Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Putins satan 2 dooms day

Status
Not open for further replies.
NoXion said:
Did NATO hold a gun to the collective heads of the Kremlin and force them to start salami-slicing pieces of Ukraine? Or were there other things Russia could have done in order to convince their neighbours to stay in a Eurasian geopolitical orbit, rather than move into a trans-Atlantic one?

If anything, the Russian occupation of Ukraine has become the best advertisement in favour of NATO membership since the end of the Cold War. Putin and his lickspittles might as well accept payment from NATO for being such effective recruiting sergeants.
Click to expand...
Ooo just remembered I have salami in the fridge.
 
Isambard said:
The message from the pro-war establishment is the same as usual: If you question the narrative and try to see a bigger picture (this is about more than innocent ickle wickle Ukraine being attacked) than you are a friend of "Puťler".

But the difference is now that the pro-war establishment has had years to establish a narrative and much of the supposed "left" (bunch of bloody Guardian reading liberals but hey-ho) has been co-opted.

The outcome of the war between NATO & Russia won't be decided via a demo for peace, but what actually happens on the ground and when Washington decides it is in their their interest to stop.
Click to expand...
No
 
NoXion said:
Ah yes, the "narrative of the pro-war establishment". Remind me, the foreign troops that have been occupying Ukrainian territory since 2014, along with conducting a wholesale invasion in 2022, where do they come from? They are from Russia, yes? Not NATO? It astounds me how self-professed "anti-war" types in the West will ignore the blatantly obvious. The Kremlin's actions make them as pro-war as it's possible to get short of starting WWIII, but strangely enough they never figure in "peacemonger" rhetoric.

What's this "bigger picture" that apparently excuses Russian warmongering? NATO expansion? OK, let's keep widening our scope. Why might so many of Russia's neighbours prefer a NATO presence over a Russian one?
Click to expand...
I DON'T Support the Russian Invasion of de jure Ukraine, I wish we could go back to before 2014 somehow. But it is the powers in Kyiv that have pišşed it all away.

The "wider picture" is worldwide geopolitics. The "Belt & Road" initiative, oil being sold in currencies other than USD, BRICS, coup d'etats in Sahel Africa......

I've a had a while off Urban and just putting my tootsies back in to it as opposed to being some new "fcukwit" turning up. It is interesting to watch how the tenor has somewhat changed.

Saddam Hussein was a nastier guy than that there "Puťler", but more people questioned back then the narrative of the Iraq war for example.
 
Isambard said:
I DON'T Support the Russian Invasion of de jure Ukraine, I wish we could go back to before 2014 somehow. But it is the powers in Kyiv that have pišşed it all away.

The "wider picture" is worldwide geopolitics. The "Belt & Road" initiative, oil being sold in currencies other than USD, BRICS, coup d'etats in Sahel Africa......

I've a had a while off Urban and just putting my tootsies back in to it as opposed to being some new "fcukwit" turning up. It is interesting to watch how the tenor has somewhat changed.

Saddam Hussein was a nastier guy than that there "Puťler", but more people questioned back then the narrative of the Iraq war for example.
Click to expand...
Nah. This is just putinophile bullshit.
 
Isambard said:
I DON'T Support the Russian Invasion of de jure Ukraine, I wish we could go back

Saddam Hussein was a nastier guy than that there "Puťler", but more people questioned back then the narrative of the Iraq war for example.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "de jure" in this context? Isn't it a a term used with regard to legal recognition of a territory's status used in contrast to ""de facto". I wasn't aware that you were an international legal institution.

As to Iraq, I would have thought the more appropriate comparison would be between Putin and Bush as aggressors trying to establish their place the in history books; and Zelenski and Saddam, with the latter probably being nastier than the former, as victims of imperial overreach.
 
I wonder how the NAFO crew are going to argumentativly deal with the situation if and when it comes to pass that NATO doesn't win this war.

Looking back now to WW1, the "rah rah rah, we're going to smash the horrible Huns" rhetoric seems horrible as hundreds of thousands of young working class men died in the squalor of the trenches in a war of the bosses on both sides.

But here we are, 100 years later doing it again
 
tim said:
What do you mean by "de jure" in this context? Isn't it a a term used with regard to legal recognition of a territory's status used in contrast to ""de facto". I wasn't aware that you were an international legal institution.

As to Iraq, I would have thought the more appropriate comparison would be between Putin and Bush as aggressors trying to establish their place the in history books; and Zelenski and Saddam, with the latter probably being nastier than the former, as victims of imperial overreach.
Click to expand...

de jure as in the legally recognised frontiers of Ukraine before 2014.

But frontiers are not forever cast in stone, as anyone living on that there Pox Island should be aware. An independent Scotland and united Ireland are quite possible within my lifetime.
 
Someone correctly above mentioned Russian financial support for dodgy right wing parties. Absolutely spot on to call that out.

But we then also need to need to talk about money, the media and dodgy practices from "our" ruling class influencing the political discourse domestically and of course how they operate in other European states.
 
Perhaps a better example would be in independent Scotland, but where the rUK then invades Borders, Lothian, and The Western Isles, deports a proportion of the population of those areas, and makes access to healthcare, schooling, and welfare dependent on taking up the offer of a rUK passport for the rest, while providing generous grants for people from Newcastle, London, Birmingham and Cumbria to go and live there.

It then holds 'referenda' at two days notice where a surprising 99.98% of the population vote to sever ties with Scotland, and for those territories to become indivisibly part of England.

Would you recognise those new borders, or is that different....?
 
Isambard said:
Saddam Hussein was a nastier guy than that there "Puťler", but more people questioned back then the narrative of the Iraq war for example.
Click to expand...

I mean, I'm taking a wild stab in the dark at this, but maybe because they are totally different things? And there's been loads of discussion on here about the war from all types of positions ffs.

Isambard said:
But we then also need to need to talk about money, the media and dodgy practices from "our" ruling class influencing the political discourse domestically and of course how they operate in other European states.
Click to expand...

That gets discussed endlessly, I mean this is a broadly left wing forum that has literally thousands of threads on things like that. Go and discuss all the other things on other threads, or bring them up on Ukraine ones when they're relevant. But just going on about them slightly randomly is straight from the playbook of a certain type of 'anti-imperialist'.
 
Isambard said:
I wonder how the NAFO crew are going to argumentativly deal with the situation if and when it comes to pass that NATO doesn't win this war.

Looking back now to WW1, the "rah rah rah, we're going to smash the horrible Huns" rhetoric seems horrible as hundreds of thousands of young working class men died in the squalor of the trenches in a war of the bosses on both sides.

But here we are, 100 years later doing it again
Click to expand...
NAFO are a meme spewing irrelevance. As to the Great War analogy, there are no troops from Britain or other NATO states going to fight on that distant land of which you seem to know nothing. Many of the Ukrainians I meet have been dispossessed, robbed, brutalised and in at least on case raped by the occupying forces. Whatever outside interests there may be, they see themselves as resisting occupation, not as pawns of International Capital.
 
Last edited:
kebabking said:
Mick Wallace is also a tax dodging property developer, and with Clare Daly the most quoted western politicians on Chinese state media.

Both have consistently voted against all sanctions on Russia.

Of course, being a student of history like all good 'leftists' you'll know that it was Labour who took the UK into NATO, and Labour who drove through the UK nuclear weapons program, and they have held to those commitments in every post war government they've formed.

Your version of the left - which is friends with every vile regime on the planet - are not labour, and you are not the left.
Click to expand...
Mick Wallace & Clare Daly an unflattering piece in the Irish Times:

How Clare Daly and Mick Wallace became stars of authoritarian state media
 
Isambard said:
I wonder how the NAFO crew are going to argumentativly deal with the situation if and when it comes to pass that NATO doesn't win this war.

Looking back now to WW1, the "rah rah rah, we're going to smash the horrible Huns" rhetoric seems horrible as hundreds of thousands of young working class men died in the squalor of the trenches in a war of the bosses on both sides.

But here we are, 100 years later doing it again
Click to expand...
NAFO will manage. You don't need to be concerned on their behalf.

And the kind of "rah rah rah" thing you gripe about is SOP for any government engaged in warfare - you need the support of the citizenry to engage in conflicts, particularly long ones. I don't see how that in itself could invalidate the reasons for the conflict.
 
America and the rest of the West are up to their necks in blood.
Doesn't mean because your anti West you are any better or even much much worse.
a pox on both your houses is fair

supporting an obviously bad guy like putin is just stupid at least Castro had an ideology behind and wasn't nearly as bad as America's puppets in Latin america.
Putin is just a tryant theirs no putinism just wibble about how Russia must protect itself from invasion by NATO.

nobody's invading Russia it's has nukes and is a polluted undeveloped wasteland
 
existentialist said:
Nah. This is just putinophile bullshit.
Click to expand...
It's a bit more complicated than just being a Putinophile, isn't it?

There's a section of the left who haven't moved on from 2003 in the white heat of Bush and PNAC and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. NATO are the bad guys. The Libyan misadventure only reinforced the idea that NATO are a force for bad. And NATO, the military of western capitalist states, are bad guys. They act on behalf of the western capitalist states in the interests of western capitalist states. But they are not THE bad guys, the only bad guys. There's plenty of others to go around. But this is a point that some on the left have trouble getting their heads around. The mullahs, Assad, the CCP, Putin, they're all given the benefit of the doubt because western capitalist states, the NATO states, don't like them. It's some kind of 'enemy of my enemy' reaction, if the NATO states are against them it must be because of NATO, because NATO are THE bad guys, the premier root of evil in the world. The idea that the Iranian, Syrian, Chinese and Russian states are rotten to the core and deserve to be replaced by their people for their people bounces off those on the left who think this way, because they know in their hearts that NATO are THE bad guys and everything must therefore come down to them.

And Russian state propaganda, always ready to feed anything that causes disruption in western capitalist states, has been quite happy to encourage this line of thinking.

When Putin and his circle decided to invade Ukraine it was their choice for their nationalist, expansionist, Greater Russian reasons. Of course there's a larger geopolitical picture and the Russian state building itself up as an opposing power block to the NATO states is a feature. But it wasn't NATO, beside it's existence as the military of western capitalist states, that made the Russian state invade Ukraine; it wasn't Ukraine, beside Zelensky's aim to move towards closer ties with the west, that made the Russian state invade Ukraine. It was the Russian state seeking to expand/return it's influence to the region, to Make Russia Great Again, that made them invade. Russian imperialism. The NATO states have supported and armed Ukraine as a block to Russian Imperialist expansion. And from that point of view, there is an element of NATO states vs the Russian state in the war. And for people who see NATO as THE bad guys, that means, to maintain their simplistic worldview of good vs bad, minimising the Russian state's 100% culpability for this war and looking for ways to pin the blame on NATO, because, y'know, it just HAS to be NATO's fault somehow.
 
I don't know why people are drawing parallels between the invasion of Ukraine and the Gulf War. For one thing, there were two Gulf Wars. I supported the first, because Iraq had invaded Kuwait. This was roughly parallel to what is happening now, and nobody thought that Kuwait was necessarily on the side of the angels. That wasn't the point. I didn't support the second Gulf War, because I didn't consider Saddam to be a credible threat to anyone at that particular time. Whether he was in the abstract better or worse than Putin is neither here nor there.
 
ouirdeaux said:
I don't know why people are drawing parallels between the invasion of Ukraine and the Gulf War. For one thing, there were two Gulf Wars. I supported the first, because Iraq had invaded Kuwait. This was roughly parallel to what is happening now, and nobody thought that Kuwait was necessarily on the side of the angels. That wasn't the point. I didn't support the second Gulf War, because I didn't consider Saddam to be a credible threat to anyone at that particular time. Whether he was in the abstract better or worse than Putin is neither here nor there.
Click to expand...

Two Gulf Wars?! That were different?! Get away with your complicated history.
 
"Seem to know nothing"?

Before the horrible war started I spent the previous 15 years visiting, about twice a year, every corner of Ukraine, from Uzghorod to Luhansk.

My Ukrainian language skills really just enough to survive, but where possible I spoke to as many people as possible and hungrily read all I can about Ukraine in the media.

Also a fair number of contacts with Ukrainians in UA and abroad through working with socially progressive NGOs active in and with Ukraine.

So, not claiming to be an expert; but neither are my opinions and knowledge off the back of a cornflakes packet or given to me by an FSB handler.
 
Isambard said:
I DON'T Support the Russian Invasion of de jure Ukraine, I wish we could go back to before 2014 somehow. But it is the powers in Kyiv that have pišşed it all away.

The "wider picture" is worldwide geopolitics. The "Belt & Road" initiative, oil being sold in currencies other than USD, BRICS, coup d'etats in Sahel Africa......

I've a had a while off Urban and just putting my tootsies back in to it as opposed to being some new "fcukwit" turning up. It is interesting to watch how the tenor has somewhat changed.

Saddam Hussein was a nastier guy than that there "Puťler", but more people questioned back then the narrative of the Iraq war for example.
Click to expand...

I didn't say you supported the invasion. I honestly don't know why Western "anti-war" types keep turning such a blind eye to Russian warmongering. I suspect there are multiple causes for such a failing.

BRI is a Chinese thing. Oil being sold in non-USD currencies is indicative of the US continuing its slide down from being the post-Cold War hyperpower that it used to be. Coups in Africa are a regrettably frequent occurrence as part of the legacy of colonialism and on-going neo-colonialism. You're gonna have to do a bit more dot-joining than throwing out geopolitical occurrences seemingly picked at random.

People questioned the second Iraq War because it was obviously based on bollocks, much like the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
 
Isambard said:
I DON'T Support the Russian Invasion of de jure Ukraine, I wish we could go back to before 2014 somehow. But it is the powers in Kyiv that have pišşed it all away.

The "wider picture" is worldwide geopolitics. The "Belt & .
Click to expand...



Isambard said:
Road" initiative, oil being sold in currencies other than USD, BRICS, coup d'etats in Sahel Africa......

I've a had a while off Urban and just putting my tootsies back in to it as opposed to being some new "fcukwit" turning up. It is interesting to watch how the tenor has somewhat changed.

Saddam Hussein was a nastier guy than that there "Puťler", but more people questioned back then the narrative of the Iraq war for example.
Click to expand...
Given the weaponisation of the dollar with regards Russia ...fair enough. Though would say from that perspective Russia already ceded to Beijing. Think that side of things about to heat up (oh and China has misstepped with regards G20)

First Gulf War. Iraq was out of order though US Ambassador telling Saddam it was a local matter that the US wouldn't involve itself with didn't help...Helicopter policing should never have been allowed in the settlement.
Second Gulf war...Vice should have won an Oscar.


I don't think Ukraine Russia ends when Washington says it does...I get what you are saying but given the atrocities there's going to be bad blood there for a generation
 
Q
Isambard said:
"Seem to know nothing"?

Before the horrible war started I spent the previous 15 years visiting, about twice a year, every corner of Ukraine, from Uzghorod to Luhansk.

My Ukrainian language skills really just enough to survive, but where possible I spoke to as many people as possible and hungrily read all I can about Ukraine in the media.

Also a fair number of contacts with Ukrainians in UA and abroad through working with socially progressive NGOs active in and with Ukraine.

So, not claiming to be an expert; but neither are my opinions and knowledge off the back of a cornflakes packet or given to me by an FSB handler.
Click to expand...

Your posts on this thread don't reflect that background.

Instead of the clichés, why not focus on the reactions of those you know to the 2014 and 2022 conflicts? Do they support being integrated within the Russian state? Do they support armed or passive resistance to what they perceive as occupation? Are they indifferent to which regime they live under? To what extent does their reaction reflect the region that they come from?
 
tim said:
The invasion happened nearly a decade ago. It's now time for a few home improvements.
Click to expand...
Fairly sure I'm not in crimea. Could do with repainting the bathroom I guess. Just seems weird to downplay an invasion by giving it the same name as a building extension.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

danny la rouge
International Day for the Remembrance of the Slave Trade and its Abolition (23 Aug)
Replies
2
Views
218
Gramsci
Gramsci
P
Mexico Presidential Elections 2/6/24
Replies
7
Views
585
planetgeli
P
trashpony
Car ploughs into people at Christmas market in Magdeburg 20/12/24 - at least 2 dead and 60+ injured
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
AnnO'Neemus
A
Bingoman
Turkish terror attack 23rd October 2024
Replies
4
Views
862
_Russ_
_Russ_
kebabking
  • Poll
US 2028 election?
2
Replies
54
Views
1K
tim
tim
Back
Top Bottom