War propaganda, 'Realists' and neocons, and the denigration of the war sceptics

[RD2003]

oh right, you refuse to make an effort with your posts because you feel other people don't bother. pisspoor

If you were to give me 100 lines I wouldn't complain.

 

[Pickman's model]

If you were to give me 100 lines I wouldn't complain.

i'm not feeding you material

 

[likesfish]

Arms industry makes money hand over fist if there's no war the cold War was a boom time. No awkward questions when the kit fails to perform.
Russias previous occupation of Eastern Europe and its inability to be a good neighbour fueled NATO expansion.
It's security concerns would be much like the British Demanding the Parachute Regiment garrisoned Dublin because London was worried about the actions of the IRA.
Russia was a military occupier invaded Hungary Poland and the Czechs us the baltic States.

 

[RD2003]

Arms industry makes money hand over fist if there's no war the cold War was a boom time. No awkward questions when the kit fails to perform.
Russias previous occupation of Eastern Europe and its inability to be a good neighbour fueled NATO expansion

NATO expansion got underway when Russia was on its knees and a threat only to itself.

 

[xenon]

I'm not expanding time and energy on trying to work out how a fucking peace deal might work, for the benefit of about 7 people on here. Unlike the U75 armchair generals, I pretend no expertise in that area or any other.

I simply believe that a peace deal would be better than continuing slaughter, and that every effort should be made to secure one.

Incredible stuff, thanks for contributing.

, is this the callibre of stuff you've been posting in these other threads. Hint: no one sane would disagree with your last paragraph but how to get there. I'd suggest abandoning Ukraine does not get there and goes quite a long way in the opposite direction.


Never mind, leave it to the big brains.

 

[RD2003]

Incredible stuff, thanks for contributing.

, is this the callibre of stuff you've been posting in these other threads. Hint: no one sane would disagree with your last paragraph but how to get there. I'd suggest abandoning Ukraine does not get there and goes quite a long way in the opposite direction.


Never mind, leave it to the big brains.

Alternatively we could send them a slice of Urban wisdom. That's if anybody has got right email address. Maybe a note could be tied to the barrell of one of the tanks going over.

 

[likesfish]

NATO expansion got underway when Russia was on its knees and a threat only to itself.

So the Poles and the Balts were expected to trust Russia? Really just how many military interventions and mass graves are you expected to forgive?
Eastern Europe wanted in the EU and NATO because they wanted to be western and not worry about Russia and they were right

 

[Kaka Tim]

I don't know what will happen if 'support' for Ukraine is stopped. I haven't called for it to be stopped.

It isn't only me who has pointed out that the roots of what's happening in Ukraine go back to when it was first mooted that Ukraine and Georgia could join NATO in 2008. Immediately you got the brief war in Georgia (after Georgia made the first moves on the ground, providing Russia with the excuse it needed). The fighting in Donbas and the annexation of Crimea happened soon after the overthrow of the pro-Russian president and the seizure of power by a government that immediately started talking about joining NATO.

If the Russians see NATO on their borders as an encroachment, neither I nor you, nor anybody else can do anything about it.

Anyway, are you with Liz Truss or what?

Do I support dickhead politicans using the war to carry out domestic political grandstanding? No. Do I support the UK doing all it can to support the people of ukraine - including providing weapons to fight off an invasion? Yes.

So do you support the uk and other countries sending arms to Ukraine?

 

[Southlondon]

So maybe we stop escalating the war by ceasing to support Ukraine. Then he has a green light to roll the tanks into Moldova. Or elsewhere. He isn’t making the responses reasonable.
Given he has done chemical attacks on UK soil and everybody laughed, I reckon we call him out on his nuclear threats with the view of regime change.

Or, seeing as how the whole world has a stake in seeing this war resolved as soon as possible without it escalating, pressure is applied to both sides to sit down and discuss a compromise that allows the Ukrainians to have at least a bit of their country that’s still liveable in so families can reunite and people stop being killed. Lots of ways that could happen with compromises on both sides and maybe that will have to include loss of some land for Ukraine, and less of a territorial enlargement for Russia than they set out to grab. China might be inclined to apply pressure on putin if Europe does the same to zelensky. Live to fight another day applied to both sides and has to be preferable to watching the Ukrainians suffer the fate of the Palestinians with a large chunk of the population unable to return to any part of their country when the USA lose interest as they are prone to do in long conflicts, and Europe splits further with regards support to Ukraine

 

[Pickman's model]

Or, seeing as how the whole world has a stake in seeing this war resolved as soon as possible without it escalating, pressure is applied to both sides to sit down and discuss a compromise that allows the Ukrainians to have at least a bit of their country that’s still liveable in so families can reunite and people stop being killed. Lots of ways that could happen with compromises on both sides and maybe that will have to include loss of some land for Ukraine, and less of a territorial enlargement for Russia than they set out to grab. China might be inclined to apply pressure on putin if Europe does the same to zelensky. Live to fight another day applied to both sides and has to be preferable to watching the Ukrainians suffer the fate of the Palestinians with a large chunk of the population unable to return to any part of their country when the USA lose interest as they are prone to do in long conflicts, and Europe splits further with regards support to Ukraine

People have suggested in the media that China is eying this up and wondering about Taiwan. As this situation with Russia might set a precedent China takes advantage of, how much of Taiwan do you think it ok for Beijing to seize?

 

[Kaka Tim]

Or, seeing as how the whole world has a stake in seeing this war resolved as soon as possible without it escalating, pressure is applied to both sides to sit down and discuss a compromise that allows the Ukrainians to have at least a bit of their country that’s still liveable in so families can reunite and people stop being killed. Lots of ways that could happen with compromises on both sides and maybe that will have to include loss of some land for Ukraine, and less of a territorial enlargement for Russia than they set out to grab. China might be inclined to apply pressure on putin if Europe does the same to zelensky. Live to fight another day applied to both sides and has to be preferable to watching the Ukrainians suffer the fate of the Palestinians with a large chunk of the population unable to return to any part of their country when the USA lose interest as they are prone to do in long conflicts, and Europe splits further with regards support to Ukraine

Alternatively the whole world has a stake in Russia losing and being seen to lose. Ukraine fighting them off puts pressure on Russia to negotiate an end to the war. And why should Ukraine gift Russia with a landgrab? In return for what? Russia not bombing the fuck out of them and massacring and deporting their civilians? (until next time Putin feels strong enough to have another pop at "de-nazification")
There are no easy answers here and every course of action is fraught with terrible risk.

 

[RD2003]

So the Poles and the Balts were expected to trust Russia? Really just how many military interventions and mass graves are you expected to forgive?
Eastern Europe wanted in the EU and NATO because they wanted to be western and not worry about Russia and they were right

At the time NATO expansion began, Russia was still in the throes of economic and social collapse and showing few signs of recovery. Memories of decades earlier on the part of the Baltic States didn't mean that the Russia of the time was in any position to threaten anybody. NATO expansion pissed off even a western stooge like Yeltsin, and was a factor in bringing Putin to the fore.

 

[RD2003]

Do I support dickhead politicans using the war to carry out domestic political grandstanding? No. Do I support the UK doing all it can to support the people of ukraine - including providing weapons to fight off an invasion? Yes.

So do you support the uk and other countries sending arms to Ukraine?

I had no objection to defensive weapons. Upping the anti with heavy weaponry only means thousands more deaths, and guarantees Ukraine nothing.

 

[RD2003]

People have suggested in the media that China is eying this up and wondering about Taiwan. As this situation with Russia might set a precedent China takes advantage of, how much of Taiwan do you think it ok for Beijing to seize?

Maybe that's a question for when it actually happens.

 

[Kaka Tim]

I had no objection to defensive weapons. Upping the anti with heavy weaponry only means thousands more deaths, and guarantees Ukraine nothing.

Heavy weapons that take out Russian artillery and airplanes and stop their advance will mean more deaths ? probably not for the Ukrainians (Who are begging for those weapons). And tanks and APCs will potentially allow Ukraine to counter-attack and liberate their towns and cities - where civilians are currently being mass deported and murdered and raped. Or is it that this will "provoke" uncle vlad into using nukes? - And yes - its a genuine risk but - like i said earlier - every option carries massive jeopardy.

 

[LDC]

I had no objection to defensive weapons. Upping the anti with heavy weaponry only means thousands more deaths, and guarantees Ukraine nothing.

Yeah, I've been meaning to post something about that, but I find it hard to articulate it as a political or pragmatic argument, but I do feel much more uneasy about longer range and heavier weapons being supplied. I totally admit it's emotional and/or irrational as it does make complete logical and military sense for the situation, I'm just not sure it makes good political sense, and I think the supply might benefit others maybe even more than Ukraine, unlike the other weaponry and supplies that were shipped earlier on.

 

[RD2003]

Heavy weapons that take out Russian artillery and airplanes and stop their advance will mean more deaths ? probably not for the Ukrainians (Who are begging for those weapons). And tanks and APCs will potentially allow Ukraine to counter-attack and liberate their towns and cities - where civilians are currently being mass deported and murdered and raped. Or is it that this will "provoke" uncle vlad into using nukes? - And yes - its a genuine risk but - like i said earlier - every option carries massive jeopardy.

'The Ukrainians' are not begging for anything. There are no 'the Ukrainians,' just Ukrainians in all their messy diversity. I'm not surprised that most Ukrainians have rallied behind the present government, seeing as they've been invaded, but it's the present Ukraine government and state machine*, with interests of its own and many foreign links, doing the begging.

I don't know why you're so animated by these questions when you are already getting what you want btw. You'll get your escalation and the accompanying slaughter. As for nukes and 'massive jeopardy,' might as well all go all down with 'em.


*Funny how so many who spend much of their time online denouncing 'the state' seem to regard the state as embodying the entire people in this instance.

 

[RD2003]

Yeah, I've been meaning to post something about that, but I find it hard to articulate it as a political or pragmatic argument, but I do feel much more uneasy about longer range and heavier weapons being supplied. I totally admit it's emotional and/or irrational as it does make complete logical and military sense for the situation, I'm just not sure it makes good political sense, and I think the supply might benefit others maybe even more than Ukraine, unlike the other weaponry and supplies that were shipped earlier on.

And it risks the escalation of the war beyond Ukraine. Which gives rise to another contradiction in that those who claim 'Russia will not stop at Ukraine,' are the very same people who call for this escalation, thus taking that very risk.

 

[ska invita]

NATO expansion pissed off even a western stooge like Yeltsin, and was a factor in bringing Putin to the fore.

Gorbachev talks in his memoirs about how he felt utterly betrayed by everything told him by the US about how the post-Soviet world would look between the rival powers - immediately done a kipper by the US - was expecting mutual disarmament, instead the US immediately capitalised on Russian weaknesses

 

[RD2003]

Gorbachev talks in his memoirs about how he felt utterly betrayed by everything told him by the US about how the post-Soviet world would look between the rival powers - immediately done a kipper by the US - was expecting mutual disarmament, instead the US immediately capitalised on Russian weaknesses

Yeltsin too, who regarded himself as the man who would lead Russia's integration into the western world, and operated as a de-facto western stooge, is said to have been absolutely livid when he learned of what NATO was proposing. The arch-westerniser Yegor Gaidar also said it would be the biggest mistake the west could possibly make regarding Russia, and more or less predicted the present outcome. Theses are only a few. Point this out, however, and people go into denial or start rewriting history.

Anyway folks, I'm fucking off out for the evening now. Might as well take advantage of a non-irradiated environment while we still can.

 

[Kaka Tim]

'The Ukrainians' are not begging for anything. There are no 'the Ukrainians,' just Ukrainians in all their messy diversity. I'm not surprised that most Ukrainians have rallied behind the present government, seeing as they've been invaded, but it's the present Ukraine government and state machine*, with interests of its own and many foreign links, doing the begging.

I don't know why you're so animated by these questions when you are already getting what you want btw. You'll get your escalation and the accompanying slaughter. As for nukes and 'massive jeopardy,' might as well all go all down with 'em.


*Funny how so many who spend much of their time online denouncing 'the state' seem to regard the state as embodying the entire people in this instance.

I am pretty sure that the vast majority of Ukrainians are very very keen to get as much weaponry as they can to fight off the invader - if there are any voices saying different ive not seen them (although im sure RT or similar can provide) . And of course its not what I - or anybody else - wants. The war is an absolute catastrophe for the whole world and its a question of working out the least shit outcome and there is huge amount of uncertainty as to what that is.
But saying "end the war by not arming Ukraine too much" is no guarantee of anything - and could quite conceivably make the war last even longer, and bloodier. It does not lessen the risk of further wars and nuclear blackmail by putin (especially if hes seen that it works) you may very well just be putting off the day when the world has to call his bluff - but at even greater cost in lives.
You seem incapable of engaging with the reality outside of your smug, condescending, assumed moral superiority. Your argument is as infantile as it is intellectually cowardly.

 

[Pickman's model]

Maybe that's a question for when it actually happens.

No it isn't

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Or, seeing as how the whole world has a stake in seeing this war resolved as soon as possible without it escalating, pressure is applied to both sides to sit down and discuss a compromise that allows the Ukrainians to have at least a bit of their country that’s still liveable in so families can reunite and people stop being killed. Lots of ways that could happen with compromises on both sides and maybe that will have to include loss of some land for Ukraine, and less of a territorial enlargement for Russia than they set out to grab. China might be inclined to apply pressure on putin if Europe does the same to zelensky. Live to fight another day applied to both sides and has to be preferable to watching the Ukrainians suffer the fate of the Palestinians with a large chunk of the population unable to return to any part of their country when the USA lose interest as they are prone to do in long conflicts, and Europe splits further with regards support to Ukraine

So the choice is let Putin have what he wants or the world burns. That seems a sound strategy for the short term but what about the medium to long term when the precedent is set that we just roll over to aggression?

 

[Pickman's model]

So the choice is let Putin have what he wants or the world burns. That seems a sound strategy for the short term but what about the medium to long term when the precedent is set that we just roll over to aggression?

In the long run we're all dead
--keynes

 

[NoXion]

At the time NATO expansion began, Russia was still in the throes of economic and social collapse and showing few signs of recovery. Memories of decades earlier on the part of the Baltic States didn't mean that the Russia of the time was in any position to threaten anybody. NATO expansion pissed off even a western stooge like Yeltsin, and was a factor in bringing Putin to the fore.

If the Russian government is unhappy with NATO expansion, then they've had every opportunity over the decades to use diplomatic means to persuade their neighbours that joining up was unnecessary. Instead they chose to use subversion and intimidation. The countries seeking to join up with NATO have their own agency in all of this. They have their reasons. Russia is a big part of those reasons.

As it turns out, those reasons are pretty damn justified. If Ukraine compromises now, then what exactly would be preventing Russia taking the time to lick their wounds and recover, before pulling the same trick once again? Because they would know as a matter of record that if they push hard enough, the opposition will fold.

 

[Smangus]

Russia could have applied to join NATO , chose not to ,or something.

 

[Duncan2]

Russia could have applied to join NATO , chose not to ,or something.

Arguably the world would be a safer place than it is if there were no countries that were not in NATO.

 

[Smangus]

Arguably the world would be a safer place than it is if there were no countries that were not in NATO.

Arguably not too, pick yer poison.

 

[nogojones]

NATO expansion got underway when Russia was on its knees and a threat only to itself.

They still had quite a large armed force and a couple of nukes, so I don't think they were quite as cuddly as you suggest.

However it would have been a good time for UK, US, France and Russia to significantly disarm.

 

[Duncan2]

It might well have been satire but i read something recently to the effect that there was a conversation on the subject of whether Russia could join NATO in 2010 at a summit attended by Bill Clinton and Vladimir Putin.

It wasn't possible.