Russian invasion of Ukraine

[FinestTigers]

OK, Ill refine it for you. The parts of your post that you have cherry picked, I dont disagree with strongly.

That was not the narrative of your post however. You post stated that the US have been actively antagonistic to Russia and had an aggressive stance towards them. This is patently untrue and demonstrably so. I included clear examples that this is false, and it is.

The Russians alone, based on their actions in Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine twice had singlehandedly poisened any possibility of a peaceful coexistence with the US, NATO or the West generally.

To be honest, I am amazed and sickened by apologists trying to paint a picture where Russias actions are anything other than disgraceful and their own fault.

G'day 5150, these are only my thaughts about what's happening in the World of politics and what could happen in the future, Lets see how we go today mate,

I'm sure you would agree that NATO is not an angelic type of an orginisation and neither is any other powerful country, they are all concerned about regional and World dominance.

The meaning of my previous post was more to do with the New silk road project, but you made more comments about NATO and nothing about the New silk road project.

Naturally no-one is going to give up their World influences and dominance without a mighty fight,
And i see the New silk road project as the single biggest threat to today's Superpower and Imperialism.

I think today's and future conflicts will all be connected to this massive new prioject.

The founder and owner of this project is China, and so far 140 countries have signed up for cooperation, with massive investments have already been made in many countries, the development of the new silk road (aka BRI) is currently estimated to cost $900 billion and it is expected to add more than $7 trillion to the worlds GDP, China calls the scheme "a new era of globalization"

Of course the Imperialist would be very worried, this is why i say, it could have been better for the US to have Russia as another European ally and not allow Russia to join forces with China, but perhaps it's all too late, the future of the Imperialist looks increasingly precarious.

I think that from now on, the meaning of new world conflicts will be NATO v The new silk road (BRI).

 

[earl]

"Are the Anglosphere nations right to treat Russia as a perpetual threat and pariah long after its global ambitions have collapsed and its military power has rusted away?"

How funny is this.

 

[earl]

Interestingly Scotty M is apparently speaking up today about having to increase our defense budge due to autocratic dictators.

What a crappy world it's becoming.

 

[Kaito]

Www.twitter.com/ASBMilitary decent source for those who are interested ..

 

[Kaito]

Interestingly Scotty M is apparently speaking up today about having to increase our defense budge due to autocratic dictators.

What a crappy world it's becoming.

I read a Samantha Maiden article this morning with relation to this..Big cringe 😂

 

[Tiger5150]

G'day 5150, these are only my thaughts about what's happening in the World of politics and what could happen in the future, Lets see how we go today mate,

I'm sure you would agree that NATO is not an angelic type of an orginisation and neither is any other powerful country, they are all concerned about regional and World dominance.

Name a nation that NATO has invaded or "taken" against its will. NATO is a purely defensive organisation. AGAIN, Russia was asked to join and they signed and agreement to work towards joining and were a NATO signatory partner until the first Ukrainian invasion.

The meaning of my previous post was more to do with the New silk road project, but you made more comments about NATO and nothing about the New silk road project.

Its not a "New Silk Road". The original Silk Road was opened to foster trade and cultural exchange. The Belt & Road Initiative is a global fraudulent action to provide China with globally strategic locations, predominantly throughout the Pacific. The BRI is not Chinese benevolence. The money that China provides for BRI projects are a loan and if you cant pay it back you forfeit the property. Sri Lanka lost their only primary shipping port this way. It is being repeated throughout the Pacific.

With respect (genuinely), I find all this talk about peripheral global politics a distraction at best and to be honest, I find it pretty distasteful. Any talk about past US crimes such as Iraq, questions about the eastward expansion of NATO (at Eastern Europe request) and now the Chinese BRI all just seek to provide nuance and depth to an issue that is as deep as a puddle.

Russia, a global military superpower has invaded a sovereign nation, for no good reason and is destroying cities, killing innocent civilians and displacing millions. That is the start and the finish. Discussion of peripheral politics trivialises what is happening, its motive and the repurcussions.

Discussions about how the BRI will impact the world would be pretty low on the list of things to care about today in Kiev.

 

[earl]

Russia, a global military superpower has invaded a sovereign nation, for no good reason and is destroying cities, killing innocent civilians and displacing millions. That is the start and the finish. Discussion of peripheral politics trivialises what is happening, its motive and the repurcussions.

100% agreed. The people that show appreciation for Putin and talk about how smart he is are the worst but there are varying degrees of trying to turn this into something that it isn't.

 

[Magpie_Magic]

Name a nation that NATO has invaded or "taken" against its will. NATO is a purely defensive organisation. AGAIN, Russia was asked to join and they signed and agreement to work towards joining and were a NATO signatory partner until the first Ukrainian invasion.



Its not a "New Silk Road". The original Silk Road was opened to foster trade and cultural exchange. The Belt & Road Initiative is a global fraudulent action to provide China with globally strategic locations, predominantly throughout the Pacific. The BRI is not Chinese benevolence. The money that China provides for BRI projects are a loan and if you cant pay it back you forfeit the property. Sri Lanka lost their only primary shipping port this way. It is being repeated throughout the Pacific.

With respect (genuinely), I find all this talk about peripheral global politics a distraction at best and to be honest, I find it pretty distasteful. Any talk about past US crimes such as Iraq, questions about the eastward expansion of NATO (at Eastern Europe request) and now the Chinese BRI all just seek to provide nuance and depth to an issue that is as deep as a puddle.

Russia, a global military superpower has invaded a sovereign nation, for no good reason and is destroying cities, killing innocent civilians and displacing millions. That is the start and the finish. Discussion of peripheral politics trivialises what is happening, its motive and the repurcussions.

Discussions about how the BRI will impact the world would be pretty low on the list of things to care about today in Kiev.

I hope your not cut and pasting again 🤣🤣🤣🤣

I'm thinking of easing up on you for "humanitarian "reasons. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[Tiger5150]

I hope your not cut and pasting again 🤣🤣🤣🤣

I'm thinking of easing up on you for "humanitarian "reasons. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Not sure what Im accused of cutting or pasting, but thank you for your valuable contribution to the thread.

 

[FinestTigers]

Name a nation that NATO has invaded or "taken" against its will. NATO is a purely defensive organisation. AGAIN, Russia was asked to join and they signed and agreement to work towards joining and were a NATO signatory partner until the first Ukrainian invasion.

I am very surprised again that you are saying this, it sure seems now that you believe NATO are angelic and that they only exist to protect innocent people, wow.

There are many but lets start with this one.

The NATO-led military intervention in Libya, 19 March 2011.

In January 2012, the Arab Organization for Human Rights, Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and the International Legal Assistance Consortium published a report describing alleged human rights violations and accusing NATO of war crimes.

And what do you know about what happened after this intervention? Millions of displaced people and millions of dead people throughout the Middle east for years and years.

 

[earl]

And NATO was involved in Afghanistan against Afghanistan's will and bombed Yugoslavia in 1999 against it's will.

Was the bombing part of a process of trying to stop ethnic cleansing or you could call it genocide ? I think it was.

 

[Tiger5150]

I am very surprised again that you are saying this, it sure seems now that you believe NATO are angelic and that they only exist to protect innocent people, wow.

There are many but lets start with this one.

The NATO-led military intervention in Libya, 19 March 2011.

In January 2012, the Arab Organization for Human Rights, Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and the International Legal Assistance Consortium published a report describing alleged human rights violations and accusing NATO of war crimes.

And what do you know about what happened after this intervention? Millions of displaced people and millions of dead people throughout the Middle east for years and years.

You missed the fact that NATO acted in Libya in 2011 at the request of the UN security council in the role of protecting Libyan civilians from cluster bombing by Gaddafi.

To What Extent Was the NATO Intervention in Libya a Humanitarian Intervention?

Given the evidence of NATO's emphasis on regime change, actions taken by NATO in the Libyan intervention showcase how the intervention was not strictly humanitarian.

www.e-ir.info

 

[Tiger5150]

And NATO was involved in Afghanistan against Afghanistan's will and bombed Yugoslavia in 1999 against it's will.

Against their will? Any involvement by a military power against a party will be against their will.

NATO were supported by Russia in Afghanistan.

NATO in Yugoslavia....against whos will? It certainly wasnt against the will of the ethinic Albanians who were being slaughtered in state sponsored genocide. THat is the whole point of NATO. That is exactly why they exist.

 

[earl]

Against their will? Any involvement by a military power against a party will be against their will.

NATO were supported by Russia in Afghanistan.

NATO in Yugoslavia....against whos will? It certainly wasnt against the will of the ethinic Albanians who were being slaughtered in state sponsored genocide. THat is the whole point of NATO. That is exactly why they exist.

It's amazing how some people can twist facts to try and present their narrative.

 

[Tim Sheens]

Www.twitter.com/ASBMilitary decent source for those who are interested ..

Had a look and it looked very much a propaganda machine handle, but each to their own.

 

[Tiger5150]

This is an open thread on Russia's invasion so everything regarding political geopolitical etc is pertinent.

If you dislike it don't post, read or reply to posts. You can also ignore members. You cannot in your usual style box the debate to suit your arguments.

Thank you oh holder of all cans and cannots.

I think you will find I can post what I like, as I like....as can you which is kind of your point, but it doesnt apply to me? Righto.

It doesn't trivialize anything, Russia feels it had good reasons. If it's concerns were adequately considered during diplomacy we wouldn't be here today.

This is everything about geopolitics.

So......because Russia has reasons, its all ok? We dont need to consider if those reasons justify invading a sovereign nation, levelling its cities, killing civillians and displacing millions? Play on?

This is nobodies fault but Russia.

 

[earl]

It often selects it's involvement for political reasons .

They are a political institution. I'd also suggest stopping genocide is a good reason to take action. Are you stating genocide didn't occur in Yugoslavia or did you just drop that fact because it makes your argument look stupid ?

 

[Tiger5150]

The point is it wasn't defensive and Yugoslavia and the people that were claiming genocide were not in NATO so NATO chose to involve itself in a third country.

All the NATO countries appealed to the Security Council to intervene and it was vetoed by those two bastions of World Peace, Russia and China.

Russian concerns re NATO on their border are real. NATO can use a pretext for attempted invasion of Russia if say Ukraine accused it of "sponsoring genocide againstit's people if it was in the organization on" humanitarian grounds ".

So I suppose that its justified that in response to a concern regarding an imaginary attempted genocide, its much better to go in with thousands of tanks and do it properly.

 

[earl]

You taking the context of the original post off track again.

The point is there has been non defensive involvement in third countries on definitions of "defense or humanitarian grounds "selectively and non universally applied.

The problem is that you don't have the ability to discern the difference between NATO bombing the former Yugoslavia to stop genocide compared to Russia invading Ukraine.

 

[Tiger5150]

You taking the context of the original post off track again.

The point is there has been non defensive involvement in third countries on definitions of "defense or humanitarian grounds "selectively and non universally applied.

That was your point, not mine. My point has actually been that these things are extremely tangential to what Russia are doing in Ukraine.

One of the charters of NATO is "Responsibility to Protect". In Libya and Yugoslavia, this is clearly what they were there for, in Libya at the ratified request of the UN Security Council. In Yoguslavia at the unratified request of the UN Security Council with the exception of peace loving Russia and China who were quite ok with the genocide continuing to its end. Im quite sure the Libyan civilians were grateful to have Gaddafi stop shelling their own people and the Albanians were also grateful.

Afghanistan is a weird one, Ill grant you that, but given that Russia cooperated with NATO forces, I'll assume it was approved.

Im yet to see any evidence of NATO invading a country unprovoked, leveling cities and indiscriminantly killing civilians.