No. Any measure a country takes to strengthen itself is not a provocation just because their interests don't align with another country's. Every nation has the right to strengthen itself and pursue its own interests so long as those interests aren't invading another country. It was bull when my country did it in Iraq, and it's bull with Russia doing it in Ukraine now.joe00uk wrote: ↑Sat May 21, 2022 10:57 amThey're understandable from Ukraine's point of view, sure, but Russia has a completely different point of view based on its own interests as a nation. If the Ukrainian and Russian regimes are hostile to each other, then obviously any measure either takes to strengthen itself is going to be 'provocative' to the other. I'm not talking about who's right and wrong. But it's also important to remember that Crimea being given to Ukraine in 1954 was rather nonsensical. Its population is mostly ethnically Russian. I don't see why it should ever have made sense for them to stay in Ukraine after 2014 when an anti-Russian government seized power. As for the Donbass, Russia didn't seize it from them - those were Ukrainian citizens of Russian ethnicity who didn't want to be ruled over by a new regime which would be hostile to them. Obviously, yes, the Ukrainian government wants that territory to stay under its rule so obviously it was going to take measures to ensure that remains the case, but this is why I'm saying there are multiple valid perspectives here. There's no "one true path to enlightenment".
I don't know about what happened in 1954, it doesn't matter. Crimea was a part of Ukraine for decades, to the point where most of the population, including many of the ethnic Russians, identified as Ukranian. Russia was not invited to come in and steal it by force. And really, an anti-Russian government suddenly seized power in Crimea, and that gave Russia the blessing to go forth and conquer? That doesn't make any sense.
As for the Donbass, it isn't the Ukrainians trying to wrestle it from the Ukranians, it's Russia.
Yes, come on now. I don't know which western media news outlets you watch, but they're not some behemoth unified front dictated by one man in power like Russia's is. I only heard of the Ghost of Kyiv once, and I think that was just a snippet of an interview someone was doing with a Ukranian, not sure. Propaganda? Probably. By Ukraine itself, which I'm not gonna judge a nation for propaganda to keep spirits up and people hopeful during an invasion. By some media outlets, sure. Each outlet is going to have their own practices and standards. But not all of them are saying the same things. Because most Western outlets are free to report the news how they want. Same can't be said for Russia's outlets, dictated solely by Putin.It is the very definition of propaganda. If the media intentionally feeds us biased information (or misinformation) for the purpose of swaying our opinion towards supporting one side or another in a conflict, that is propaganda. Are you really trying to tell me the "Ghost of Kiev" wasn't propaganda? Are you really trying to tell me that the constant stream of reports here in the West about Russia losing "any day now" are an objective assessment of the facts? Come on.
Except, as I said, there was some even in the beginning even if less, and still some even in mainstream media. And as the shock wore off, as people began to think outside the cloud of fear, and as it became clear that "weapons of mass destruction" was a lie and more people began to understand what was happening, the criticism grew and grew. None of that is happening in Russia, none of it can happen in Russia, because it's against the law to speak out and call it a war or an invasion. And trust me, the 9/11 trauma was valid. You didn't need to to have been there firsthand or have lost someone to experience it. It was an attack on our country, destroying some of our most iconic buildings, and killing so many of our people in one heinous act, and we weren't sure if something like that wasn't going to happen again and soon. I don't think there wasn't a single one of my countrymen who wasn't a mix of shocked, saddened, angered, and scared when that happened. How we responded to it was unfortunate, but we were an easily moldable mix of emotional people who just wanted to feel safe again and wanted to do something. Russia is just acting because one man has too much power.You've answered that yourself. There was a lot less in the beginning, and practically none in the mainstream media. I'm not so sure the 9/11 trauma factor is valid there (aside from the effects of media coverage) given most people didn't experience 9/11 firsthand or know anyone who was killed or injured. In any case, popular opinion never mattered. The American and British governments pressed ahead on it just like any authoritarian regime you could care to name and only relented after many years when their failures became too obvious to ignore.Vakanai wrote: ↑Sat May 21, 2022 1:54 amAlso I don't know what country you were watching media in, but I remember seeing plenty of critics and criticism of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan here. Sure, there was less of it in the very beginning, frankly Americans were still kind of in shock for the first two or three years after 9/11 to want to give it serious unbiased thinking, but even then criticism existed. Russia allows no criticism in it's media, and the population isn't suffering a traumatic cultural shock to the system to be thinking unclearly. Russia is pure Putin led propaganda.
And yeah, the governments kept going on despite popular opinion. But I'm not trying to defend those administrations. Why do you need to defend Putin?
We're not pretending we're better than Russia though, we're just calling Russia out because Russia's the one wrongly invading their neighbor. Like I said, we've no problem criticizing our own nations and governments when we think we're in the wrong. America's been in the wrong, UK's been in the wrong, but it is Russia who is in the wrong right now, Russia is the one committing war crimes right now. So right now, we should be calling Russia out for it, we should be supporting Ukraine, we should be trying to make it harder for Russia to wage this war.Exactly, so we might as well admit our flaws and stop pretending that we're so much better than everyone else because they also have flaws. That's not to say we should become shrinking violets and start thinking of everyone else as better than us of course, which is also untrue. Popular opinion of the Iraq War in the West shifted, but it took years of embarrassing failures for the official media and the government to do the same. They also spent years denying all wrongdoing and painting themselves as victims and their victims as extremists, so I'm not sure why you're saying "there's no comparison" when there quite clearly is a comparison.Vakanai wrote: ↑Sat May 21, 2022 1:54 amAmerica and it's allies are flawed, I won't debate that fact. We've made mistakes. We frankly did shit we shouldn't have. Some of it was shock, some of it lies (weapons of mass destruction that never existed), some of it was just on us, our fault. We've owned some of it, some we haven't. But Russia is denying any wrongdoing, trying to paint themselves as the victims and their victims as extremist militants, and will not allow it's citizens to argue against the Kremlin's worldview and are being brainwashed into believing it via state sponsored propaganda. The West is not innocent, but there's no comparison here. Russia is flat out in the wrong here, is the aggressor here, and Ukraine is suffering death and despair all because of the tyrannical Nazi-like decisions of an authoritarian and ruthless megalomaniac.
And again, there is no comparison. There was no 9/11 type inciting evidence. There's no criticisms allowed. No one in the nation is calling out the war crimes. The war crimes are more flagrant, and earlier. There's nothing but propaganda. This is Putin's war because he's an authoritarian leader. Our leaders may be flawed too, but at least we can vote them out.
Never mind most of our horrors were drown strikes that accidentally targeted innocent people, because remote warfare is the most anti-humanitarian idea anyone's ever had. Meanwhile, we've all seen the bodies of Ukranians dead in the street, executed.
I am not anti-Russia. I am anti-Putin. I am anti-war. I am anti-invasion. Even if the war in Iraq and this invasion of Ukraine are comparable? That doesn't change that this invasion is an unjust tragedy committed on one nation by another that has no right to be in there.
Sure, I agree with that. But there's a difference in perspectives, like how we should respond, are sanctions right, should we send more diplomats, etc. But those are calm and informed different perspectives. There's no value in getting the perspectives of those committing the war crimes or are brainwashed by the propaganda to believe the invasion is a just act of glory. No one needed to ask the Nazis for their perspective in WWII for folks to know they were not the good guys.Also, I haven't been talking about who's in the right or the wrong - in case you haven't noticed. I'm no fan of Ukraine, but I don't actually support the invasion. The point I've been making this whole time is that getting different perspectives is good, whether or not you happen to agree with them.