Best get back to posting up Twitter links then.
Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24
- Thread starter kebabking
- Start date
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
What about the day before yesterday and maybe even stretching it to a few months before ?
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
tbf fella that a fair point but this thread evolved from just a standard PNP Thread
lots of people had the fear when this started and a lot of discussion has gone into taking down that fear
*fear being nuclear Armageddon
plenty of nice people to offer advise and understanding
all it takes is someone to engage like you have
Last edited:
gosub
~#
The period i'd look at is GWBush, post 9/11. Putin was in power . Bush was trying to build consensus about Islamic terrorism. Russia was reasonably sympathetic but voicing concerns about US getting involved with Ukraine and Georgia was talk of roping Russia in on air defense iirc....20 years on and Putin s talking holy war and buying drones off the Iranians. funny old worldI don't see the problem with revisiting old ground in a thread.
This thread is neigh 640 pages long now and folk will dip in and out and it is a discussion that some may come to later in the development of the war.
I've followed the thread from day one but having only recently read some of the the historical stuff on NATO, and the fall of the former soviet union I have actually found it really interesting. I also value the knowledge and insight that a number of posters on this thread have so much so that would like to engage with their thoughts about what their views are about some of what I've read, but to be honest the willy waving that goes on here just puts you off.
I don't have a massively informed opinion on some of these things but I know that in order to bolster my opinion it would help me from engaging in discussion with people who's views I'd benefit from engaging with IYSWIM.
If people can't ask questions that revisit previously discussed areas on a 600 page thread without being shouted down then it's not a discussion its just a "We did this 6 months ago" closed shop.
Where's the scope for advance dialogue and creating a shared consensus in that? Where's the actual 'Ongoing' discussion?
It seems it's OK to have a few pages of calling each other dickwads and wankstains but it's verboten to revisit themes and concepts that have previously been discussed by the main contributors of the discussion.
Wasn't this why a lot of board members historically said they stopped contributing to P&P and something we've said we'd sort out numerous times over the years?
Just asking like
Anyway, I found this an interesting read.
NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard | National Security Archive
Western leaders gave multiple assurances against NATO expansion to Gorbachev in 1990-1991 according to declassified American, Russian, British, Germans documentsnsarchive.gwu.edu
If anyone can recommend anything else without sending me that old Google meme I'd appreciate it.
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
Cheers.tbf fella that a fair point but this thread evolved from just a standard PNP Thread
lots of people had the fear when this started and a lot of discussion has gone into taking down that fear
*fear being nuclear Armageddon
people of nice people to offer advise and understanding
all it takes is someone to engage like you have
Yup thanks, been reading/podcasting a little on that sort of period too. It beats watching television.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
I never post Twitter links.
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
a_chap
When the world came apart, where were you?
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
Are you believing some alternate reality where NATO expansion played no role whatsoever?
Fucking hell. Tell me what the last 600 pages decided then.
aye , sure you did not have a hand in anything
personally i blame nato
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
What can I say chappers, some days I just awake from my dream where I'm a karma loving hippy and think we could all get along a lot more easierAre you... new to these boards by any chance?
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
Let me know when it's passed by enough that it's the 90's again. I wasn't paying much attention to this sort of stuff then...Well I guess that will inevitably happen as time passes by.
UnderOpenSky
baseline neural therapy
Let me know when it's passed by enough that it's the 90's again. I wasn't paying much attention to this sort of stuff then...
View attachment 351880
Which one is you?
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
The smokey eyes and the red lipstick mate. I had a big thing for glitter and pop socks in those days
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
Let me know when it's passed by enough that it's the 90's again. I wasn't paying much attention to this sort of stuff then...
View attachment 351880
I’ll give you a shout in 2049.
friedaweed
Me and me girl named Jane
I bet it'll be all KAYTO's fault by thenI’ll give you a shout in 2049.
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
In view of the latest protracted arguments on here, and against my better judgment:
conflict
1. an active disagreement between people with opposing opinions or principles…dictionary.cambridge.org
The word 'conflict' you used to describe the war suggests a symmetry of claims etc, seriously at odds with the fact that Russia invaded Ukraine and is still seeking to destroy it.
That dictionary definition you posted does absolutely nothing to counter that.
It's a morally vacuous position that draws no distinction between the claims of Ukraine to national integrity and of Russia to a belligerent imperial landgrab.
I used it as a synonym of war. You’d argue black was white and sugar was shite.In view of the latest protracted arguments on here, and against my better judgment:
The word 'conflict' you used to describe the war suggests a symmetry of claims etc, seriously at odds with the fact that Russia invaded Ukraine and is still seeking to destroy it.
That dictionary definition you posted does absolutely nothing to counter that.
It's a morally vacuous position that draws no distinction between the claims of Ukraine to national integrity and of Russia to a belligerent imperial landgrab.
maomao
普費斯
It's a perfectly reasonable synonym of war and I can't find any evidence that it has any of the connotations claimed. But if you argue for anything less than throwing every last Ukrainian life after every last inch of Ukrainian soil on this thread then you'll be accused of wanting to suck Putin's cock.
The cause of the conflict is that Russia unilaterally decided to invade Ukraine. The leaders of Russia made the decision to send thousands of destructive weapons and tens of thousands of brutalised troops to go into another country, destroying, killing, raping and torturing as it went.
Having been invaded, the leadership of Ukraine decided to fight back and the result is conflict.
What you’re asking is not the cause of the conflict. You’re asking why the leaders of Russia chose to invade another country. It’s not the same question. As I noted earlier, discourse is not neutral. Questions are not neutral. Dialogue is directed and used to a purpose. That purpose comes into focus when somebody looks at the situation in Ukraine and says “why are they fighting?” Why do you think they’re fighting?? Somebody tries to kill you, you respond.
Having been invaded, the leadership of Ukraine decided to fight back and the result is conflict.
What you’re asking is not the cause of the conflict. You’re asking why the leaders of Russia chose to invade another country. It’s not the same question. As I noted earlier, discourse is not neutral. Questions are not neutral. Dialogue is directed and used to a purpose. That purpose comes into focus when somebody looks at the situation in Ukraine and says “why are they fighting?” Why do you think they’re fighting?? Somebody tries to kill you, you respond.
What is irritating and happens frequently, including this recent example, and maomao is quite right on, is that folk are eager to pounce on what they perceive as your motivations. If you’re not singing perfectly from the hymn sheet then you must secretly support Russia really.
Motivations are embedded into questions. They always exist, and if you think there isn’t one, that just means you’re blind to your own motivation.
The questions I asked earlier were these
Those are pretty important framing questions for a discussion about causes of things.
I didn’t say there wasn’t one. I said people make it about what they perceive it to be. It’s tedious.
Well then counter that by spelling out your motivation. What is your purpose — what do you want to do with these answers? Why these questions at this time? Why should this be the focus of inquiry?
Fuck me, why not just deal with the substantive content instead of demanding a psychoanalytical shakedown?
maomao
普費斯
If we're to apply these rules to all questions asked on Urban75 (even just the 'serious' threads) most of the answers are going to be 'cause I was bored/curious/drunk/fancied a chat/fight etc.' It's a very high standard to hold us to and not one that has been evenly applied.
Similar threads
