Ukraine III

[eternumviti]

eternumviti
'you expound what appears to be a visceral loathing of Britain in your every post'

I disagree with your view of Tony L but I bow to your expertise in this field given that you display exactly that behavior in your view of the EU.

We weren't discussing the EU, but if you wish to do so I'd be perfectly happy to go over to the relevant thread and pick through the relativity between the EU institutions and the historic sovereign entities that comprise both the UK and the EU's own member states.

Your ball.

 

[matthewr]

I am reminded of the old joke about how there is no political discussion that cannot be made worse by the addition of Ken Livingstone and feel much the same way about threads and Brexit.

 

[PsB]

You seem to be objecting to my post and I’m not sure why. Please note the word ‘suggested’, and if speculation on what is happening in Ukraine is off the menu, than I guess that’s the end of this thread, as it is pretty much all speculation.

You were "suggesting" that the UK and the US are "dragging out" the conflict. I am "suggesting" that this is back-to-front, as
a) the belligerents are Russia and Ukraine. Plus maybe Belarus and a few mercenaries (probably on both sides).
b) the UK and the US are not belligerents. NATO is not a belligerent. China is not, either. All these powers have been crystal clear that they would not intervene militarily.
c) they have between limited and no capability to "drag out" the conflict, or indeed stop it. The 2 Vlads are the ones with that ability.

Your "suggestion" effectively pins an unspecified portion of the blame for Putin's war of choice dragging on not on the aggressor or the plucky defenders, who for some reason are accepting huge casualties to defend their sovereignty, but on the bystanders that are still shipping resources to the underdog. My point is this is a marginal effect: the main reason is the determination on both sides. There is a pacifist view (not saying this is your view, BTW) that Zelensky should have rolled over on Day 2 to save lives, and that anything that delays Russia's justified and inevitable victory is a crime, but Zelensky and most Ukrainians don't seem to be subscribing to it. And cutting the flow of defensive armament to Ukraine would probably not save lives at this stage.

 

[eternumviti]

I am reminded of the old joke about how there is no political discussion that cannot be made worse by the addition of Ken Livingstone and feel much the same way about threads and Brexit.

Just for the record, it weren't me what started it, guv.

I read in the DT that the electronic jamming device that has been captured by Ukrainian forces is to be sent by road to Ramstein air base in Germany, and thence to the US for evaluation.

I'm interested in the first bit. I can't help but wonder whether the Russians mightn't be too.

 

[MUTTY1]

You seem to be objecting to my post and I’m not sure why. Please note the word ‘suggested’, and if speculation on what is happening in Ukraine is off the menu, than I guess that’s the end of this thread, as it is pretty much all speculation.

Or is it just the wrong sort of speculation that’s not allowed?

You need to grow a thicker skin. This thread has an awful lot of debris because peeps are verbosely duelling over what is, at best, tangential to the thread. I’m starting to skip stuff because of this and that’s not good.

 

[DonQuixote99]

Richard 1st - John

The Shah - Khomeini

Brown - Cameron - May - Johnson

Facta - Mussolini

Many other examples available.

Some of these leaders were more incompetent than truly bad but they were all succeeded by by someone worse.

I would not count rotten people leading coups or 'revolutions,' you have to expect rotten people who gain power in rotten ways to be rotten. That leaves only King John and Britain's current era of bad PMs on your list. And John tried....

 

[ks.234]

You were "suggesting" that the UK and the US are "dragging out" the conflict. I am "suggesting" that this is back-to-front, as
a) the belligerents are Russia and Ukraine. Plus maybe Belarus and a few mercenaries (probably on both sides).
b) the UK and the US are not belligerents. NATO is not a belligerent. China is not, either. All these powers have been crystal clear that they would not intervene militarily.
c) they have between limited and no capability to "drag out" the conflict, or indeed stop it. The 2 Vlads are the ones with that ability.

Your "suggestion" effectively pins an unspecified portion of the blame for Putin's war of choice dragging on not on the aggressor or the plucky defenders, who for some reason are accepting huge casualties to defend their sovereignty, but on the bystanders that are still shipping resources to the underdog. My point is this is a marginal effect: the main reason is the determination on both sides. There is a pacifist view (not saying this is your view, BTW) that Zelensky should have rolled over on Day 2 to save lives, and that anything that delays Russia's justified and inevitable victory is a crime, but Zelensky and most Ukrainians don't seem to be subscribing to it. And cutting the flow of defensive armament to Ukraine would probably not save lives at this stage.

I wasn’t suggesting anything, I was responding to a suggestion. Hence the speculation upon a suggestion.

The rest of your post is an assumption, based on a speculation, of someone else’s suggestion. And is three time removed from reason

 

[flatpopely]

I wasn’t suggesting anything, I was responding to a suggestion. Hence the speculation upon a suggestion.

But somehow these suggestions become fact and the thread argues about a fact that was only speculation.

 

[Brian]

I wasn’t suggesting anything, I was responding to a suggestion. Hence the speculation upon a suggestion.

The rest of your post is an assumption, based on a speculation, of someone else’s suggestion. And is three time removed form reason

Here we go again.

 

[ks.234]

But somehow these suggestions become fact and the thread argues about a fact that was only speculation.

Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things

 

[-alan-]

I am reminded of the old joke about how there is no political discussion that cannot be made worse by the addition of Ken Livingstone and feel much the same way about threads and Brexit.

Yes indeed. Or the frequency with which seemingly unrelated threads get polluted with it.

Maybe it's time for a revision of Godwin's Law... Johnson's Capitulary perhaps ..?

 

[flatpopely]

Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things

I like Talking Heads but not sure quoting them has worked in the context of my point, just a diversion tactic.

 

[ks.234]

I like Talking Heads but not sure quoting them has worked in the context of my point, just a diversion tactic.

Sorry, didn’t think you were making a serious point. As you say you were making a serious point? how does a suggestion become a fact? who is turning suggestions into facts? What is your point?

 

[flatpopely]

Sorry, didn’t think you were making a serious point. As you say you were making a serious point? how does a suggestion become a fact? who is turning suggestions into facts? What is your point?

Another deflection from what I posted. I was saying that the suggestion the West wanted to extend the war was not fact but would soon turn into the basis for an argument that had no basis in fact.

 

[DimitryZ]

I wasn’t suggesting anything, I was responding to a suggestion. Hence the speculation upon a suggestion.

The rest of your post is an assumption, based on a speculation, of someone else’s suggestion. And is three time removed from reason

Actually, conversion of unfounded speculation into a "topic of rational discussion," is one of the more common propaganda methods.

Here, you have successfully converted baseless musings into a discussion of western culpability for ongoing slaughter.

This appears to be your main interest here.

 

[ks.234]

Another deflection from what I posted. I was saying that the suggestion the West wanted to extend the war was not fact but would soon turn into the basis for an argument that had no basis in fact.

That is quite ridiculous. I never suggested anything as a fact.

 

[Bob McC]

Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things

Rafael Benitez likes this

 

[ks.234]

Here is the post.

What is the problem?

We really do need to keep in mind what NATO is. There is talk of regime change.

‘I gather that senior British figures are talking in similar terms. There is a belief that “the U.K.’s No. 1 option is for the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin.” Again and again, I hear such language. It helps explain, among other things, the lack of any diplomatic effort by the U.S. to secure a cease-fire. It also explains the readiness of President Joe Biden to call Putin a war criminal.’

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...nd-biden-misunderstand-history-in-ukraine-war

Niall Ferguson there, a known arse, but he’s a courtier so probably does have some sources.

 

[mandryka]

They also need to know that another invasion won't happen again. Crimea wasn't the end. Donbas wasn't the end. From a Ukrainian perspective, the current war has to be the end. No more pause and repeat. Full stop.

Ukrainians need fortified borders and ongoing military support. The West should help fund this.

Defences on the Eastern borders of Ukraine could be turned into bases to launch missiles to Moscow. Is there a diplomat anywhere today who could make that acceptable to Russia?

This war is happening because no one has found the solution to this conundrum - maybe there isn’t one, the situation is just fundamentally flawed. The map, with its borders, doesn’t make sense, is essentially unstable, in the real world.

 

[DonQuixote99]

Defences on the Eastern borders of Ukraine could be turned into bases to launch missiles to Moscow. Is there a diplomat anywhere today who could make that acceptable to Russia?

This war is happening because no one has found the solution to this conundrum - maybe there isn’t one, the situation is just fundamentally flawed. The map, with its borders, doesn’t make sense, is essentially unstable, in the real world.

Moscow could be a good neighbor that acts decently and no one would want to launch missiles at them? Anyone ever think of that? And oh by the way they have thousands of nuclear warheads, so it would be MAD deluxe. This Ukraine threatens Russia bit would be total nonsense except Russia has made extraordinary efforts to be someone Ukraine will hate for a lifetime or more. They will have to live with that.