Are you suggesting that after suffering so much in the past, Russian people need to trust westerners again? Evan after so many broken agreements, wars that they have caused, regime changes, support for dictatorships of worst kind?
It is was clearly explained so many times in the past. And most of the world understands it.
1 Like
The Russian people donât need to trust the west , east , north , south , or their own regime but they also should not just invade a neighbour who did nothing to them and was already brutalised by the Russians in the past
4 Likes
So, because you donât trust the west, it is ok to invade a weaker neighbouring country? Sorry, but I donât see the logic in that.
Also, you havenât actually said it out loud, but are you seriously trying to defend Russiaâs actions here?
3 Likes
Meanwhile on a positive note Nordstream is getting a Egypt/Israeli Southstream sibling. See peace is an option and Putin sees his energy hold weakening.
2 Likes
If only western democratic people could elect less warmongering leaders world would be much happier place.
Thatâs the same guy who pushed Ukraine into confrontation with their own people and neghbours.
And in 2016, different warmongers though.
Ukrainians, and their western overlords, had eight years to implement Minsk agreements (and UN resolutions). Russian people were very patient. Things only got worse. Last time around patience costed Russians more than 20mil lives.
Whey, of course not.
And this is what Ukranian president had in store for people and children of Donbass.
So much hate, for his own people.
Then what are you trying to prove here? I am genuinely asking, because if you are not trying to defend Russiaâs actions in Ukraine, then what is it that these claims need to support?
That you are Nazi supporter.
Never forget.
Personally, I find Nazism disgusting. Together with those who support it, or stay quiet when it is happening.
Thatâs pretty hurtful coming from someone who is literally supporting a fascist regime.
Also, itâs false. Ukraine is not a fascist, let alone Nazi, dictatorship. Itâs a democratic republic, or at least moreso than Russia, or Serbia for that matter. They may have issues with far-right nationalism, but thereâs few countries who donât these days. Having issues with far-right nationalism is however far from being a full-blown fascist dictatorship. That map you show is pretty, but it does not represent the real views on the issue. Rather it is a UN vote on a resolution Russia puts up every year to smear the US. If you actually bother looking into the explanation of the US vote, you will find the following.
These thinly veiled attempts of smearing Ukraine as nazis is characteristic of your arguments in this disussion so far. Itâs thin, itâs outrageous, itâs offensive and itâs hypocritical. Most importantly, itâs wrong. Thereâs no coherent argument that states a fact and connects it to a logical conclusion.
If weâre going to call in bloggers, I might as well throw up this: https://youtu.be/E7VFNCGkbvY It will do a much better job at logically debunking your lies than I could do with limited time.
6 Likes
BTW, that was related to your inability to see logic. Just wanted to show you how dangerous it is to make assumptions.
Logic of security is such that it is indivisible - there canât be security for the western elite if there is no security for Russia, China, Serbia, Libya, Syria, âŚ
At the moment, west is run by idiotic warmongering elite that endangers security for the whole planet. Planet is finally fighting back.
Listen, learn.
âI have never seen a situation in which totalitarian control was so extreme as it is in the United States right now.â
The pot calling the kettle black. If there is anyone who has demonstrably shown an incapability of logic and reasoning it is you @dejan. Your logic goes as far as: âWest bad, thus Russia goodâ. You have also shown an incapability to recognize how arguments are build up and attack its constructions. When presented with fallacies in your logic, you just present a new argument, because you are actually incapable of constructive arguments. If you blame me for making assumptions, point them out and explain how they are wrong, but that is not something you can do, because I donât speak bullshit. You speak a lot of it however.
This doesnât exactly prove anything youâve said earlier. You also donât even try to connect it to a reasonable argument or explain how the two are related. You just put it out there in the hope people agree with the statement and therefore agree with your argument. Constructive arguments donât work like that.
Yeah, sure, but I donât see how global warming is related to the topic.
On another day, I will gladly have a discussion on how the US is f*cked in so many different days, but not with the connotation that doing so proves the validity of an aggressive war or a dictatorial regime.
Additionally, Noam Chomsy, for all the good that he did, has had a few bad takes on the conflict. Let a few Ukrainian scholars point out his logical fallacies. The problem with leftist intellectuals like Chomsky is that they are so hyper focused on the US that they bend the role of others in an argument to better serve their anti-American opinions. Now I donât like America either with its large fascist movement, but that doesnât mean I should disregard the imperialism of others. Itâs not just about the US.
And please read that article of those Ukrainian scholars, because they very accurately and with very simple language attack the logical fallacies Russophiles such as you tend to have. Open Letter to Noam Chomsky (and Other Like-Minded Intellectuals) on the Russia-Ukraine War - Notes - e-flux
3 Likes
The latest from Austria:
1 Like
You keep on missing the point - there is no argument here. This is a public forum that deals with history, events that, in my view, led to something that will change the world for ever.
I am presenting my view that might be of interest for some.
I am interested to see what otherâs views are. Your views are of little interest for me, since they reflect propaganda and irrational hatred that I can see elsewhere.
I read it.As usual, waste of time. Low level American âacademicsâ (economists at that - how is economy going?) with ties to Ukraine and NGOs, produced inconsequential propaganda pamphlet with their opinions and not supported with any evidence other than their, pretty irrelevant, opinions.
On the other hand, opinion of ex-president of Ukraine could be of more value - in this interview given on June 15 to several media, including Radio Svoboda (subsidiary of the Radio Free Europe station, financed by the United States Congress)
The former Ukrainian president confessed that the Minsk agreements, which Moscow has been demanding for several years, had served kyiv to strengthen its armed forces, and not to put an end to the conflict in the Donbass.
That somewhat contradicts opinions of âacademicsâ - peace and diplomacy were not of general interest for Ukrainian leadership. They were more interested in confrontation with their citizens and neighbours, as directed by US/NATO.
Realists are not pro-Russian, Russophiles or anti-west. We just follow the facts and evidence and connect the dots.
Two hours worth spending on understanding how did we get where we are and danger of our predicament.
Imagine sitting there for two hours, listening to some boring-ass lecture by some no-named professor, all so you can get your daily dose of confirmation-bias. Sad.
2 Likes
Correct, because itâs busted. You just donât dare to admit it.
A view thatâs provably false and therefore shouldnât be listened to by anybody.
The propaganda and hatred you spew is damaging and therefore it deserves to be fought.
I you mean that you can see rational arguments elsewhere but still choose to believe this crap, then that says a lot about your mental capabilities.
1 Like
I personally wouldnât call professors at UC Berkeley low level academics, but then you do somehow believe that prof. Maersheimer has any credibility. Interesting how that works. Apparently you decide whether someone has any credibility based on whether you believe them. Apparently you also think that their Ukrainian heritage is irrelevant to the argument. This says a lot about your selectiveness with arguments.
This is some very disingenuous framing you are doing. First of all, this interview is actually pretty hard to find, so it would have been nice of you to actually provide a proper reference. Also, in the same context, the Ukrainian leadership explained how they donât saw Moscowâs claims as credible and that the Minsk agreements served their purpose in delaying an outright confrontation with the Russian Federation. Peace was never an option for Moscow and the Ukrainians knew it.
Now take that out of context and you can somehow spin the line âUkraine does not trust Russiaâs promises on peaceâ into âUkraine wants war with its neighboursâ. Ukraine does not want war, but it also doesnât want to be a Russian puppet. They have a right to self-determination like everybody else.
3 Likes
Hate to point out this and many other articles pointing out that the:
1 Sanctions arenât really working India and China are still buying oil and paying for it big time
2 Russia is actually defeating the Ukranian forces, they can adept to
3 In spite of the ginormous planned outlays it take lots of time to get new weapon systems
Also I doubt whether there still is a real will to confront Russia, so far sending some weapons and letting the Ukranians doe the dying is one thing but I personally I am not sure if the NATO/EU Europe is really ready or even should want a face off. E.g should a direct war be risked for Lithuania? Is there political will.
I am not very positive about it and the âRussia has already lostâ jubilant voices have quiteted down.
1 Like