Not really no but they work for NATO and would get in trouble. But a quick google search had this video. CBS reported it then quickly back stepped
Russo-Ukrainian War v. World War 3?
- Thread starter deficiT
- Start date
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Ukraine has been controlled by well over a dozen non-Russian powers in the last 1000 years, only had Russian controllers in the last 100-200 years.
They fought their first of several wars of independence from Russia 100 years ago. Russian language and culture wasn't pushed on them until 1930s... and they were also genocided in a famine during that time. 5 million died.
They fought for independence from both Germany AND Russia during and immediately after WWII. They have literally been struggling for independence their entire existence!
Anyways, they never joined Russia willingly as Texas did with the union, they were conquered and forced to. They've actually been bullied by bigger countries their entire existence in the last 1000 years. They have made multiple attempts at independence.
Fighting for independence is the American spirit, so comparing it to Texas (who also loves to joke about independence from the union) is not a good comparison. Ukraine is more like... Peurto Rico, Korea, Vietnam.
It's actually the American way to help them leave Russia.
I really don't understand why conservatives want Russia to conquer Ukraine again. It's anti American mythology and ideology.
Being anti war and not wanting to send them tax dollars is reasonable, I can appreciate that sentiment and feel the same to some degree. But the cheering for Russia and saying Ukraine belongs to them never made sense to me. That's equivalent to saying the US belongs to England.
Is the US doing this with our own imperialist intentions in mind? Almost certainly, and the war machine... but that's not what conservatives are seemingly trying to point out. It's an easy grab bag of anti-Biden politics. In fact I think it's the first modern example of Republicans being anti-war instead of the Democrats.
...but American people actually rooting for the tyrannical, federalist, government power over what is essentially a rural state? It's completely opposite of conservative American values.
I am uneducated, though. Maybe one of you can enlighten me on why Russia actually deserves to own Ukraine and all it's people.
I was born in Texas
. Russia can fuck off. Ukraine deserves independence.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
This is pretty funny
You mean..."Ukraine deserves independence from Russia" & life-long tax obligation to the EU, UK & USA...go freedom.Ukraine has been controlled by well over a dozen non-Russian powers in the last 1000 years, only had Russian controllers in the last 100-200 years.
They fought their first of several wars of independence from Russia 100 years ago. Russian language and culture wasn't pushed on them until 1930s... and they were also genocided in a famine during that time. 5 million died.
They fought for independence from both Germany AND Russia during and immediately after WWII. They have literally been struggling for independence their entire existence!
Anyways, they never joined Russia willingly as Texas did with the union, they were conquered and forced to. They've actually been bullied by bigger countries their entire existence in the last 1000 years. They have made multiple attempts at independence.
Fighting for independence is the American spirit, so comparing it to Texas (who also loves to joke about independence from the union) is not a good comparison. Ukraine is more like... Peurto Rico, Korea, Vietnam.
It's actually the American way to help them leave Russia.
I really don't understand why conservatives want Russia to conquer Ukraine again. It's anti American mythology and ideology.
Being anti war and not wanting to send them tax dollars is reasonable, I can appreciate that sentiment and feel the same to some degree. But the cheering for Russia and saying Ukraine belongs to them never made sense to me. That's equivalent to saying the US belongs to England.
Is the US doing this with our own imperialist intentions in mind? Almost certainly, and the war machine... but that's not what conservatives are seemingly trying to point out. It's an easy grab bag of anti-Biden politics. In fact I think it's the first modern example of Republicans being anti-war instead of the Democrats.
...but American people actually rooting for the tyrannical, federalist, government power over what is essentially a rural state? It's completely opposite of conservative American values.
I am uneducated, though. Maybe one of you can enlighten me on why Russia actually deserves to own Ukraine and all it's people.
I was born in Texas
...neu collonianism; it's PC, so, it's GUuuD.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Governments are always in debt for decades or centuries after either winning or losing wars.You mean..."Ukraine deserves independence from Russia" & life-long tax obligation to the EU, UK & USA...go freedom.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Do you think they would be better off indebted to Russia for killing hundreds of thousands of their soldiers, or indebted to Nato for giving them the opportunity to actually win?
I legitimately don't understand what you're trying to say here.
You think Russia would just give them a jail free card and a good economy after this war?
"It's cool bro, you ruined our rubles and killed so many, here is some amazing Russian communist economic hospitality! Be free and happy! I'm so glad to see you after convincing all of our citizens that you were nazi nato puppets that tortured our own!!"
What exactly do you think happens after war?
Last edited by a moderator:
DesertHarp
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 25, 2022
- Messages
- 382
I feel bad for the Urainians, but the historical synopsis above glides past a few things - like the penchant for right wing extremism among western Ukrainians. Stepan Bandera still commands a lot of admiration in western Ukraine. (Parades, museums, streets and parks bearing his name, his face on stamps and on money.) Either before or during WW2, he fled to Germany for refuge because he thought Hitler was a great guy. The NAZIs locked Bandera up because he was too nuts, even by their standards. That Azov Battalion/Regiment still thinks he was cool. That really scares the folks in eastern Ukraine. I don't blame them. My point is that there's way more complexity to this conflict than CNN is ever going to reveal.
It is a little ironic that the U.S. right wing isn't sympathetic to the Ukrainian right wing. Kind of like history coming full circle. Bandera loved the NAZIs, and they locked his behind up.
It is a little ironic that the U.S. right wing isn't sympathetic to the Ukrainian right wing. Kind of like history coming full circle. Bandera loved the NAZIs, and they locked his behind up.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Sure. 4% of the Ukranian vote in which Zelensky was elected was for a literal Nazi party.
But judging a whole country based on that is moot when you compare it to the history of the US and our glorious KKK neo nazi / white nationalist supporters, which I'd actually guess is more than 4%
We are not angels, either. I'd surmise almost every western country has about 5% extreme right wingers.
And Fox / right wing US media.
Wars cannot be summed up in 10 minute news bites.
"The first casualty of war is always the truth."
That's just the sociopolitical war propaganda machine at work. 350 million people in this country are under the constant barrage of it.
Fox doesn't like the war simply because Biden is president. It doesn't matter what they actually believe, that's all that matters to a for profit media conglomerate.
Mass propaganda became legal (and very profitable) in this country in 1982 when media was deregulated. Not sure why more don't reference this. Odd concept of both a free media, but not free due to pure capitalism and corporatocracy.
Fuck Reagan.
Last edited by a moderator:
DesertHarp
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 25, 2022
- Messages
- 382
I'm not judging "a whole country." I don't know where you got that from. The politics of Ukrainians varies a good bit as you move from West to East and from North to South. That has been problematic for Ukraine. There's nothing "moot" about that. Similarly in the U.S., we see politics vary a good bit, as you go from North to South and as you go from Coastal toward the interior. That's been problematic for us too. I'm sure you've heard the noises made here by some who want us to have a national "divorce" and make a federation of red states autonomous. (I think that was MTG.) We all have these problems.
KKK membership has greatly dwindled, since the 1920s, when even Massachusetts had Klan gatherings. But MGT and her like-minded colleagues are being lionized by a lot more than 5% of the population. Only a small fraction of them have white-hooded outfits in the attic. However, that small fraction is enabled by a lot more, who make common cause with them. Similarly in Ukraine: A tiny fraction votes NAZI. But the percentage who lionize Stepan Bandera is way the heck more than 5%. 70% in Western Ukraine thinks he was great. Of course, they say he wasn't a NAZI. Well . . . look the dude up and draw your own conclusion. (I guess they are technically correct.)
I agree with you that there are no angelic countries in the world. Usually, a country is not monolithic. It's made up of the individuals in it, many of whom are not nice to each other. Western Ukrainians in the Azov Battalian have been rather unkind to some Eastern Ukrainians. It's problematic. Maybe those Minsk Accords should have been given a shot. Perhaps??
That Azov Regiment is runnin' the show over there. Zelensky has no agency to negotiate anything. If he conceded one square inch of ground to Russia or to autonomous self-government, an Azov sharp shooter would put a bullet in his head. He knows it. That's why Netanyahu wanted him to come to Israel.
All I'm saying is that this is a debacle and a horror show. I feel so sorry for the ordinary people there. (Those that are left.)
KKK membership has greatly dwindled, since the 1920s, when even Massachusetts had Klan gatherings. But MGT and her like-minded colleagues are being lionized by a lot more than 5% of the population. Only a small fraction of them have white-hooded outfits in the attic. However, that small fraction is enabled by a lot more, who make common cause with them. Similarly in Ukraine: A tiny fraction votes NAZI. But the percentage who lionize Stepan Bandera is way the heck more than 5%. 70% in Western Ukraine thinks he was great. Of course, they say he wasn't a NAZI. Well . . . look the dude up and draw your own conclusion. (I guess they are technically correct.)
I agree with you that there are no angelic countries in the world. Usually, a country is not monolithic. It's made up of the individuals in it, many of whom are not nice to each other. Western Ukrainians in the Azov Battalian have been rather unkind to some Eastern Ukrainians. It's problematic. Maybe those Minsk Accords should have been given a shot. Perhaps??
That Azov Regiment is runnin' the show over there. Zelensky has no agency to negotiate anything. If he conceded one square inch of ground to Russia or to autonomous self-government, an Azov sharp shooter would put a bullet in his head. He knows it. That's why Netanyahu wanted him to come to Israel.
All I'm saying is that this is a debacle and a horror show. I feel so sorry for the ordinary people there. (Those that are left.)
Pickledlemons
Bluelighter
US is *part* of UK. For USA to leave UK is like for Catalonia to leave Spain. I'm not saying Catalonia should leave spain. I'm not saying Catalonia should not leave Spain. But it's a similar situation, USA is a renegade British province.
Pickledlemons
Bluelighter
DesertHarp
Bluelighter
- Joined
- May 25, 2022
- Messages
- 382
Ukrainians identify as a people. They speak their own language. They deserve to be recognized as a nation, and Russia did so recognize them long ago. Putin is no scholar. He's no formulator of any carefully thought out concept with real insight. He threw together this theory of Ukraine being part of Russia as a makeshift way to defend and rationalize what he wanted to do, which was to stop the advance of NATO toward the Russian border. Until that loomed on the horizon, he was content to let Ukraine be Ukraine. Now he wants to go back on the deal that the two countries had worked out decades ago. That is a betrayal of what was once mutually accepted by the two nations.
His real rationale is that he feels Russia suffered a double betrayal. He felt betrayed by Ukrainians wanting to kick the Russian navy out of Sevastopal, which he though was a settled arrangement, for which Russia had been paying Ukraine. He felt betrayed by the U.S., who long ago assured Russia that NATO would not try to incorporate into itself every country that was formerly part of the Soviet Union. So betrayal spawns more betrayal. It was Ukraine and the U.S. that first upset the apple cart and provoked this conflict. Hundreds of thousands of dead Ukrainians have paid for that extreme foolishness.
Zelinski broke the Minsk agreement and tore it up on tv as soon as he got elected
Pickledlemons
Bluelighter
Agree.
Agree
Agree, although I think there's a bit more to it than that.
Not really. There were programs to keep Ukraine in the Russian sphere of influence going all the way back to the early 90s. Yeah Putin doesn't mind Ukraine being Ukraine, as long as they lick his boot. And geeze, Georgia would make me jumpy too.
Russia leased the port from Ukraine. That lease was not terminated by Ukraine, Putin just feared it might be. Thats all that was. And I wouldn't have been too surprised with a decision like that with all the political meddling that was going on back in those days. Remember that never would have been a problem if Putin didn't 'convince' Yanukovych to ditch the EU association agreement at the last minute, which ultimately lead to him fleeing back to Russia and new elections being held. Once again, he got greedy. He already had an ally in Ukraine but that wasn't enough, he wanted more. And as a result, Sevastopol was put into question. And it wasn't even a settled question before he decided to invade.
Can you please point me in the direction of the treaty where that promise is written and signed? Or are you saying some possible off the record remark 30 years ago by a different administration is reason enough for this war? Gorbachev has even said on TV that there was no such agreement. Then again, he's also said the opposite so who knows with that guy. Maybe he was coerced one way or another. Anyway, what written and signed agreement? Where is it?
I guess my point is it's a '"For-profit" neu collonianism war'; as distinct from a "war on terrorism", war.
Freedom War is the new black; kind of war!
It's just interesting, in a 'rip your brain from your cervical spine' kind of way, the way they portray, the industry; when there were so many chances to negotiate terms, for the sake of consolidation. Too many investors in Ukraine to stop the destruction.
Pickledlemons
Bluelighter
Only one person in the world has the power and authority to end the war without sacrificing his country, or starting a world war, and thats Putin.I guess my point is it's a '"For-profit" neu collonianism war'; as distinct from a "war on terrorism", war.
Freedom War is the new black; kind of war!
It's just interesting, in a 'rip your brain from your cervical spine' kind of way, the way they portray, the industry; when there were so many chances to negotiate terms, for the sake of consolidation. Too many investors in Ukraine to stop the destruction.
Pickledlemons
Bluelighter
Cocaine bear might be able to pull it off.
As expected, the Ukrainian counter-offensive ultimately didn't really turn into anything much. Probably too late in the game for any major movement on any side, and the Russians are well dug-in and (generally) now producing weapons and ammo at a faster rate than the West/Ukraine.
Stalemate.
Stalemate.
