Surely you're not trying to suggest that Ukraine attacking Russian-occupied territory is dishonesty? Or else, has the nuclear plant somehow changed location?
Ukraine War Watch Thread
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
So how do you think the Nord Stream 2 situation will effect things?
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
Ukraine has not shelled the friggin' plant. Russia attacked it earlier in the war, and has since been using it to shell Ukrainian communities. Any foolishness going at the plant is purely the fault of the Russians.
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
News organizations that I have read on the subject indicate that it is the Russian government that is claiming that Ukraine is doing the shelling of targets near or at the plant. The Ukrainian government, in turn, is claiming that it is Russia that is doing the shelling. Such news organizations typically indicate that they are unable to verify which version is correct.
Don't mourn, organize.
-Joe Hill
-Joe Hill
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
I don't like your tone, can't you write more calmly?Are you out of your mind?
Sorry, I don't know how else to say it: are-you-out-of-your-mind? Things are that easy to you?, you just want to merrily start WW3?, btw are you in the army now?, are you ready to join that expeditionary force?, how much do you enjoy war?
You are calling for NATO to organize a 100.000 force... for this weekend, maybe?, 300.000?, and start fighting in every country and ocean, every border... Do you think that Russia is kindly going to oblige and fight a conventional war only in Ukraine?, just for fun?
Any idea how wars started and what happened afterwards?
I'm saying, the Russians might very well succeed in destabilizing western Europe this winter. Already, shops are closing due to high costs, this can accelerate immensely if energy costs go way up. People can freeze to death. We can have mass unemployment. Poverty is going way up. All because of the crazy man Putin. We can't just sit by and do nothing. If the terrorist state of Russia chooses to use nuclear bombs, that's not our fault.
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
erowind wrote: ↑Tue Sep 27, 2022 6:42 amThe cold war was fundamentally different. By the time the USSR had acquired nuclear bombs the Warsaw Pact was well established and the earlier adventurism of soviet revolutionaries across the steppe had come to an end. The USSR didn't territorially expand after WW2 nor did it generally involve itself in military conflicts except when local revolutionaries requested aid as in Vietnam, Afghanistan or a handful of African countries. Trotsky's concepts of global revolution were stamped out and for however many faults Khrushchev did have his administrations foreign policy was more isolationist than not. The Korean war was an aftermath of WW2 and doesn't fit the bill either. All of which is to say, the USSR didn't invade countries after WW2 for imperial purposes.
So, when the USSR invaded Afghanistan it was responding to the request of “local revolutionaries.” Yet when the U.S. invaded other countries, it was acting for “imperial purposes”?
I suppose when it marched its armies into Hungary in 1956, and into Czechoslovakia in 1967, it was also responding to the request of “local revolutionaries”?
I actually had to look up the meaning of casus belli: an act or situation provoking or justifying war.To contrast that with today's Russia. Russia is invading Ukraine for the purpose of imperial domination of the country and to extract it's resources. (The ethnic component is just the casus belli.)
Conveniently setting aside arguments that Ukraine was developing its democratic institutions. In the absence of evidence or illustrative examples, I also wonder if “entering trade relations” is also being transformed into “extracting capital.”America too is providing military aid to Ukraine for the purpose of imperial domination and to extract it's resources. American capital had already liberalized much of the Ukrainian economy and was extracting capital before the war started.
See above regarding Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan.So the geopolitics are different now. Instead of two diametrically opposed yet fundamentally different world powers with different ideological interests like with the USA vs the USSR, where the USSR largely did not compete for imperial dominance.
False equivalency in that the United States does have a an arguably flawed but still functioning democratic system. Under threat, one might add, from the Putin supported Donald Trump and company. Trump employing Big Lie tactics to undermine the legitimacy of other wise democratic institutions. Ethnic politics also playing a role here in the United States.The modern Russian Federation and United States are both capitalist oligarchies which are both competing with one another for imperial dominance.
Again, ignoring the transition from monarchy to democracy undertaken by many European countries.This is a very bad combination, and not to be historicist because things have changed since WW1, namely that the capitalist nations in question are largely oligarchies not monarchies now, and we don't really know how the internet will effect the sociological component of this war.
A time when many countries were still in their monarchist phase.Even so, imperial capitalist countries do tend to fight each other when they run out of places to invest their capital internal to their own empires. This phenomena is visible throughout history from WWI all the way back through the 19th and much of the 18th century.
Thus equating the fundamentally anti—democratic nature of the Russian government with the USA, as well as ignoring the genocidal implications of the casus belli.Which is all to say, the Russian Federation and the United States are, ironically, much more likely to war with each other and not be willing to negotiate than the USSR and the USA were.
Which is horrid, capitalists constantly argue that capitalist countries don't have a reason to war with which other. Well, here we are, how's that going?
I have actually never heard that argument. The argument that I have heard is that democratic nations don’t have a reason to war with each other.
The closest I have heard to the argument that capitalist nations don’t war with each other was a claim, later proven by subsequent events to not be the case, that nations with McDonald franchises within their respective borders did not war with each other. What proved to be the force that rendered that rule inoperative?
At least one of those overpowering forces was that of ethnic differences and related animosities.
There is some history to support the idea that the United States doesn’t value human rights. Ethnic and racial identities and differences fed into genocidal practices and the perpetuation of the economic institution of slavery. This was especially the case in the 19th century.They'll veil the argument behind this war being between "democracy" and "authoritarianism" but both the Russian Federation and the United states are authoritarian oligarchies that don't value human rights.
Somewhat more respective of human rights were racist ideologies of the “white man’s burden” which led to more paternalistic behavior.
Being oppressed, perhaps. This is especially the case for ethnic and racial minorities in the United States. LGBT+ communities and women can also make a legitimate claim to being oppressed.One of them is just much richer and the American people are very used to being oppressed, so used to it that they often can't even perceive they live in an extremely authoritarian nation with fixed elections, censored speech, censored press, corrupt governance, concentration camps, extrajudicial killings and militarized police.
Fixed elections. Democracy has been a goal of progressive forces in the United States. There was an era of Big Bosses with their political machines that rigged elections at various local locations. Sometimes even to the point of possibly affecting the outcome of presidential elections. For the present time, one must endorse the Big Lie perpetrated by Donald Trump and company to believe that elections are “fixed” today. That is not to say that corporate interests and the wealthy do not enjoy an advantage in terms of modern media access.
Censored speech and censored press – no, just no. Not in the sense of prior restraint exercised by the government. Libel and slander laws are in place, but one must prove intent to deceive and damages to win lawsuits brough on such grounds. As mentioned earlier, that is not to say that corporate interests and the wealthy do not enjoy an advantage in terms of the employment of modern media.
Corrupt governance. No country is without challenges in that regard. As demonstrated earlier, one of the biggest problems Ukraine has faced in recent years in addressing its internal problems is to deal with the corrupting influence of Russia. For example, upon its Supreme Court. So, to equate the Ukraine and Russia in this regard would not only be to engage in a false equivalency, but also to unjustly indulge in a blaming of the victim.
Concentration camps. I presume you mean prisons. See comment above regarding being oppressed.
Extrajudicial killings. In the U.S. the only such killings I can think of are those related to racist police practices. In such instances, there is generally not a targeting of political opponents for the purpose of thwarting democratic institutions. One might add that we are lurching dangerously close to where that might be a more common occurrence, given the events of January 6, 2021, the death threats posed to election officials and to other legitimately elected government officials, etc.
Militarized police. An excellent topic for discussion in the Police and Law Enforcement News and Discussions thread.
Russia really isn't as different as people think it is.
IMHO the differences are still stark and dramatic.
Does that mean nuclear weapons do get used this time as opposed to the cold war? No, the chance is still probably low, especially for this first proxy war. But I do think it is much higher than it was
Tensions are heightening in comparison to previous years of the 21st century and even in comparison to the Cold War era
Putin is most certainly attempting to manufacture consent for the use of nuclear weapons. This can be seen in their sham elections being used as a pretext to annex Ukrainian territory into Russia. Thus, being able to justify at least the threat of first use of nuclear weapons on the grounds that they are simply defending Russian territory. Claims that the U.S supports the first use of nuclear weapons need further evidentiary support.and it's very clear that western governments and the Russian government are manufacturing consent for nuclear war and trying to justify it to everyone.
It is terrifying, especially for Ukraine, which is the most likely to be at least the initial victim of the use of nuclear weapons.That is terrifying and I am scared that I'm going to wake up to mushroom clouds one morning, at least the ecological crises is a slow burn. We shouldn't let them do this.
Both governments are an axis of evil in their own right. An axis of evil against the people of our world.
Which poses the problem as that of the United States versus Russia leaving out the legitimate wishes of Ukrainians to develop their own democratic government, free of genocidal threats to their identity as a people.
Well, I for one acknowledge that there are many evils of capitalism, especially in its earlier manifestations of promoting imperialistic practices and even genocide. I think it very much matters what kind economic system replaces that of capitalism. Kleptocracies are no better, and totalitarian states in which ethnic differences are a casus belli would by their very nature be much worse. Some nuance and subtlety are to be desired in our analysis as opposed to simplistic false equivalencies.This madness will not end until we abolish the capitalist state.
At any rate, thank you for your thoughtful post as it has helped me to clarify my own thinking on the matter. Hopefully, others also now have a better understanding of the situation and of the varying arguments and approaches to understanding that situation.
Edit: Changes made for use of proper grammar and punctuation.
Last edited by caltrek on Wed Sep 28, 2022 6:24 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Don't mourn, organize.
-Joe Hill
-Joe Hill
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
I personally don't have a completely thought response to that question. A good place to start might be with this article on the subject: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ ... he-baltic
Axios also had a good brief article on the topic: https://www.axios.com/2022/09/28/nord-s ... -sabotage
Don't mourn, organize.
-Joe Hill
-Joe Hill
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
I don't like your call for WW3.I don't like your tone...
No, I don't want to calm my tone, WW3 has nothing to calm down about it.
This was your post:
"Worst case is blackouts through Europe, people dying from cold and businesses going under. Europe have to prepare to go in with military forces in Ukraine to defeat the Russians and hopefully tumble Putin. We can't just sit still and see Europe go down."
Worst case scenario is WW3, the whole planet. Did the end of Europe happened in 1973?, we actually got more efficient car engines; did it happened in 2008?
You are calling to join a war, a war that can pretty well turn into WW3, that is i-n-s-a-n-e; that in all probability would turn into WW3.
Do you remember how well the change of regime went (is going) in Libya?, to mention just one example. You sound like somebody trying to defend his (our) privileges, no matter the costs, no matter the consequences.
I my first post I was actually "kind", I was going to ask you if you are a twelve years old, have you been studying History in High School? I cannot call your post "conclusions" -based on what?-, but some kind of Europe-centred-tantrum and your "solution" is the worst of it: the worst case scenario.
Re: Ukraine War Watch Thread
This looks like Vietnam, after one more victory... we need more, of everything.The U.S. will provide an additional $1.1 billion...