacekeeping force. It’s no surprise when you consider how many times the United States pulled that off. You’re being misled if you honestly believe that Trump would’ve been the aggressor in this situation, considering the media’s obsessive hatred for him and blatant chicanery.
It really boils down to one simple thing – Putin did this because he knew he could. Biden wants peace (at least in the eyes of the public) but Biden doesn’t know how to make peace.
Listen to Putin’s speech about why he entered Ukraine and one would realize how futile the threats of sanctions are – an important element of peace is you must actually size up your opponent and address their concerns, not just call one a bully and threaten no dessert as if he were a mischievous child. Economic sanctions are sloppy at best and unnecessary in this case – because the country has already been under sanction for years – and are likely to result in your opponent being encouraged to do more – because he could.
Putin is quite open when talking about the economic wrongs he feels the West has done against him, how Russia has been left away from the table, has spurned agreements and discussions and so on. He’s going to do what he feels is right for him.
Is that right? No. But, you must at least his point of view to address the situation.
Biden’s adherence to ideology is making the United States laughing stock in a world full of very tough and real opposition.
Trump’s right – Putin made a smart move that was in his best interest. And this isn’t me being a cheerleader for Putin. It’s just political reality. You can hate Trump all you want, but never deny political realities because of mere political differences.
If you want my view on things, I’m honestly not that pessimistic on this situation – it’s all saber-rattling and fear-stoking. And the prospects of war in Europe was the same fear we all had when the Russians got to Crimea seven years ago. I would suggest calm in this situation. If anything, fearmongering can lead to us getting closer to war than we would like to think (in a way, Iraq in 2003 is an example of that).
You can discuss the politics too, as long as it’s important to the story – hence my post. The current situation in Ukraine is incomplete without the more, shall we say, charged elements. But I completely understand why one might be hesitant to bring up current-day politics – it can get too toxic.
And, like the discussions around TIK, I believe even TG isn’t fully able to make such discussions go anywhere.
Basically, the UN writes a strongly-worded letter at first and then they call for member countries to intervene.
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
ARTICLE 2 (para 4)
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means.
The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.
As for your second question:
If Ukraine attacks Russian forces acting as “peacekeepers,” then yes. Russia could declare that this was an act of aggression against a “peaceful force” and retaliate.
Yes, I know, but initially I just asked, for clarification, if your comparison was negative or positve ment to Chamberlain, as I think it could be read both ways.
But, after thinking about it, I found your comparison rather interesting, and after all, I guess we are in this forum to learn from history to create a better furture.
My thoughts are:
In hindsight i’ts very easy to judge Chamberlain very harsh, but England was not ready to go to war for Sudentenland alone. So maybe hed did all that was possible at that time? And I think the German strategy at that time, can be compared to the strategy Puitin is following now. Also I guess Putin now holds ulinmited power with control of all aspect of society, including the press. A powerbase with many similarities to Hitlers.
So, if You draw a timeline of events, I agree there are some stunning similarities.
I think luckily no one here thinks this truly. This comparison has been made too much in election campaign and there is no more effective way to rightfully infuriate the Russians. I used to work in Russia actually during the last crises. Lots of Russians have lots of opinions on history. The discussed these opinions over Vodka and quite happily worked together. Getting into fights over it makes no sense. There are some historical issues as well, like in our time (-79 years ago) The Black sea fleet base is to Russia of vital importance and also there is the inconvenient issue that too many Ukranians joined the fight against Stalin. Also the Ukraine still often is rightfully in the crosshairs of the Simon Wiesenthal center and the Ukranian Azov forces are not angels. This is a wildly complex conflict not a good versus evil thing, hope it will be dealt with sensibly.
The one thing you didn’t mention about the UN Security Council was the veto powers of the permanent members. They use those to stop actions they don’t like and it makes this a very weak body to correct wrongs and stop wars
I agree history judged Chamberlain harshly in some respects. I know England was not ready for war but between 1938-1939 did they do much to get ready? I would say they did just enough to survive 1940 but not enough to deter war.
Will history judge this as any more than just an ongoing ethnic unrest? Not sure except I’ll be long gone.
It appears to me that Putin, who is not Hitler lol is interested in readjusting his borders to suit his desires to restore Russia to it’s Soviet glory. He is not a good guy but he aids the separatist movements and possibly creates them to benefit Russia. Do I think I believe the west that he is going to launch an all out assault? No. Do I think a lot of people are going to get hurt and start the next long brewing crisis yes.
Maybe the better comparison is the balkans around 1900.
Either way wars can happen by accident and mismanagement and that is more what I fear here.
We will see if Putin stops at the Polish and Slovak border or if he will continue until he is at the North sea.
For China this is a good thing as with the focus on the Russian war of aggression it will a great time for them to make their move on Taiwan
Well Well, It turned out that Mr. Putin was much more like Hitlier that we dared to think.
Donbas = Austria/Sudetenland
Ukraine = Tjekkoslovakia/Poland
Shelling and unrest in Donbas = Fake polish attack on German radio station
“We move in to protect”, the reason Hitler used to invade Denmark/Norway
Unlimited power over military, goverment and press
Supression of all opposition, election rigged, democracy has ceased to exist.
Inncer cirkle onlys says what he wants to hear
So sad that this story is now repeated. Stay strong Ukraine