Russia and Ukraine

[The Architect Of Fate]

My own asserted aims to not get sucked into WWIII? Doesn't every rational person on the planet want to avoid a third world war if possible? Isn't that why not one European government, or the American government, is willing to risk a no-fly zone, which is a massively neo-con position? I am not morally responsible for what happens to Ukrainians because Russia is the one killing them, not me. If I say I want to stay out of it, I am not morally responsible for what someone else chooses to do. If I said I supported giving Ukraine billions in weapons, THEN I would be in part responsible for the deaths, because I'm arguing for the artificial prolonging of the war and rising piles of bodies. That's a totally different story.

A no-fly -zone would not lead to WW3 and giving Ukraine weapons to defend itself from invasion isn't what's caused deaths. Putin's moronic invasion is what's caused deaths, And yes saying you want to stay out of it is essentially signing Ukraine's death warrant....

[Irreligious Atheist]

Russia and Ukraine agreed to a tentative settlement in April, but then the UK PM flew to Kiev to scuttle it.

This assumes it was a good settlement and that the UK PM was in the wrong to scuttle it. A bad settlement is almost worst than war.

It's also total BS

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/01/did-...nd-russia/

You didn't prove that it's BS, and your contention before was that Ukraine should be able to set their own future. Well, they wanted to make a deal, but the UK PM said we don't like your deal, that doesn't work for us.

[Irreligious Atheist]

My own asserted aims to not get sucked into WWIII? Doesn't every rational person on the planet want to avoid a third world war if possible? Isn't that why not one European government, or the American government, is willing to risk a no-fly zone, which is a massively neo-con position? I am not morally responsible for what happens to Ukrainians because Russia is the one killing them, not me. If I say I want to stay out of it, I am not morally responsible for what someone else chooses to do. If I said I supported giving Ukraine billions in weapons, THEN I would be in part responsible for the deaths, because I'm arguing for the artificial prolonging of the war and rising piles of bodies. That's a totally different story.

A no-fly -zone would not lead to WW3 and giving Ukraine weapons to defend itself from invasion isn't what's caused deaths. Putin's moronic invasion is what's caused deaths, And yes saying you want to stay out of it is essentially signing Ukraine's death warrant....

If dealing with and cucking a nuclear armed power was as simple as you seem to think it could be, the no-fly zone or further bombing of Russia by the US and the West would have already taken place. It hasn't. The military generals are not suggesting it.

And Ukraine wanted to make a deal. Were they signing their own death warrant?

[The Architect Of Fate]

This assumes it was a good settlement and that the UK PM was in the wrong to scuttle it. A bad settlement is almost worst than war.

It's also total BS

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/09/01/did-...nd-russia/

You didn't prove that it's BS, and your contention before was that Ukraine should be able to set their own future. Well, they wanted to make a deal, but the UK PM said we don't like your deal, that doesn't work for us.

Yes it does as parties on both sides had little confidence in the possible settlement and as the article points out Russia's atrocities likely had more of an impact than Johnson. So the claim Boris killed the settlement is BS, And yes Ukraine should be able to decide its own future but that doesn't mean letting them fall into a trap. That's not what allies do.

[The Architect Of Fate]

If dealing with and cucking a nuclear armed power was as simple as you seem to think it could be, the no-fly zone or further bombing of Russia by the US and the West would have already taken place. It hasn't. The military generals are not suggesting it.

I said a no-fly zone would not lead to nuclear war because it won't and a no-fly zone wouldn't need to lead to offensive strikes on Russia and some generals have called for no-fly- zones over Ukraine so this is also wrong.

And Ukraine wanted to make a deal. Were they signing their own death warrant?

Yup because Putin can't be trusted to hold up his end.

[Rev. Rye]

And Ukraine wanted to make a deal. Were they signing their own death warrant?

Yup because Putin can't be trusted to hold up his end.

Funny thing is, if the agreement in April went through, it’d probably be almost exactly like what everyone thinks the Munich agreement in 1938 was like.

Granted, things were more complicated, since Hitler had far better control over his own narrative than he would a few years later (he could still act like he was fairly reasonable at this point, the Final Solution wouldn’t become a thing for years, and not being addicted to drugs at that point certainly helped); Chamberlain’s decision to appease makes much more sense when you consider that A: the First World War was so devastating that doing a repeat that wasn’t absolutely necessary was extremely unpopular, B: he figured out early on that (to quote my copy of Ian Kershaw’s Nemesis) “If I've understood you correctly then you're determined in any event to proceed against Czechoslovakia. If that is your intention, why have you had me coming to Berchtesgaden at all? Under these circumstances it's best if I leave straight away. Apparently, it's all pointless,” and C: seemed to consider the Munich agreement a stop-gap more than anything else (one that he, unfortunately, dropped the ball on); and that, depressingly, a good-sized portion of the population of the Sudetenland actually wanted to rejoin Germany.

In this case, it’s blindingly obvious that Putin does not want compromise. To him, Ukraine isn’t a nation. It’s just an a part of Russia whose claims to independence he will no longer entertain. He’s repeatedly said as such. A crucial part of how the agreement managed to pass was because Hitler still had spin doctors who could easily make his ambitions seem more moderate than they actually were. Now, it’s all a part of the public record and if they were to try and claim that Putin was willing to settle for small pieces of Ukraine, everyone with a modicum of information about the situation would know it was a lie unless they were already too busy sucking Putin’s dick to notice or care. Boris Johnson is a fucking idiot, but even he’s not that stupid.

[Thumpalumpacus]

If I say I want to stay out of it, I am not morally responsible for what someone else chooses to do.

If the Ukrainians are willing to fight for their freedoms, show us how supporting them is immoral. The Russians will not resort to nukes simply for us supplying Ukraine with weaponry, else they would have done so already. For that reason I find your hand-wringing entirely unconvincing. I also find it interesting how closely it mirrors Kremlin threats that have been shown empty thus far.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Indeed Russia will never employ its nukes over Ukraine. It's a bluff. What we can rely on is no deal with Putin can be trusted till he's been given no other option and the only way we get that is if Ukraine wins. Which it must. There is no other scenario where Ukraine is safe.

[Deesse23]

Indeed Russia will never employ its nukes over Ukraine

Russian official military doctrine states, and Putin himself has confirmed it that: Nukes will only be used in case of an existential threat to Russia.
Can we go on please, with the next (of many) asinine claims of IA?

[Irreligious Atheist]

My own asserted aims to not get sucked into WWIII? Doesn't every rational person on the planet want to avoid a third world war if possible? Isn't that why not one European government, or the American government, is willing to risk a no-fly zone, which is a massively neo-con position? I am not morally responsible for what happens to Ukrainians because Russia is the one killing them, not me. If I say I want to stay out of it, I am not morally responsible for what someone else chooses to do. If I said I supported giving Ukraine billions in weapons, THEN I would be in part responsible for the deaths, because I'm arguing for the artificial prolonging of the war and rising piles of bodies. That's a totally different story.

A no-fly -zone would not lead to WW3 and giving Ukraine weapons to defend itself from invasion isn't what's caused deaths. Putin's moronic invasion is what's caused deaths, And yes saying you want to stay out of it is essentially signing Ukraine's death warrant....

A no-fly zone doesn't have to lead to nuclear war. It could lead to conventional war with Russia, and you don't want that either. The US is obviously way stronger, but still, you could lose a load of troops, and is the West down for that, and if you're whooping that Russian ass in Russia, at some point are they just might say screw it and launch the nukes because The States is whooping their ass so bad. You're not taking any of this into account. Nukes exist and they are never irrelevant. And then you have Russia using chemical weapons on Ukrainians in response to worry about. You have the nuclear power plants, and you probably watched the same Vaush video I watched about how things are very unlikely to go bad with the power plants and some real effort would have to be put into it by the Russias to accomplish some bad shit with those plants, but it is doable, and Europe certainly should not take this as a zero risk thing. Other things to keep in mind are the grain and wheat supply and supply of other things that need to be shipped around the world. Gas prices, etc, etc. You're ignoring all of this it seems.

You say I'm kneeling to Putin. I say you are trying to take over the world and act as god itself, and you don't care what Ukraine wants. They wanted a deal. The West has been talking them out of deals and throwing money at them so they can selfishly use the Ukrainians as cannon fodder. You are perfectly fine with using Ukrainians as cannon fodder, and that flag in your signature is nothing but a virtue signal against Russia. It has nothing to do with caring for Ukrainians or Ukraine. I suspect NATO just wants to weaken Russia like happened to the USSR when they failed against the Mujahideen. History repeats itself.

And to the other guy who was saying I was being inconsistent about caring about lives, no I wasn't. If the peace deal was made like I wanted and Ukraine wanted, the carnage would cease. The West shooting Russian planes out of the sky, that causes the carnage to increase, because WWIII. If Russia attacks a NATO country, that's a whole other issue. Ukraine is not in NATO, so no, they absolutely do not get those same protections. Never. They are in a superpowers sphere of influence, and that's their issue to deal with. I do not want to be god. I do not want to be a liberal version of Adolph Hitler who rules the world and says this is what such and such countries are allowed to do. I am not god. You are not either.