Genuine question: Where are you from, milstar? I'm very curious; partly because of your views, and partly because of your sometimes fluent and sometimes broken English.
Sorry for the late response, Jayzus. In recent weeks, I haven't had much spare time (if any). I saw your reply a couple of days ago, but I forgot about it, 'til now. Anyway, the frequency of responses here is going to be very sparse. (Just don't think I spent this whole week scribbling this comment, though did this whole afternoon).
Where am I coming from? Freshford, Somerset. A few miles south of Bath. We have a lovely inn. Or at least I think we do. I haven't been there in years. The river Frome burbles right through, and another one, the Avon, is close. I used to travel occasionally to Southern Europe, until the lockdown, met people, who were not really keen on western politicians. That probably influenced my views on the world of politics.
My English? Ah, it's a mix of several factors involved, all of a rather trivial nature. I was never a man of particular literacy. Even in elementary school, I had trouble grasping walls of text. I once heard a pretty good statement that native speakers tend to be lazy with their language, with which I can agree. It may sound controversial here, but grammar rules are something I pay little attention to when typing my comments, and I write them quickly as I lay out my thoughts at the time. Additionally, I often use my cellphone (unlike now), where I must wrangle with the tightness of the buttons and autocorrect (often necessary option). I hope these explain my Jekyll-Hyde coherency.
My views? I dare say they are not that weird to some other members of this forum. Over the years, I have observed governmental doings, or better said, wrongdoings, in both domestic and foreign departments. So-called "humanitarian" interventions often ended up miserably, one way or another (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya...).
The extent of our leaders' crimes is that they only happen to remember a casual voter right before elections. This left me severely anti-authoritarian, maybe even more so than our Sharky laddie here. I am only baffled about whether I should consider them traitorous or putty-headed.
@Wolfie, I hope my answer satisfies your demands as well.
I was talking about genocide, not nuclear warfare, which is what we’re well on the way to. Even the corridor announcement is chilling, since in the past we know how that ends up. (Basically, everyone leave your country so it can be taken over easily; those who stay behind all become enemy combatants by default and therefore fair game.) Beyond that, we’ve already seen Putin poison people overseas (including in the UK), by way of radioactive contaminants, along with committing atrocities with war-crime-level weaponry. Little to nothing is off the board for him.
And perhaps you’re right about the end state. But if the end result of this is Putin killing countless thousands, probably committing genocide, and wiping a sovereign nation forever from existence, you’re OK with that? You’re like “hey, Ukraine brought this on themselves”? As for the NATO aggression, have you ever thought that ex-Soviet client states saw a shot at independence vs subjugation and therefore went for that? (CIS could have been a much smarter set-up, but Russia didn’t want independence – it wanted those countries to do what Russia wanted, hence its failure.)
Indigo, I am a man of peace. I am against war, any war. Meaning you have to go al lthe way. I was just saying that while I don't support the invasion, I said that he had reasons, unlike waking up one day and going off the rocker, like "let's massacre and conquer a neighbouring country." I am assured this was in the boiling pan for quite some time. At its optimal, Putin probably seeks to restore a mix of imperialist Russia and the Soviet union, albeit in redux form. What is especially troubling is how the whole war trickled into the media, and I don't doubt both sides use propaganda for their purposes (well, one must be blind and notice extreme polarisation). No, I wouldn't throw the word "genocide" that lightly, giving it its weight. Ukraine has millions of refugees now, right? What if they return when the conflict is over? Additionally, what is spine-tingling is that Ukraine had a biological (biochemical, perhaps) lab seized by Russian forces. Under US supervision. Only a naive person, extremely naive, would think one side is exclusively good, and the other exclusively evil. Conflicts, at least in modern times, have rarely been that. I only feel sorry for the pain that the Ukrainian people have to endure as a result of NATO, Russia, and their own regime's actions.
Of what I've named as probable outcomes, I think the most likely one is where Ukraine loses a portion of its eastern part and is barred from joining NATO.
@Tjm86 without going part by part, I'll just say that I agree with you on a good number of your comments. I'll just add this. I am aware of Putin's statement on the fall of the Soviet union, and it is obvious that he seeks to restore Russia's influence worldwide, much in the vein of the US. In fact, Putin may already have reached that point when he decided to intervene in Syria. I seriously doubt a country like the UK could be of any interest to him, politically and geographically. Ofcourse, I don't claim we are beyond his reach, but that is not the point I am trying to make. If we haven't been invaded during the Cold war, I don't see that happening now. I am also fully aware of, and I've read somewhere pretty good reasoning on why some countries feel antagnistic toward Russia, blaming the Soviet era (well, more Soviet than tsarist). And quite rightfully so. Then there is the situation with eastern Ukraine with Azov neonazis adding fuel to the fire. Another problem is that both sides are spouting propaganda (the first casualty of war), which has seethed to extremely polarising levels. I'm not going to call Putin Hitler; in fact, I don't think Trump deserved that dreadful moniker; and Trump was certainly a madman. Politically illiterate.
Now, this whole situation is horrible. But what would be a more horrible outcome is if we go to war with Russia. That would be catastrophic. Well, I slightly walk that back. It would be castrophic, unless they do invade us.
Anyway, I don't expect this conflict to drag on, and if I have any clairvoyant skills, I don't see more of this in six months. And you, sir, seem well versed in Eastern-European politics and culture? Fancy giving some books to read?
Anyway, I think Oliver Stone gave a pretty good view on this (I'll leave the link instead of the whole post):
https://deadline.com/2022/03/oliver-stone-criticizes-putin-ukraine-1234973037/My only disagreement is that I don't think anyone is happy about this, Russian nationalists too, and those others, the legion if they are happy about this, I don't consider them humans.
There's also the documentary "Ukraine on Fire," in which Stone appears, and which I watched and felt quite educated on the entire Ukraine crisis situation (that movie, by the way, is either forbidden or has been removed from Youtube).
But just so that a war can be tragicomical, here's one example:
https://www.newsweek.com/russell-texas-bentley-interview-pro-russia-donbas-ukraine-1684450@Funt Solo which one? I take it's well known he had two of them.
But yeah, I'd rather be a pathetic human with a neutral PoV; than a fascist one, being conditionally demanded to use a designated label for the bloke.
Show Posts
