Russia Ukraine Update Thread - part 2

a reply to: Grimpachi

Yeah, I've never said Ukraine is perfect even though you keep assuming I think that. Although I also have some sympathy for them because Russia has been weaponizing their culture and language and using to stoke divisions in Ukraine. It's a difficult situation and I think mistakes have been made.

Why do you think I insult Russian speaker's intelligence?

We fundamentally disagree right there. No one needs to be subject to an illegitimate government. That is a hill I will die on.

I don't get it. When did I say anyone needs to be subject to an illegitimate government?

a reply to: Cutepants

Yeah, I've never said Ukraine is perfect even though you keep assuming I think that.

Not once have I ever made that claim. Are you trying to build a strawman?

Although I also have some sympathy for them because Russia has been weaponizing their culture and language and using to stoke divisions in Ukraine.

I don't know if you are unaware or if you are just ignoring that Russian speaking Ukrainians had been singled out and persecuted for speaking Russian.

The division was caused by Ukrainian government not Russia. There are even cases of Ukrainians shooting Russian speakers that couldn't pronounce a certain Ukrainian word. From confessions of AFU POWs.

Why do you think I insult Russian speaker's intelligence?

"Your average Russians would just be totally confused at best,"

When did I say anyone needs to be subject to an illegitimate government?

What did you mean by this then?

"because I don't think the success of an insurrection or the legitimacy of an election affects the right to break away."

Of course, the legitimacy of a sitting government does affect the right to break away.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Not once have I ever made that claim. Are you trying to build a strawman?

You just showed me that copypasta about Ukrainian language policy and then said you hope that it cures my naivety. Is it not then reasonable for me to assume that you think I have an unrealistically positive opinion of Ukrainian policy? Why do you think that's me building a straw man?

"Your average Russians would just be totally confused at best,"

OK, I see lol. I feel like you're being intentionally obtuse here. Just because a person is confused by something doesn't mean they are unintelligent. Like, I could say the average American would be confused if a Chinese person tries to tell them something in Chinese. But that doesn't mean they're dumb.

It's just that we're never going to get anywhere if you keep latching on to ever little thing like this. Are intentionally trying to obscure so you don't have to face the though questions? So you don't have to self-examine your double-standards when it comes to sovereignty?

What did you mean by this then?

"because I don't think the success of an insurrection or the legitimacy of an election affects the right to break away."

I meant that I think the right already exists independent of those things.

a reply to: Cutepants

You just showed me that copypasta about Ukrainian language policy and then said you hope that it cures my naivety. Is it not then reasonable for me to assume that you think I have an unrealistically positive opinion of Ukrainian policy?

You did just double down and blame Russia for weaponizing/causing division with the language.

I quote
"Although I also have some sympathy for them because Russia has been weaponizing their culture and language and using to stoke divisions in Ukraine."

It wasn't Russia who made those laws. How can you reasonably blame Russia for what Ukraine did all by itself?

What is reasonable to assume here?

OK, I see lol. I feel like you're being intentionally obtuse here. Just because a person is confused by something doesn't mean they are unintelligent. Like, I could say the average American would be confused if a Chinese person tries to tell them something in Chinese. But that doesn't mean they're dumb.

It's just that we're never going to get anywhere if you keep latching on to ever little thing like this. Are intentionally trying to obscure so you don't have to face the though questions? So you don't have to self-examine your double-standards when it comes to sovereignty?

Based on what you said I misunderstood what you are saying. It seemed to me you were calling them dumb and saying they needed to conform to fit into Europe. It remains to be seen if those people wanted to even be part of Europe, I can say there are a lot of people in those regions that have a very low opinion of Europe.

As for the double standards you claim I have. What are they? Be precise.

I meant that I think the right already exists independent of those things.

We disagree on that. Mainly because there are already prior agreements/contracts in place.

For instance the US. We have taxation and we are also represented. We have a say in our government that is a right. Take away any of those things and the contract is broken which would open up the possibility of splitting away.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Iraq was also a soverign nation. The justification for invading it was fabricated.

Boring. We all know that. Iraq is another discussion for you to go and start.



The topic here is Russia and their belligerence and brutality focussed on the sovereign nation of Ukraine.

Are you able to agree Ukraine is a sovereign nation? Maybe start at the beginning.

Was Ukraine a sovereign nation, when they had a duly elected government that was pro-Russia, in 2014?

You might be interested in researching Victoria Nuland.

a reply to: Grimpachi

It wasn't Russia who made those laws. How can you reasonably blame Russia for what Ukraine did all by itself?

What is reasonable to assume here?

So are you saying I was wrong, you actually think I'm right about Ukraine?

I never said Russia maid those laws, I said they were made in reaction to Russia's actions. I think that was pretty clear in my post, you should read it again. I can very easily and reasonably blame Russia for it's foreign policy over the past 20 years which has destabilized the whole continent to the point of war. But specifically in Ukraine they've used illegal combatants and funded local criminals in the Donbas to justify their invasion.

As for the double standards you claim I have. What are they? Be precise.

You are pro Donbas sovereignty but not Ukrainian, that's the most obvious example.

We disagree on that. Mainly because there are already prior agreements/contracts in place.

Everyone agreed?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Grimpachi

You have been called out numerous times for doing that in your defense of Russia. Tell us, what part of Moscow do you call home?

He ain't living there - else he would use the correct russian word (Donbass, Донбасс) rather than the Ukrainian one (Donbas, Донбас). :-)

a reply to: Enderdog

and you may want to research what the Ukrainian Rada did when Yanukovych agreed to step down. The Ukrainian constitution was reverted back by 1. When Yanukovych decided to flee the country, under their constitution, he abandoned his post. The moment he did that the Rada set new elections, as the Constitution requires.

Yanukovych was legally replaced under Ukraine's Constitution.

People really need to stop falling back to the old Nuland gambit.

a reply to: carport

Once could hardly tell by the way he goes out of his way to make excuse after excuse to defend Putin and to deflect.

My thing is if he can't be bothered to learn information, especially about Russia and Chechnya, then why take him seriously? Arguing with only one side of a story, that is based in science fiction, tells us that he is not serious about whats going on with the only exception of protecting Putin.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Cutepants

OK, I was honestly hoping we'd agree about the nationhood of Donbas at least, but then we need to take a step back and ask what your criteria are for that? What is a nation for you?

The idea that America installed a leader is fake. But I'm surprised by your naivety if you think Russia honestly wants Donbas to be sovereign but not Ukraine? Like, a tiny area in between what they view as different regions of Russia. They'd have way better chances of independence as part of Ukraine.

23.02.2014 –
(long list of bad things Ukraine did)
25.05.2022

You forgot other dates, for example:

1881 – Prohibition of teaching in the public schools and conducting church sermons in Ukrainian
1888 – a decree by Alexander III banned the use of the Ukrainian language in official institutions and of Ukrainian given names
1892 - Prohibition to translate books from Russian into Ukrainian
1895 – Prohibition by the Main Administration of Printing to publish Ukrainian-language children's books
...etc.

The Ukraine has quite some more forbidding to do to match what Russia had forbidden once. :-)

Not to forget even the west partook, one example:

1913 – Ukrainian banned from all public schools in Alberta, Canada, home to the largest Ukrainian diaspora community in the New World at that time

And, finally:

1978 - The Ukrainian SSR decides on Ukrainian as the official state language, Russian becomes an auxiliary language (lingua franca).

a reply to: Cutepants

So are you saying I was wrong, you actually think I'm right about Ukraine?

I don't think so. You need to be more specific as to what you think we agree on.

I never said Russia maid those laws, I said they were made in reaction to Russia's actions.

23.02.2014 – Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (Ukr Parliament) announces that the Russian language will no longer have the status of a regional language (prior to that Russian could be used for documentation and meetings in the local councils and local authorities where historically that was the language of everyday communication and use)

What actions are you claiming that law was made in response to?

I can very easily and reasonably blame Russia for it's foreign policy over the past 20 years which has destabilized the whole continent to the point of war.

I can also easily and reasonably blame the US and NATO for it's foreign policy over the past 20 years which has destabilized the whole continent to the point of war.

But specifically in Ukraine they've used illegal combatants and funded local criminals in the Donbas to justify their invasion.

What is your definition of an illegal combatant? Would Azov qualify? They a have a lot of foreigners including people that were wanted for murder in other countries in there.

Are you saying that Russia had them join Azov?

You are pro Donbas sovereignty but not Ukrainian, that's the most obvious example.

I don't believe I have said that. I just don't think the designation of sovereignty is a valid point to make for the world supporting any side. It wasn't when we invaded sovereign nations.

It is pretty obvious to me that being a sovereign nation doesn't prevent being invaded. It is just a term people use to try to claim righteousness when it is convenient and forgotten when it isn't such as when they invade.

IMO it is an exercise in pure hypocrisy to use the term in an attempt to designate right and wrong.

Everyone agreed?

Could be. I don't know? Kind of vague of what I am being asked here.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: carport

Once could hardly tell by the way he goes out of his way to make excuse after to excuse to defend Putin and to deflect.

My thing is if he can't be bothered to learn information, especially about Russia and Chechnya, then why take him seriously? Arguing with only one side of a story, that is based in science fiction, tells us that he is not serious about whats going on with the only exception of protecting Putin.

Well, let's call it "weekend warrior", or, here "keyboard warrior". I see a problem in that people who (rightfully) question main stream media are prone to fall into the trap of non-mainstram media who reports the same rubbish, but with a different, 180° opposite, spin. And since the MSM is a bad thing, the others must be the good ones, because the enemy of my enemy must be my friend.

If one is really in doubt about something, there is a nearly foolproof method to strive for knowledge: Get up, go to the action and see and hear with own eyes and ears. There are not only ukrainian, but also russian refugees in almost all western countries and nobody can stop you to talk to them, preferably to multiple people who do not know each other.
THEN one can read and analyse conflicting reports with all new, and probably better trained, eyes.

One can also read research from multiple sources, preferably from countries who border Russia (I wouldn't prefer UK-or Australian- english sources over US-english when I want to know something about a border conflict with Mexico either) and in which many people speak Russian or have a mentionable number of Russians/Ukrainians living there.

And so on and on ... oh well (shrug)

a reply to: Grimpachi

I don't think so. You need to be more specific as to what you think we agree on.

Oh well, it doesn't matter anyway.

What actions are you claiming that law was made in response to?

Russia's attempts to forcibly Russify Ukraine, both historically and in the present. I imagine especially having documents in Russian would be a liability if you're trying to prevent the Russian astroturfing of rebels. These may seem like extreme measures, but keep in mind they are fighting an enemy who has committed genocide against them both literally and culturally on many occasions in history and continues to do so, also abducting their children. At some point I have to question your motivations and ethics when you keep whining about this relatively inconsequential crap.

I can also easily and reasonably blame the US and NATO for it's foreign policy over the past 20 years which has destabilized the whole continent to the point of war.

I'm sure can very easily manage that, you seem to care very little about what is true or not. It must be liberating in a way.

What is your definition of an illegal combatant? Would Azov qualify? They a have a lot of foreigners including people that were wanted for murder in other countries in there.

No, why would Azov qualify? Why would being a foreigner be illegal?

In this case I was referring to combatants who did not carry any markings identifying them as Russian soldiers or any other group.

Are you saying that Russia had them join Azov?

Who?

I don't believe I have said that. I just don't think the designation of sovereignty is a valid point to make for the world supporting any side. It wasn't when we invaded sovereign nations.

So you do support Ukrainian sovereignty? And that whole question of whether sovereignty is a valid point was the start of this whole debate I think, lol. Still trying to get there.

It is pretty obvious to me that being a sovereign nation doesn't prevent being invaded. It is just a term people use to try to claim righteousness when it is convenient and forgotten when it isn't such as when they invade.

I guess for most people it's just a way of saying someone is meddling where they have no business.

IMO it is an exercise in pure hypocrisy to use the term in an attempt to designate right and wrong.

Is it also pure hypocrisy to talk about regime change to designate right and wrong?

Could be. I don't know? Kind of vague of what I am being asked here.

It was too vague yeah. I meant that people don't agree to enter into a social contract when they're born, they just find themselves as citizen in some country.

* - Russia to covertly mobilize reserves, conscript Chechen convicts - GUR

* - Russia Accused of Kidnapping Own Citizens to Fight War in Ukraine

* - Desperate Putin 'to send paedophiles and rapists to Ukraine' - criminals released to fight

a reply to: Cutepants

Russia's attempts to forcibly Russify Ukraine, both historically and in the present. I imagine especially having documents in Russian would be a liability if you're trying to prevent the Russian astroturfing of rebels. These may seem like extreme measures, but keep in mind they are fighting an enemy who has committed genocide against them both literally and culturally on many occasions in history and continues to do so, also abducting their children. At some point I have to question your motivations and ethics when you keep whining about this relatively inconsequential crap.

Genocide. Do you mean the Bandera groups that genocided tens of thousands of poles and Jews?
You act like everything happened separately. As if Ukraine was not a stronghold SS divisions. You honestly paint them as poor victims when they are anything but.

They idolize a SS Nazi







who led people to do this.


I really don't get how so many are so dedicated to whitewashing Ukraine and it's history.

As for it being inconsequential. Inconsequential to who? Obviously you.

No, why would Azov qualify? Why would being a foreigner be illegal?

In this case I was referring to combatants who did not carry any markings identifying them as Russian soldiers or any other group.

I have news for you. That happened on both sides. Look up little green men and I think it was black pajamas or men in black.

Who?

The criminals of course. Do you know what safari means in Ukraine? It means rich white guys that would come out and pay to hunt down humans in Donbas. It didn't have to be military hunted down either.

Also, let's not act like Ukraine didn't have more than its share of homegrown criminals. Ihor Kolomoyskyi is one of the biggest but there were plenty of other big ones running around.

How about Hunter Biden? Over a billion dollars has passed through his "companies" most of which only exist on paper. Ukraine became the playground for crooked politicians. I doubt we will ever know the extent of it.

So you do support Ukrainian sovereignty? And that whole question of whether sovereignty is a valid point was the start of this whole debate I think, lol. Still trying to get there.

They can be sovereign. They are just going to have less territory to be sovereign on after this. Actions have consequences and the sovereign designation doesn't stop those consequences from coming to fruition.

I guess for most people it's just a way of saying someone is meddling where they have no business.

That includes sponsoring coups, yes?

Is it also pure hypocrisy to talk about regime change to designate right and wrong?

IMO it is up to the people living there and having to deal with the consequences of the regime change to decide.

It was too vague yeah. I meant that people don't agree to enter into a social contract when they're born, they just find themselves as citizen in some country.

In most places they get older they can leave or they can take part of the benefits from that contract.

a reply to: Grimpachi

as opposed to completely ignoring Russia's history... How many Russians died under Stalin.. 20+ million. How many Ukrainians were murdered under Stalin? How many were starved.

You just dont get it. No one is doubting / questioning what Ukraine did in the past. For some reason though youve developed Putin syndrome by wanting to live there.

For what is worth Ukraine was given the damned if you do and damned if you dont position. Live under Hitler or live under Putin.

Can't imagine why Ukraine wants to be left alone by Russia.

[Forwarded from Azmilitary1]
[ Photo ]
🇷🇺 🇮🇷 🇮🇳 Iran is testing a new trade corridor for the delivery of Russian goods to India — Bloomberg

The State Shipping Company of Iran started the first transportation of Russian cargo to India using a new logistics corridor, Bloomberg reports

The cargo from St. Petersburg arrived in Astrakhan, from where it was sent to the Iranian port of Enzeli via the Caspian Sea. Then it will be delivered by road to the port of Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf coast, and from there by sea to the Indian port of Nhava Sheva

▪️ Iran is reviving the mothballed North-South transit corridor project to connect Russia with promising Asian markets. Within the framework of the project, it is planned to build a railway connecting the Iranian ports of the Caspian Sea with the southeastern port of Chabahar

t.me...