Amnesty International Condemns Ukraine's Tactics

[Ringo]

Little bit of history

 

[toomuchtime_]

Little bit of history

Bullshit. What happened there was a Ukrainian problem and none of Russia's business. The fact that Russia used this as a pretext is proof positive that NATO is needed by the people of eastern Europe.

 

[para bellum]

Meh.

I just wish the Kremlin propaganda team would get some new material, this stuff is gawdawful stale.

I can't figure out if the MAGA wing of the GOP have turned into a bunch of Kremlin trolls, or if the Kremlin trolls just find it convenient to pose as MAGA Republicans.

I guess it doesn't matter, the effect is the same. The end of the GOP as a national party for the foreseeable future.

It's weird. I'm a lifelong republican (voted for Trump twice). Not a single conservative that I know is stupid enough to swallow the Russian propaganda, but it seems almost universal here on USMB...

 

[Rust_Cohle]

Meh.

I just wish the Kremlin propaganda team would get some new material, this stuff is gawdawful stale.

I can't figure out if the MAGA wing of the GOP have turned into a bunch of Kremlin trolls, or if the Kremlin trolls just find it convenient to pose as MAGA Republicans.

I guess it doesn't matter, the effect is the same. The end of the GOP as a national party for the foreseeable future.

It's weird. I'm a lifelong republican (voted for Trump twice). Not a single conservative that I know is stupid enough to swallow the Russian propaganda, but it seems almost universal here on USMB...

You mean like how the "give peace a chance" leftist are now the party of War Mongers? Btw have you signed up to go fight in Ukraine yet or are you a coward?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Meh.

I just wish the Kremlin propaganda team would get some new material, this stuff is gawdawful stale.

I can't figure out if the MAGA wing of the GOP have turned into a bunch of Kremlin trolls, or if the Kremlin trolls just find it convenient to pose as MAGA Republicans.

I guess it doesn't matter, the effect is the same. The end of the GOP as a national party for the foreseeable future.

It's weird. I'm a lifelong republican (voted for Trump twice). Not a single conservative that I know is stupid enough to swallow the Russian propaganda, but it seems almost universal here on USMB...

"I can't figure out if the MAGA wing of the GOP have turned into a bunch of Kremlin trolls, or if the Kremlin trolls just find it convenient to pose as MAGA Republicans."

My thoughts, exactly.

 

[para bellum]

You mean like how the "give peace a chance" leftist are now the party of War Mongers? Btw have you signed up to go fight in Ukraine yet or are you a coward?

Perfect illustration of my point from one of Pootie's "Web Brigade". You're a fraud, and your juvenile comebacks don't phase me.

No self-respecting conservative would cheer on a genocide like you posers do every day.

Your side lost this war a year ago, but the killing goes on. All you have left are these desperate "information operations", full of stupid and stale talking points.

And while I'm too old, and they wouldn't want me, I'd be happy to man a lathe and crank out some 155mm shells for them...

 

[Rust_Cohle]

Perfect illustration of my point from one of Pootie's "Web Brigade". You're a fraud, and your juvenile comebacks don't phase me.

No self-respecting conservative would cheer on a genocide like you posers do every day.

Your side lost this war a year ago, but the killing goes on. All you have left are these desperate "information operations", full of stupid and stale talking points.

And while I'm too old, and they wouldn't want me, I'd be happy to man a lathe and crank out some 155mm shells for them...

You cheered on genocide for 8 years done by Azov Battalion literal Neo Nazis and that's who you support

 

[José]

Originally posted by toomuchtime
Bullshit. What happened there was a Ukrainian problem and none of Russia's business. The fact that Russia used this as a pretext is proof positive that NATO is needed by the people of eastern Europe.

Your logic goes both ways:

Bullshit. What happened in Kosova was a Serbian problem and none of NATO's business. The fact that NATO used this as a pretext is proof positive that Russia needs a buffer zone between her and that belligerant military alliance.

But at least you concede the fact that there is a problem in Ukraine regardless of Russia.

People refuse to accept the fact that Ukraine is a divided, polarized society because this admission destroys their narative of a struggle between good and evil, right and wrong. Conceding the fact that millions of ukrainians don't want the country to distance itself from Russia forces them to abandon their black and white view... They don't want to see the War in Ukraine as anything remotely similar to grey.

 

[para bellum]

You cheered on genocide for 8 years done by Azov Battalion literal Neo Nazis and that's who you support

LMAO. Gee, we've never heard that one before...

Seriously. Talk to your team leader or whatever you call him. Tell him you need some new talking points.

Russia is way past fucked. There's no simple recovery from the mess Putin made.

 

[José]

Regarding the geopolitical dimension of the war (NATO):

What Russia did in Ukraine is something extremely grave, illegal that cannot be taken lightly.

All Members shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

Most people feel a natural revulsion when they witness a country suffering an armed aggression with millions of civilians becoming refugees.

That's why I never denied the right of Ukraine to fight the armed aggression. That was my first post about the war:

"I support the right of Ukraine to fight the russian invaders and Russia's right to defend herself from a military alliance trying to surround her and I don't see any contradiction...

Unidimensional political thinking is the hallmark of dumb, stupid people."

The war in Ukraine is not legal (if you believe international law has any meaning) but it is legitimate (there's a subtle difference):

Is legal and legitimate the same?

Legality refers to what fits within the law and is compliant with a legal framework.

Legitimacy, however, involves following a correct, fair, genuine, moral and ethical path.

Between legality and legitimacy: which is more important? - ARM.

But I am ready to drop my support of Russia as soon as any member shows me a peaceful way to keep NATO far from Russia's borders. 30 years of diplomatic efforts were clearly in vain.

And what did America do when a foreign power spent 50 years trying to establish satellite countries in Central America and the Caribbean?

Did she waste half a century begging the foreign power to stop spreading its tentacles on her neighborhood or did she resort to military invasions, proxy wars that killed tens of thousands, coup detats, etc...?

At least as far as this issue (NATO) is concerned, all you have to do is show me a peaceful way for Russia to prevent the military encirclement of her borders and I will drop my support for Russia and will start supporting Ukraine 100% here and now in front of the whole Board.

The problem is that the super patriotic american clowns of this Board can't see any problem to be solved. Their answer to my question about a peaceful resolution is:

Russia has to bend over and take it.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

LMAO. Gee, we've never heard that one before...

Seriously. Talk to your team leader or whatever you call him. Tell him you need some new talking points.

Russia is way past fucked. There's no simple recovery from the mess Putin made.

You mean you've never heard history and facts before

That's obvious

 

[toomuchtime_]

Your logic goes both ways:

Bullshit. What happened in Kosova was a Serbian problem and none of NATO's business. The fact that NATO used this as a pretext is proof positive that Russia needs a buffer zone between her and that belligerant military alliance.

But at least you concede the fact that there is a problem in Ukraine regardless of Russia.

People refuse to accept the fact that Ukraine is a divided, polarized society because this admission destroys their narative of a struggle between good and evil, right and wrong. Conceding the fact that millions of ukrainians don't want the country to distance itself from Russia forces them to abandon their black and white view... They don't want to see the War in Ukraine as anything remotely similar to grey.

Again, what is happening in Ukraine is none of Russia's business and the fact that Russia cites internal Ukrainian problems as a pretext for an invasion of Ukraine proves that eastern European countries need NATO so that they can defend themselves from Russian aggression. Of course you want to talk about Kosovo and probably Iraq because you understand that what Russia is doing in Ukraine is absolutely indefensible.

 

[para bellum]

...But I am ready to drop my support of Russia as soon as any member shows me a peaceful way to keep NATO far from Russia's borders. 30 years of diplomatic efforts were clearly in vain.

I won't change your mind Jose, but I disagree with the characterization of NATO.

Assuming for the moment that your NATO is the "true" NATO, the peaceful way is for Russia to make herself more attractive to her neighbors.

NATO isn't conquering those countries, they are applying to join. They aren't joining because NATO has a goal of destroying Russia- NATO has never had that goal. NATO went through a massive disarmament in the 1990's. Just look at the defense spending of NATO countries before and after the cold war.

Those countries are joining because they fear Russia, and they don't fear NATO.

NATO's main benefits:
1. Prevents European countries from going to war with each other- something they are quite good at, historically speaking.
2. Allows smaller (weaker) countries to participate in the non-proliferation regime by putting them under the NATO "nuclear umbrella". That avoids what would otherwise be a nuclear arms race in Eastern Europe.

For all those former WarPac countries (including Ukraine), the shift towards Europe began in the 1990's. They all had their own pace, but it was a transition over many years.

So how to stop that? It has to be the carrot- the stick only accelerates the process. Russia has to offer more than threats.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Regarding the geopolitical dimension of the war (NATO):

What Russia did in Ukraine is something extremely grave, illegal that cannot be taken lightly.

All Members shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

Most people feel a natural revulsion when they witness a country suffering an armed aggression with millions of civilians becoming refugees.

That's why I never denied the right of Ukraine to fight the armed aggression. That was my first post about the war:

"I support the right of Ukraine to fight the russian invaders and Russia's right to defend herself from a military alliance trying to surround her and I don't see any contradiction...

Unidimensional political thinking is the hallmark of dumb, stupid people."

The war in Ukraine is not legal (if you believe international law has any meaning) but it is legitimate (there's a subtle difference):

Is legal and legitimate the same?

Legality refers to what fits within the law and is compliant with a legal framework.

Legitimacy, however, involves following a correct, fair, genuine, moral and ethical path.

Between legality and legitimacy: which is more important? - ARM.

But I am ready to drop my support of Russia as soon as any member shows me a peaceful way to keep NATO far from Russia's borders. 30 years of diplomatic efforts were clearly in vain.

And what did America do when a foreign power spent 50 years trying to establish satellite countries in Central America and the Caribbean?

Did she waste half a century begging the foreign power to stop spreading its tentacles on her neighborhood or did she resort to military invasions, proxy wars that killed tens of thousands, coup detats, etc...?

At least as far as this issue (NATO) is concerned, all you have to do is show me a peaceful way for Russia to prevent the military encirclement of her borders and I will drop my support for Russia and will start supporting Ukraine 100% here and now in front of the whole Board.

The problem is that the super patriotic american clowns of this Board can't see any problem to be solved. Their answer to my question about a peaceful resolution is:

Russia has to bend over and take it.

Russia has to behave like a civilized country.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine is clearly illegal, as you concede, and is also clearly illegitimate in the eyes of nearly the whole world, as the recent vote to condemn it in the UNGA showed, so only a tiny percent of the world's countries agree with you that the invasion of Ukraine was in any sense legitimate.

Your claim that NATO is trying to encircle Russia is clearly nonsensical. Russia is surrounded today by exactly the same countries it has always been surrounded by, and not a single one of them is controlled by NATO.

So why did these countries join NATO? Were they threatened or bribed by NATO if they did not join as the former Warsaw Pact nations were if they declined to join with Russia in the Warsaw Pact? No, in fact, these countries have to pass certain criteria to even be invited to join, and to agree to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense, a burden some members have struggled with, to join.

So why would these countries agree to such scrutiny and accept such a financial burden? We both know the answer is that for hundreds of years, Russia has been trying to control these countries either with the use of force or with the threat of force and now, because they have joined NATO, Russia can no longer impose its will upon them. And that is what you and Putin and Putin are so upset about.

 

[Ringo]

Russia has to behave like a civilized country.

What civilized countries are they?

 

[Ringo]

 

[Ringo]

Russia has to behave like a civilized country.

No chance in Hell!