Ukraine War Watch Thread

[ibm9000]

Excuse me...

Why should we help Ukraine?, we didn't help Iraq, we didn't help Panama...
Is just a question of "likes"?

We were hoping Afghanistan to win against the USSR? and against USA too?


-I case of a "quick" interpretation... I am not saying anything about hoping Russia to win-

[caltrek]

Excuse me...

Why should we help Ukraine?, we didn't help Iraq, we didn't help Panama...
Is just a question of "likes"?

We were hoping Afghanistan to win against the USSR? and against USA too?

-I case of a "quick" interpretation... I am not saying anything about hoping Russia to win-

Because Ukraine is, or at least was, a fledgling democracy. One that was subject to an unprovoked attack - a savage act of aggression.

Debatable about whether we did or did not "help" Iraq. I could take either side of that argument and not find myself entirely convinced by my arguments. On the whole, I suppose I would tentatively conclude that we did more harm than good. Still, I can see the argument that getting rid of Sadam Hussein as a leader was of benefit. He had ordered the launching of invasions against Iran and Kuwait. Hardly the actions of a "likable" person. He also was a dictator - one that gained power through something other than democratic means.

Noriega, also a dictator, was hardly a nice and likeable guy in Panama, although that did not necessarily justify an invasion there. Construction of a canal at least had the potential of bringing in revenues to the Panamanians, although arguably it was more an imperialistic endeavor. At any rate, it would be helpful if you could specify particular actions or time frames in your question, rather than leave us readers the task of guessing what the hell you are writing about.

When Russia invaded Afghanistan. I am not sure what "we were hoping." There were policies of containment being promulgated at the time of Russia's invasion, so I suppose you could deduce that we were therefore hoping for a "win" by Afghanistan.

When the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, it chose sides in a civil war there. The invasion was justified by the need to strike back at Al Qaeda, an organization that had launched a terrorist attack against the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, etc. Now you may object to calling Al Qaeda a terrorist organization, but it is still clear that they were the instigators of the events of 9/11. Personally, I thought we should have confined our actions to striking at Al Qaeda, as opposed to also taking sides in the war against the Taliban, but as an individual, I do not control U.S. foreign policy.

Getting back to promoting democracy. One of the benefits is that once in place it provides a relatively peaceful framework for establishing and implementing political policies. One in which disputes can be aired in public and citizens can voice their opinions, ideally without fear of reprisal for doing so. When properly functioning, it can therefore lead to less death and destruction.

In the case of Ukraine, it is not just a matter of defending a fellow democracy. There is also the question of genocide. Under Stalin, the Ukrainians were arguably subject to genocidal policies. Given the types of justifications of aggressive policies being brough forth by Putin and his media mouthpieces, there is every reason to believe that Ukrainians have a legitimate fear of being the victims of yet another genocidal assault. So, we can also sympathize with their basic desire to defend themselves.

Now, if you believe that constitutes a "whitewashing" of Ukrainian actions, then we will just have to agree to disagree.

As for what I hope for, by now it should be clear that I am hoping for a negotiated settlement in which the legitimate interests of the need for national security and protections of minorities on both sides of the conflict are taken into account.

[ibm9000]

Yes, I take for granted that in a webpage about the invasion of Ukraine if I mention "Iraq" and "Panama", everybody around here is going to get the reference.

I am not surprise about your whitewashing of "selected" killings. We create and support dictatorships, using the word "dictator" is a lame excuse and blatant hypocrisy too, we don't invade every dictatorship, we don't support every democracy; changing interests, that's all.

USSR invaded Afghanistan to avoid a 9/11, see how easy it is? Invasion justified, all the killing, justified.


(And, not trying to start a different thread, I will recommend you to talk to a Physics teacher about 9/11... or, Remember the Maine!, or the Lusitania or the Tonkin Gulf Incident.)

[caltrek]

Yes, I take for granted that in a webpage about the invasion of Ukraine if I mention "Iraq" and "Panama", everybody around here is going to get the reference.

I am not surprise about your whitewashing of "selected" killings. We create and support dictatorships, using the word "dictator" is a lame excuse and blatant hypocrisy too, we don't invade every dictatorship, we don't support every democracy; changing interests, that's all.

USSR invaded Afghanistan to avoid a 9/11, see how easy it is? Invasion justified, all the killing, justified.


(And, not trying to start a different thread, I will recommend you to talk to a Physics teacher about 9/11... or, Remember the Maine!, or the Lusitania or the Tonkin Gulf Incident.)

I still don't know if you are talking about the initial construction of the Panama Canal, or the invasion to oust Noriega.

We must agree to disagree about "whitewashing 'selected' killings."

Who is this "we" that we are talking about? Do you "create and support" dictatorships?

If by "we" you mean the United States, then yes, your point is valid as applied to recent (twentieth and twenty-first century) history. U.S. policy has often been guided by national self-interest as opposed to a commitment to support democracy. Something that I have personally been critical of for decades, so on that point you are preaching to the choir.

"Dictator." So, in your world there is no such thing as "dictators." Or, perhaps no such thing as democracy? Or perhaps you are just not interested in personally supporting one over the other/

Again, grounds for agreeing to disagree.

Easy to justify invasion?

Were there really terrorists operating in Afghanistan at the time of Russia's invasion that posed an actual threat to Russia?

Are you denying that Al Qaeda was operating out of Afghanistan when the events of 9/11 occurred? Or, that it sponsored those attacks?

Easy to justify an invasion?

...and just who is invading who in the Ukraine?

I am not getting or understanding your reference to "talking to a Physics" teacher. Perhaps you would care to elaborate. (In a different thread if appropriate).

[ibm9000]

I still don't know if you are talking about the initial construction of the Panama Canal, or the invasion to oust Noriega.

The invasion was not to oust Noriega.
We, Western Democracies, did invade the Suez canal -UK, France and Israel in this case- for democracy? No, it was business.
We, will support every dictator that is good for business. It is not about my personal opinion, it is about what we do.

Were there really terrorists operating in Afghanistan at the time of Russia's invasion that posed an actual threat to Russia?

Did you copy that from the US Department of State?, because it looks exactly like the language they use to justify their "selected killings"; what they graciously tell us, I mean.
Could you have verified your own statement?, could you have verified the WMD? We invade a country and we kill people. That quote is your justification, why does any other country has to use yours?


But you got the Maine, the Lusitania and the Tonkin Gulf Incident, right?
Talking to an engineer, a bit more of Physics than a High School teacher, he couldn't explain how a building is going to collapse upon itself at free fall speed (+1") and he was talking about the one untouched by a plane; not that it makes much of a difference. Anyway, the Maine was sunk by Spain, for many, many a year and the Pentagon Papers clearly show how honest governments are, sorry, democracies.

[erowind]

.

[ibm9000]

By the way...

It seems that the Ukrainian Offensive was taken Lozove at the end of May and taking Davydid Brid at the end of July. I am guessing that in another couple of months they will take... Sevastopol.

[caltrek]

I still don't know if you are talking about the initial construction of the Panama Canal, or the invasion to oust Noriega.

The invasion was not to oust Noriega.
We, Western Democracies, did invade the Suez canal -UK, France and Israel in this case- for democracy? No, it was business.
We, will support every dictator that is good for business. It is not about my personal opinion, it is about what we do.

Were there really terrorists operating in Afghanistan at the time of Russia's invasion that posed an actual threat to Russia?

Did you copy that from the US Department of State?, because it looks exactly like the language they use to justify their "selected killings"; what they graciously tell us, I mean.
Could you have verified your own statement?, could you have verified the WMD? We invade a country and we kill people. That quote is your justification, why does any other country has to use yours?


But you got the Maine, the Lusitania and the Tonkin Gulf Incident, right?
Talking to an engineer, a bit more of Physics than a High School teacher, he couldn't explain how a building is going to collapse upon itself at free fall speed (+1") and he was talking about the one untouched by a plane; not that it makes much of a difference. Anyway, the Maine was sunk by Spain, for many, many a year and the Pentagon Papers clearly show how honest governments are, sorry, democracies.

Thank you for your points of clarification regarding Panama.

Did I copy that from the State Department?

Are you serious? It was a question. Since when does a question have to be "verified."

Ummm...yes, I did ask that question. Verification complete.

Or are you arguing that Al Qaeda was not involved in the events of 9/11? In which case, you are so deep into the territory of conspiracy theories that there is really no point in further discussing the matter with each other. As in what planet are you living on, sir.?

Ok, the Maine was (not) sunk by Spain, and the Pentagon papers clearly did show how governments lie, or otherwise misrepresent the truth. Is that a reason to embrace every Tom, Dick and Harry of a conspiracy theory that comes along?

I suppose next you will be explaining how it is really aliens from another planet that are controlling it all. Get real.

[ibm9000]

Are you serious? It was a question. Since when does a question have to be "verified."

You are missing the point... and I am not surprised you din't mention the WMD, can you verify the justification for any killing committed by any democracy? We we will give the justification we want for whatever we do and that justification is valid for us.
We carry out "covert operations", terrorist attacks; we carry out "selected killings" even if we don't use death squads, what is the difference between that and what a terrorist group or a dictator does, honesty?


I am not arguing anything... I am asking you to talk to a Physics teacher. I am saying that we -this one only you and me- know that it worked before... the conclusions, all yours.
On the other hand, your tiptoeing around what democracies do, gets you really, really close to our Russian friend and the Tooth Fairy. What it was, "Get real"?

[Vakanai]

Are you serious? It was a question. Since when does a question have to be "verified."

You are missing the point... and I am not surprised you din't mention the WMD, can you verify the justification for any killing committed by any democracy? We we will give the justification we want for whatever we do and that justification is valid for us.
We carry out "covert operations", terrorist attacks; we carry out "selected killings" even if we don't use death squads, what is the difference between that and what a terrorist group or a dictator does, honesty?


I am not arguing anything... I am asking you to talk to a Physics teacher. I am saying that we -this one only you and me- know that it worked before... the conclusions, all yours.
On the other hand, your tiptoeing around what democracies do, gets you really, really close to our Russian friend and the Tooth Fairy. What it was, "Get real"?

You're arguing basically that because America has done something, we can't complain when other countries do similar. This is ignoring the fact that many of us, including many Americans, complain when America does it too. I'm straight up going to say that we never should have gone into Iraq and that the American people were lied to about WMDs to get us to accept our invasion of that country. So when I say that Russia should never have invaded Iraq and that Putin's lying to his people to get them behind this invasion, there's no hypocrisy in it despite me being American because I admit our country was in the wrong and should have never done that either.

That's the point. It doesn't matter what country does what, when any country does evil crap like this it should always be called out. And right now Russia is doing some evil crap.

[ibm9000]

That's the point. It doesn't matter what country does what,

No.
That is exactly my point, in another post I wrote: "Evil is evil" and somebody here is whitewashing some evil.
That is hypocrisy.

[Vakanai]

That's the point. It doesn't matter what country does what,

No.
That is exactly my point, in another post I wrote: "Evil is evil" and somebody here is whitewashing some evil.
That is hypocrisy.

Who is white washing what history?

[weatheriscool]

As Many as 80,000 Russian Forces Killed, Wounded in Ukraine: Pentagon
Source: U S News and World Report

Russia has endured as many as 80,000 casualties since President Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February, according to the latest assessment from the Pentagon of the steep costs Moscow has paid.

Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Colin Kahl told reporters on Monday that the number of Russian soldiers killed or wounded in the fighting is somewhere between 70,000 and 80,000. Kahl, effectively the No. 3 civilian at the Pentagon, added that the number “is pretty remarkable given that Russia has achieved none of Vladimir Putin’s objectives in Ukraine.”

Read more: https://www.usnews.com/news/world-repor ... e-pentagon

[ibm9000]

Who is white washing what history?

Sorry, on what page did you started reading this thread?

Again, the importance of counting the number of corpses.

[caltrek]

Who is white washing what history?

Sorry, on what page did you started reading this thread?

Again, the importance of counting the number of corpses.

Are you suggesting that there is an absolute moral equivalence between killing one person and killing a million persons? Even when that one person is in the process of engaging in mass murder, and that the million are largely innocent civilians?

If objections to that logic constitutes "white washing" then we must agree to disagree.

What sounds like white washing to me is to deny that the United States was ever attacked by Al Qaeda on 9/11.

What next? Perhaps that the United States was not attacked by the Japanese government at Pearl Harbor? That the holocaust never took place? That the genocidal events of the Holodomor never took place?

Yes, the United States government under George W. Bush lied about WMD in Iraq. Which is why I opposed that invasion. I also voted twice for political opponents of Bush when he ran for president. Bush was a horrible president, and I am glad that he retired from office fourteen years ago. I am also grateful that journalist organs such as The Nation pointed out that the government was lying in advance of that invasion. Often friendly to Russia, The Nation has condemned Russia's invasion of the Ukraine. So, my sources of information are not confined to handouts from the U.S. government. There are other observers on the scene. If they conclude that the Ukrainian government is using civilians as human shields, then that government should be called out on that and criticized for that action.

Criticizing from a place of denial and from a place of white washing history only undermines your argument.

Leaders change. Policies change. Situations change.

This thread is about the war in the Ukraine. Yet you seem obsessed with talking about just about anything but that war. Sometimes in an effort that looks very much like a white washing of history. If not white washing, then at least denial and a profound and willful ignorance of what is going on. Failing to count the corpses is a form of such denialism. If you want to oppose support for the Ukraine for whatever reason. Fine, go ahead and do so. But please, let us not deny the basic facts. Russia launched and unprovoked act of aggression upon the Ukraine. Civilian populations have apparently been targeted in that invasion. In a way that goes beyond collateral damage while targeting military targets.

In my opinion, at least, Putin is proceeding with genocidal policies toward the Ukraine, posing an existential threat to Ukrainians. Again, if you disagree with that opinion, or somehow thinks it constitutes white washing, then we must agree to disagree.

[ibm9000]

Are you suggesting that there is an absolute moral equivalence between killing one person and killing a million persons? Even when that one person is in the process of engaging in mass murder, and that the million are largely innocent civilians?

or, maybe...

As a British officer said: What is the difference between throwing children into the fire or raining fire on top of children.

Killing 100 or 1.000, which one do you want to whitewash? -One 100 rapist or 1.000 choir boys maybe

Do you want to whitewash the Roman Empire too, or just the Republic? I am talking about what we do now, these Western Democracies; even if I am pretty sure somebody was whitewashing the British Empire -and the Roman Empire too.

Leaders change. Policies change. Situations change.

I do agree and friends change too -Noriega, Saddam-; and we keep doing the same, too.

By the way...
It seems that the Ukrainian Offensive was taken Lozove at the end of May and taking Davydid Brid at the end of July. I am guessing that in another couple of months they will take... Sevastopol.
Is not that we have that much to talk about, I'm afraid; even if it seems that the Ukrainian "offensive" is debilitating the Donestk defence, who could have imagined that!


Again, I don't argue, I don't deny, I ask you to talk to a teacher; and I guess you don't have to keep answering to this.

[ibm9000]

Oh!, I forgot to mention, those 100 are part of the 1000, all rapist and murderers, exsoldiers-children from Africa... Cambodia?, well, somewhere.

Killing one human being is evil.

If, on the other hand, you think that [b]your[/b] opinion is the only thing...
that is a dangerous road. Specially when you are the judge, jury and executioner; hopefully you pass the sentence too.

Even when that one person is in the process of

[funkervogt]

More failed predictions about the War:

Russian President Vladimir Putin could formally declare war on Ukraine as soon as May 9, a move that would enable the full mobilization of Russia's reserve forces as invasion efforts continue to falter, US and Western officials believe.

May 9, known as "Victory Day" inside of Russia, commemorates the country's defeat of the Nazis in 1945. Western officials have long believed that Putin would leverage the symbolic significance and propaganda value of that day to announce either a military achievement in Ukraine, a major escalation of hostilities -- or both.
Officials have begun to hone in on one scenario, which is that Putin formally declares war on Ukraine on May 9. To date, Putin has insisted on referring to the brutal monthslong conflict as a "special military operation," effectively banning words such as invasion and war.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/europe/r ... index.html

An exiled former Russian lawmaker said that he is "certain" that Vladimir Putin will claim "an imaginary victory" in Ukraine early next month.

"Putin will try to claim a certain victory — an imaginary victory — on May 9. I am absolutely certain about this, but the reality is that he is losing the war," Ilya Ponomarev, who was exiled from Russia's parliament in 2016 and is now fighting alongside Ukrainian forces, told CNN host Jake Tapper on Wednesday night.

https://www.newsweek.com/exiled-russian ... th-1698023

Likewise, predictions that Putin will use nuclear weapons on Ukraine, that he is on the verge of being overthrown, that the Russian army is on the brink of collapse have fallen flat. In spite of rumors to the contrary, no evidence has surfaced that Putin is terminally ill.

[weatheriscool]

Explosions rock area of Russian airbase in Crimea
Source: CNN

(CNN) A series of large explosions went off in the area of a Russian military airbase in the annexed Ukrainian territory of Crimea on Tuesday, with footage from the scene showing large plumes of smoke billowing into the air.
The Russian defense ministry said the blasts had been caused by detonated aviation ammunition, Russian state media RIA Novosti reported.
"Around 3:20 p.m., several aviation munitions detonated on the territory of the airfield 'Saki' near the settlement of Novofedorivka," the ministry said in the statement, according to RIA Novosti.

Ambulance crews and an air ambulance were sent to the site of the explosions, according to the health ministry of the region.

Oleg Kryuchkov, adviser to the head of the Crimean region -- which Russia annexed from Ukraine in 2014 -- confirmed several explosions had occurred near the village of Novofedorivka. On his Telegram channel, Kryuchkov said: "So far, I can only confirm the fact of several explosions in the Novofedorivka area. I ask everyone to wait for official messages."

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/09/europe/c ... index.html

[caltrek]

Oh!, I forgot to mention, those 100 are part of the 1000, all rapist and murderers, exsoldiers-children from Africa... Cambodia?, well, somewhere.

Killing one human being is evil.

If, on the other hand, you think that [b]your[/b] opinion is the only thing...
that is a dangerous road. Specially when you are the judge, jury and executioner; hopefully you pass the sentence too.

Even when that one person is in the process of

From The Rebel* by Albert Camus, who is regarded by many as a great pacifist of the twentieth century:

In a flash - but that is time enough to say, provisionally, that the most extreme form of freedom, the freedom to kill, is not compatible with the sense of rebellion. Rebellion is in no way the demand for total freedom. It specifically attacks the unlimited power that authorizes a superior to violate the forbidden frontier. Far from demanding general independence, the rebel wants it to be recognized that freedom has its limits everywhere that a human being is to be found - the limit being precisely that human being's power to rebel. The most profound reason for rebellious intransigence is to be found here. The more aware rebellion is of demanding a just limit, the more inflexible it becomes. The rebel undoubtedly demands a certain degree of freedom for himself; but in no case, if he is consistent, does he demand the right to destroy the existence and freedom of others. He humiliates no one. The freedom he claims, he claims for all; the freedom he refuses, he forbids everyone to enjoy. He is not only the slave against the master, but also man against the world of master and slave. Therefore, thanks to rebellion, there is something more in history than the relation between mastery and servitude. Unlimited power is not the only law. It is in the name of another value that the rebel affirms the impossibility of total freedom while he claims for himself the relative freedom necessary to recognize this impossibility. Every human freedom, at its very roots, is therefore relative. Absolute freedom, which is the freedom to kill, is the only one which does not claim, at the same time as itself, the things that limit and obliterate it. Thus it cuts itself off from its roots and - abstract and malevolent shade - wanders haphazardly until such time as it imagines that it has found substance as some ideology.

It is then possible to say that rebellion, when it develops into destruction, is illogical. Claiming the unity of the human condition, it is a force of life, not of death.

*See pages 284-285.