• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Putin & Russia

And this is just me focussing on the practical side.

That’s deliberate because I know you right wingers don’t deal with ethics, morals or higher human purposes.

If I was to get on the morality side of things… allowing a nation which has freed peadophiles, rapists and murderers on the basis they fight for their freedom?

How low can you possibly stoop?

How can allowing free rein of that ever be justified?
 
SpurMeUp said:
And the kid getting bullied used to be the bullies close friend until we came along and pulled them away from their friendship. The role the US has played manipulating Ukraine away from Russia is ignored. Conflicts don’t erupt out of nowhere there are two decades of history that are largely being ignored. And you can argue we’re using Ukraine to fight americas proxy war. Is Trump so mad withdrawing from this proxy war? Saying to Europe: if you want to take this mess on and fund the destruction be my guest.

As for Ukraines appetite to have its young conscripted and have its nation flattened, it is not as clear as we think. Easy for us to presume that Ukrainians want to keep fighting but it’s more complex and what everyone should want is peace.
Click to expand...


I am no complete sucker for complete Western narratives. A lot of the time we make ourselves seem like the good guys.

In this particular instance Ukraine has had both options. They have chosen repeatedly to integrate themselves more into the European community and to refuse closer ties with Russia. That’s how Euromaiden started.

They wanted closer ties with the EU and NATO. Yanukovych promised the Ukrainian people than that when he ran for president

Putin had influence over him and Yanukovych cancelled joining the EU even through it had been approved by the Ukrainian parliament.

It led to complete revolt. The Ukrainian people chased Yanukovych out the country and he cowered away to live his life in Moscow. Refusing to attend an online video trial because he said he had injuries hie spine and knees playing tennis

Maybe Ukrainian’s want closer relations with Europe - not because of any kind of western influence - but just they happen to want to live in a bloc/ sphere of influence in which they can actually determine their own fate… and to enjoy the political and civil liberties that come with such an association

Such as freedom to be vote, have more than one party on the ballot, not have opposing candidates fall out of 40 story tower blocks, go to prison to rot for showing dissent, freedom to be gay, freedom to protest and gather in groups of more than a handful of people

Freedom to not be associated with the kind of lunatics who put their own people in danger - by angering their own created blood money private mercenary company - so much so that same PMC revolts against them and tries to take their nations capital

Little things like knowing you can vote, not be engaged with crazy mercantile drama and just go about your life peacefully without wondering if your online post is going to get you thrown 40 story’s… seems to be important for people

Honestly I am a big citric of Western/ American imperialism. In this situation I think the Ukrainian’s just want to live their lives in peace and minimise the amount of corruption in the growth of their young nation.
 
Last edited:
It’s overly flattering of the west to say we pulled Ukraine away

There have been plenty of corrupt politicians who have wanted to pull Ukraine towards Russia

Repeatedly the Ukrainian citizens have said that’s not what they want. When it hasn’t been clear enough they have made sure to revolt to ensure they are not pulled into Russia’s sphere of influence

Instead it is surely logical that if you look at everything that has happened in Russia over the past 20 years the idea of allowing yourself to be governed by them is incredulous

Ask any Ukrainian why they want to have closer ties with the EU. They will emphasise liberty, civil rights and freedom. None are saying “because we want to be a strategic outpost for the US”

fudge Russia. If they didn’t want to push Ukrainians away from them maybe they should have offered an alternative Ukrainians would genuinely want to sign up to

Instead they massacred their brothers/cousins and now Ukrainian’s will never forgive them for it
 
Craig_J said:
I am no complete sucker for complete Western narratives. A lot of the time we make ourselves seem like the good guys.

In this particular instance Ukraine has had both options. They have chosen repeatedly to integrate themselves more into the European community and to refuse closer ties with Russia. That’s how Euromaiden started.

They wanted closer ties with the EU and NATO. Yanukovych promised the Ukrainian people than that when he ran for president

Putin had influence over him and Yanukovych cancelled joining the EU even through it had been approved by the Ukrainian parliament.

It led to complete revolt. The Ukrainian people chased Yanukovych out the country and he cowered away to live his life in Moscow. Refusing to attend an online video trial because he said he had injuries hie spine and knees playing tennis

Maybe Ukrainian’s want closer relations with Europe - not because of any kind of western influence - but just they happen to want to live in a bloc/ sphere of influence in which they can actually determine their own fate… and to enjoy the political and civil liberties that come with such an association

Such as freedom to be vote, have more than one party on the ballot, not have opposing candidates fall out of 40 story tower blocks, go to prison to rot for showing dissent, freedom to be gay, freedom to protest and gather in groups of more than a handful of people

Freedom to not be associated with the kind of lunatics who put their people in danger - by angering their own appointed blood money mercenaries so much they revolt against them and try to take their capital

Little things like knowing you can vote, not be engaged with crazy mercantile drama and just go about your life peacefully without wondering if your online post is going to get you thrown 40 story’s… seems to be important for people

Honestly I am a big citric of Western/ American imperialism. In this situation I think the Ukrainian’s just want to live their lives in peace and minimise the amount of corruption in the growth of their young nation.
Click to expand...

You do realise Yanacovich was freely and fairly elected by all Ukrainians as a pro Russian president? You knew that of course.

You also obviously know that this democratically elected president was disposed by a coup that was in part fuelled by US funding of far right groups?

The UK had a transition from being an imperial power, we called it the commonwealth. There weren’t other nations trying to undermine our commonwealth and strong ties to former colonies were there? Did we see Russia send arms to the IRA to fight us when our armies were in Ireland? It’s not a perfect analogy but it might show that you’re not as out of your bubble as you think you are.
 
SpurMeUp said:
You do realise Yanacovich was freely and fairly elected by all Ukrainians as a pro Russian president? You knew that of course.

You also obviously know that this democratically elected president was disposed by a coup that was in part fuelled by US funding of far right groups?

The UK had a transition from being an imperial power, we called it the commonwealth. There weren’t other nations trying to undermine our commonwealth and strong ties to former colonies were there? Did we see Russia send arms to the IRA to fight us when our armies were in Ireland? It’s not a perfect analogy but it might show that you’re not as out of your bubble as you think you are.
Click to expand...

Yanacovich had run as a pro Russian president befoe that. He won the presidency in 2004 and the election was overtuned as it was suspsected to have been fixed. With him losing the run off.

After that he ran as a canidate promsiing integration with the EU and NATO.

He then changed his mind and renged on it.

I think being chased out of the country is enough to suggest what Ukranians thought of him.

Please tell me which far right groups the US funded with actual sources which aren't Brietbart, Truth Social or whatever.

And please don't tell me this is like the Ukranian Nazi battalions. 800,000 people particpated in the Euromaiden protests. If these far right groups are just a handful of blokes I will struggle to accept that as a valid assessement of the overall protests

Particularly when the country Yanacovich fled to is a far right nation of its own
 
Craig_J said:
Yanacovich had run as a pro Russian president befoe that. He won the presidency in 2004 and the election was overtuned as it was suspsected to have been fixed. With him losing the run off.

After that he ran as a canidate promsiing integration with the EU and NATO.

He then changed his mind and renged on it.

I think being chased out of the country is enough to suggest what Ukranians thought of him.

Please tell me which far right groups the US funded with actual sources which aren't Brietbart, Truth Social or whatever.

And please don't tell me this is like the Ukranian Nazi battalions. 800,000 people particpated in the Euromaiden protests. If these far right groups are just a handful of blokes I will struggle to accept that as a valid assessement of the overall protests

Particularly when the country Yanacovich fled to is a far right nation of its own
Click to expand...

The US funding of ‘pro democracy’ groups in Ukraine date back to the early 2000s. I preempted your post and gave you one link, but can provide more.

The more detailed history of Yanachovich and Maiden can be seen in that link above. As noted it’s a left leaning publication not some trump bandwagon. It’s a detailed history and you are welcome to post your ideas on why it is not an accurate history. I look forward to your thoughts.

And check this news story out from today:

www.bbc.co.uk

Syrian security forces accused of killing hundreds of civilians

More than 700 civilians of the Alawite religious minority have been killed, the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says.
www.bbc.co.uk

This is the wider context of proxy wars. This is what interventions do to nations. Destroy them and create decades of instability. You’re all for it it seems. It’s not just Syria though, have a look at Libya - how do you think the US led intervention supported by key nato members has gone since for the people of Libya? Or for Afghanistan? Or Iraq? I look forward to your missives whilst people in these nations are slaughtered and their countries destroyed.
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
The US funding of ‘pro democracy’ groups in Ukraine date back to the early 2000s. I preempted your post and gave you one link, but can provide more.

The more detailed history of Yanachovich and Maiden can be seen in that link above. As noted it’s a left leaning publication not some trump bandwagon. It’s a detailed history and you are welcome to post your ideas on why it is not an accurate history. I look forward to your thoughts.

And check this news story out from today:

www.bbc.co.uk

Syrian security forces accused of killing hundreds of civilians

More than 700 civilians of the Alawite religious minority have been killed, the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says.
www.bbc.co.uk

This is the wider context of proxy wars. This is what interventions do to nations. Destroy them and create decades of instability. You’re all for it it seems. It’s not just Syria though, have a look at Libya - how do you think the US led intervention supported by key nato members has gone since for the people of Libya? Or for Afghanistan? Or Iraq? I look forward to your missives whilst people in these nations are slaughtered and their countries destroyed.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link. I will read it shortly and give it fair attention.

Right off the bat though I do think there is a very big difference between comapring what happened when the West became invoved internally within countries like Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq (which I completely oppose)- versus the situation where Russia has actually invaded a European nation.

Thereby creating a precedent that Russia is a country which can, will and is prepared to invade its neighbouring European nations.

Whilst setting in place favourable cirumstances in other former USSR/soviet bloc nations for future invasions.

And whilst Putin has said himself he feels the dissolution of the USSR and loss of its terriotry was a mistake which needs to be resvered.

That's an attack on Europe, a precendent for future attacks and that's something which immediately concerns us.

This isn't Syria. This is potnetially 1 stop away from Germany (with a fall of Ukraine leaving Poland as the only buffer)
 
SpurMeUp said:
You do realise Yanacovich was freely and fairly elected by all Ukrainians as a pro Russian president? You knew that of course.

You also obviously know that this democratically elected president was disposed by a coup that was in part fuelled by US funding of far right groups?

The UK had a transition from being an imperial power, we called it the commonwealth. There weren’t other nations trying to undermine our commonwealth and strong ties to former colonies were there? Did we see Russia send arms to the IRA to fight us when our armies were in Ireland? It’s not a perfect analogy but it might show that you’re not as out of your bubble as you think you are.
Click to expand...


Thought Yanacovich was elected on a pro-EU mandate and then a couple of years into his presidency did a massive U-turn, refused to sign up to EU association (despite massive support for it in Parliament) and this led to the Maiden uprising?

If so, doesn't suggest there was a large pro-Russian constituency that voted for him.

Fully aware that the West played a role stirring the pot but very much doubt it was anymore significant then the Russian stirrings that got Yanacovich to do a full 180.

P.S. there is some evidence the Russians did supply the provisional IRA during the Troubles, but you knew that of course.

P.P.S (just seen at @Craig_J response above)

P.P.P.s interesting article (Jacobin.com), thank you. From a little background research they are more than left 'leaning' but it is an interesting summary.
 
Last edited:
Craig_J said:
Thank you for the link. I will read it shortly and give it fair attention.

Right off the bat though I do think there is a very big difference between comapring what happened when the West became invoved internally within countries like Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq (which I completely oppose)- versus the situation where Russia has actually invaded a European nation.

Thereby creating a precedent that Russia is a country which can, will and is prepared to invade its neighbouring European nations.

Whilst setting in place favourable cirumstances in other former USSR/soviet bloc nations for future invasions.

And whilst Putin has said himself he feels the dissolution of the USSR and loss of its terriotry was a mistake which needs to be resvered.

That's an attack on Europe, a precendent for future attacks and that's something which immediately concerns us.

This isn't Syria. This is potnetially 1 stop away from Germany (with a fall of Ukraine leaving Poland as the only buffer)
Click to expand...

What you seem to be saying is you’ll choose the historical narrative (WWII) to fit your bias. Are you able to step away and actually look at the context of recent interventions? You don’t think the west had interests both geopolitical and resource based when acting in all the above listed conflicts? We were “different”. Would you say NATO or ‘the allies’ invasion of Iraq was a precursor to tyranny? If you look at what happened with Isis and lived in the Middle East - you might be correct.

Lost Mango said:
Thought Yanacovich was elected on a pro-EU mandate and then a couple of years into his presidency did a massive U-turn, refused to sign up to EU association (despite massive support for it in Parliament) and this led to the Maiden uprising?

If so, doesn't suggest there was a large pro-Russian constituency that voted for him.
Click to expand...
Do your research, the country was quite equally split being pro-Russian (the east) and pro-European (the west). Or read that Jacobean article posted earlier for a deeper history.
Lost Mango said:
Fully aware that the West played a role stirring the pot but very much doubt it was anymore significant then the Russian stirrings that got Yanacovich to do a full 180.
Click to expand...
Have a read of that article and give me your thoughts. Your bias is clear: you want to present the western side. How influential was the west? Well without any interventions you could imagine ex-soviet states might well have been quite close and connected to Russia dependent on oil and gas and speaking the same lingo n all.
Lost Mango said:
P.S. there is some evidence the Russians did supply the provisional IRA during the Troubles, but you knew that of course.
Click to expand...
Yes. However, you can’t be comparing it to the transparent massive funding of Ukraine by the west surely?
Lost Mango said:
P.P.S (just seen at @Craig_J response above)
Click to expand...

The question is: are you able to see beyond your ethnocentrism and see the picture from the other side , as well as the dominant western narrative?
 
Last edited:
@SpurMeUp

I can see it from the other side, can you?

There seems to be an acceptance that Russia had the right to interfere because it was their back yard whilst Europe/EU/NATO/US didn't. Great Game stuff with no acknowledgment of what the actual people on the ground want.

The amount of economic blackmail that Putin exerted is no less significant than the interference of the West. That is not a denial of the political and economic interference and blackmail by Europe, the USA or the IMF but just an acknowledgment that Russian intensions were no more honourable.

Research would also suggest that the Ukraine since 2010 hasn't been equally split - 57% support for EU integration in December 2014 is a significant majority when compared to only 11% wanting Russian strengthening and these figures have remained fairly consistent since.
 
Lost Mango said:
@SpurMeUp

I can see it from the other side, can you?

There seems to be an acceptance that Russia had the right to interfere because it was their back yard whilst Europe/EU/NATO/US didn't. Great Game stuff with no acknowledgment of what the actual people on the ground want.

The amount of economic blackmail that Putin exerted is no less significant than the interference of the West. That is not a denial of the political and economic interference and blackmail by Europe, the USA or the IMF but just an acknowledgment that Russian intensions were no more honourable.

Research would also suggest that the Ukraine since 2010 hasn't been equally split - 57% support for EU integration in December 2014 is a significant majority when compared to only 11% wanting Russian strengthening and these figures have remained fairly consistent since.
Click to expand...
Scroll back a few pages and what you outline here is already a massive step change from previous posts. Only a few months back few could even acknowledge there was Russian support in Ukraine prewar. That is how out of kilter with reality our perspective is.

You also seemed to find it hard to acknowledge that the democratically elected pro-Russian president was deposed - undermining free and fair elections. But did acknowledge that there was meddling and funding from the US to help with this coup; whilst playing it down stating that it wasnt actually that important. How do you know? A bit like Russian funding for Brexit and the far right in Europe wasn’t that important? Put aside the importance of these covert political interventions for a moment and see it from Russia’s perspective - watching these US funds and initiatives actively undermine their foreign policy - and you start to understand the context of the war and Russian political interventions in the west. The US were spending millions in Ukraine as far back as 2004 trying to manipulate their democratic processes.

Every history is biased. Both realities are correct. Seeing both sides is helpful and can help to navigate a way towards peace.
 
Last edited:
Bullet said:
It is surprising that Russia's GDP is smaller than Italy's, given the amount of oil they export?
Assuming Rory is correct, would we be quaking in our boots if Italy threatened to invade Ukraine, or would we just go in and slap them and send them packing?
Click to expand...
Russias gdp is smaller than Italys. That is correct. However, that doesn't really say much. When comparing gdp, it's measured in $, so will vary depending on current exchange rate. The ruble has been in free fall, so currently Russias GDP looks very small.

Also, a better way to measure economic strength, is actual purchasing power. You will get a lot more for every dollar you spend in Russia compared to the United States, so if you factor this, Russia comes out a lot better.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
I really don't think they will.....and yes, they do have a brick tonne of soviet tanks.
Click to expand...
They don't. They have pretty much depleted their stock of usable tanks already, and what they have left needs increasingly more effort to get to a usable condition. The longer the war goes on, the worse it'll get for Russia, as long as we keep supporting Ukraine. The way it's going is not sustainable for Russia, both military and financially.
 
Kandi1977 said:
Russias gdp is smaller than Italys. That is correct. However, that doesn't really say much. When comparing gdp, it's measured in $, so will vary depending on current exchange rate. The ruble has been in free fall, so currently Russias GDP looks very small.

Also, a better way to measure economic strength, is actual purchasing power. You will get a lot more for every dollar you spend in Russia compared to the United States, so if you factor this, Russia comes out a lot better.
Click to expand...
Russia needs to buy arms from Iran, North Korea, China etc.
Italy can buy the same weapons and give them to Ukraine.

As you say, Russia cannot keep going with this war, Ukraine just need to hold out a few more months and Russia will have to give up.

@SpurMeUp - USA meddled with Ukrainian politics. Russia meddled with Ukrainian politics. Russia bombed civilians, raped the women, stole the children and committed countless war crimes. Stop saying Russia was justified. If my neighbour throws a crisp packet on my lawn, I can't go round and kill them all and set fire to the house.
 
Bullet said:
Russia needs to buy arms from Iran, North Korea, China etc.
Italy can buy the same weapons and give them to Ukraine.

As you say, Russia cannot keep going with this war, Ukraine just need to hold out a few more months and Russia will have to give up.

@SpurMeUp - USA meddled with Ukrainian politics. Russia meddled with Ukrainian politics. Russia bombed civilians, raped the women, stole the children and committed countless war crimes. Stop saying Russia was justified. If my neighbour throws a crisp packet on my lawn, I can't go round and kill them all and set fire to the house.
Click to expand...

Stop putting words into peoples mouths - that I certainly didn’t say - and trying to make things black and white when there is complexity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back