The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Solidarity with Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shashin

Well-known member
It might just be me, that can't stand anymore to open the news, seeing television, hearing Radio.

Have the last few grain of sanity left the western world?...in my view it has.
To me it seems that there are only 4 persons in my life that remember 18 years back in time to the horrible mass-killings in Iraq.
Where heat from the severe bombing was so strong that one was unable to count any dead people, while the heat had been so severe that even the skeletons had evaporated...
Nobody wants to talk about that, not in that period, even not today. What’s going on? Have we left everything, every fundamental principle in the western democracies? We are claiming free speech here in the western world, but actually we haven’t got any.
NO one, absolutely no one are talking about it, apart from Jørgen Duff, I...and my cleaningman at my holiday house.
Else it seems like a madness in collective censorship that is going on.
When Biden or Blinken talks about war crimes that Russia are committing, why don't they start like this:
"We are aware that USA did war crimes in Iraq just 18 years ago, even in a much higher degree - but Russia is committing war-crime too in Ukraine"
"We are aware of we, and the rest of the western world are trying to make a total shutting down and bancrypsy to Russia"
"And by doing that, while US didn't get any punishment at all for killing ½-1 mio civilian people in Iraq, we are, as a consequence of our new
public international law and punishment-structure, hereby willing to accept a similar punishment towards US, for what we were doing in Iraq -
in order to bring important balance in law and punishment and for protection of the three fundamental priciples: 1) nobody are above the law, and 2) equal right for the law, and 3) equal punishment for equal crime"
"We are at same time aware, that killing-crimes has no expiration-date."
Now let us all fulfill..
Why aren't there any journalist who raise a little modest finger to Biden, to Blinken, to the west, asking the humble question: “what about the Iraq-war only 18 years ago Mr. President, was it okay what US did at that time? and secondly, why have US not been punished accordingly?”
Where on earth are all the critical journalists or -people gone?

This I could understood. Not to stand up as a golden saint and demand extreme punishment, claiming war-crime - but at same time being aware of have been doing exactly the same crime a few years ago, just a couple of hundred times worse.
Lets punish Russia, and US and Saudi Arabia for Ukraine, Iraq and Yemen - but equally, same methods, same strength.
And, from then on, we can start from scratch with this new world order
So what is the answer? We ignore the Russian invasion of Ukraine because other people have done bad things as well? (And yes, there were journalist that were and still are critical of the Iraq war, both inside and outside the US.)

So, the question remains, should we ignore the brutality of Putin in Ukraine?
 

Thorkil

Well-known member
Will, I was about writing a long answer to you, when these, my words, came off, last evening (danish time)(but this is not th long answer). But I'm also about trying to write an open letter to Mr. Biden, which I perhaps will ask New York Times if they will be kind to bring, while the things US did in 2003 puts USA in a special situation, with a special obligation to try to solve this matter with stretching it's, and Nato's too-, hand out towards Russia, solving the obvious and alarming need Russia have for security, just as US have, which certainly was proved in the 60's when Kennedy ordered the rockets back from Cuba to Russia, and threatened with a third and nuclear world war, if not.

So, there is only 3 solutions left, where only the third one is actually realistic. But it certainly demands a moving US and a moving Nato.
The former secretary of Nato, the former prime minister of Denmark, Anders Fogh Rasmussen was a hardliner and really the wrong person in the job. He is and was way too aggressive to handle the job making peaceful solutions with Russia. We know him for bad things made in Denmark, harming the danish tax-system etc. No, and he might be one of the reasons that this situation has come this far. We have through the last 25 years pushed Russia towards the corner, by the alarming extension of Nato. Everyone ought to have seen it would end wrong, and with our total lack of needed insight and by contrary just showing disrespect to Russia, this left them with no other options than a war and a occupation of Ukraine, if they wanted to ensure themselves against Ukraine becoming a future Nato-member, and thereby ensure themselves against a Nato border of 1.581km/988miles direct towards Russia. Such a situation would have been totally unacceptable for US if it was a Mexican border - with the risk of Nato-rockets all along this long border, and with rockets pointing at Moscow and all the bigger Russian cities, which are situated in western Russia. There are just about some 470km/294 miles from the Ukraine border towards Moscow. Naturally totally unacceptable. Why didn't our brain realize that long, long time ago? I'm no rocket expert, but I guess we are talking about 2 minutes rocket flight time then, with no reaction time left for the Russians. Totally unacceptable. We are the guilty, in our, I'm sorry for the words, selfish stupidity and ignorance.
And I don't see Stoltenberg as a man that can provide the solution now, I'm afraid.
But I'm sure Biden can, if he will, and if he gets the perspective. But it demands leaving the John Wayne method, the strong fist, that Georg Bush shoved of in 2003 with catastrophic result.
Here it’s not the strong fist that will solve, it’s the diplomatic ability that is at stake, and it will be THE test of diplomatic skills that will have to come for the day now. And the clock is running down, with the west stressing Russia with view of bancrupsy. It has become very, very dangerous. The ultimate and serious test. And we can't allow us, here in the west, this time, to fail by our previos ignorance.
I did not like Trump in many ways (specially not the encouragement to the storm of the congress and the unbelievable approval from the republican party, claiming it as a legal act, afterwards) but I must say, it seemed that Trump towards Putin and Russia was ably, in another way, to provide the needed respect at them.
We often forget that there are 160 mio. people in Russia, that have exactly the same need for security as the American have, (and we others!!!). And I'm sure that 27mio. dead Russian’s during WW2 and perhaps 12-14 mio. killed by Stalin are still sitting so deeply in the bones of Russia that their need of security are even more alarming, than in almost any other nation in the world.
This will be the ultimate test for Biden, if he wants to (he need to!), and are able to grab it. I see no other solutions. And he has to push he's other Nato members rather hard, so they together will go for the needed diplomatic solution, the neutrality in Ukraine and other countries against Russian borders (apart from Latvia and Estonia) and leave the western ultra-liberal selfishness locked up, well at home, and meet the alarming situation with the demanded humble respect.

Then, and only then, perhaps....
 
Last edited:

Shashin

Well-known member
Thorkill, please show me two things. A situation where (1) NATO invaded another European country and (2) a situation the Soviets/Russians invaded a European country. Then compere those lists.

I completely disagree with your assessment. You really have not studied Russian history or been following Putin's career. As as I noted before, you seem not keep forgetting the number of Ukrainians that died under the NAZIs and Soviets (and now Russians).

However, if you objective is to play spoiler in a thread used for members to express their solidarity for Ukraine and show their horror at Putin's actions, you have done so.
 

Thorkil

Well-known member
Will, you still don't get my issue. You won't see any reason why Russia had to defend itself from future Nato rockets being placed at its border.
Thereby you are feeling injustice for the act of forcing the rockets back to Russia from Cuba in the 60's I must conclude. Kennedy did wrong you would claim, I presume.
He had no right to feel unsecure. It was only self-defense-rockets just as Nato rockets at the Ukraine-Russia border would be. No need to worry.
Security for people in US have no parallel to security for the people in Russia. Its only legal to have security for us in the west.
Putin and Russia should accept a Ukraine membership of Nato, and accept Nato rocket direct nearby their bigger citys. That they had no right to disagree upon this.
The US killing of ½-1 mio. civil Iraqis doesn't matter and shall not be punished similar. We don't talk about it, then it didn't exist. Closing eyes make things evaporate. Period.
You claim that we shall only look at Europe. Why is killing in Europe worse than killing in Iraq? You dont want to rethink or talk about any needed similar justice of the Iraq crime.
You don't want a justice international that is fair towards all warcrimes, only the war crimes of Russia. Is it old communist hatred from the old McCarthy-times in US? I can't see it otherwise. But its human beings living there too, Will. They have a similar right for security. That you can't or will not understand. And they have left the so-called communism long time ago.
The Russian killing, of under 2.000 civil people yet, in Ukraine, shall be punished with trying get Russia bankrupt, and trying to give hunger in wast amount in Russia for the poor people there. So it shall be. That is your justice and the western way to see justice/injustice.
The US killing of ½-1 mio. people in Iraq didn't matter at all. Who cared? The families in Iraq doesn't matter. And we shall not feel sorrow for these people, it's irrelevant. And it shall not be punished at all. And if US should do it again, it doesn't matter, it's among friends. And Bush can go on smiling at people, and we smile back, only with a slightly stiff smile, but we smile.
We shall only feel sorrow for the 2.000 dead in Ukraine.
The 1 mio. dead in Iraq didn't matter at all. We really don't care.
Lives of people in in the third world has no value. There will be no threads with compassion for them in Iraq, neither for them in Darfur/Yemen etc.
Killing of these people is a free exercise. We don't care. And so it shall be further on. No need to change that.
Injustice will prevail. Amen.
Let the strongest kill for free then....
Yes "Abstraction" has right...
This war could easily have been avoided, but Nato had no will
No further comments
(Ps. When focusing on the viewpoint, looking for reasons of the Russians behavior and the fact of Nato’s forcing/pushing Russia to the corner through the last 25 years, leaving them no negotiant-alternative - it’s irrelevant to do a parallel extended history-book-writing of fex. the Stalin hunger campaign towards Ukraine before the WW2 with the stealing of their farming-products, causing hunger and 5 mio. dead or the Nazi crimes of jews either, with their killing of 5 mio. jews in Ukraine - we are a lot who are aware of this).
(PPS. if interested you can investigate in this Nazi bataljon under command of Zelenskij, which "Abstraction" mentioned, as terrorizing the eastern Ukraine, killing russians and jews
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cohen-ukraine-commentary-idUSKBN1GV2TY
and from danish brodcasting
https://nyheder.tv2.dk/udland/2022-...isymbol-her-er-ruslands-foretrukne-syndebukke
and their own homepage:
)
 
Last edited:

Shashin

Well-known member
So you are saying the only way for Russia to have security is to invade a sovereign nation? And more to the point, to lie about the threat (actually, Putin is saying they are invading because the Jewish president is a Neo-NAZI and a drug addict). You say the US invasion of Iraq is illegitimate, which was a lie based on a national defense idea of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction, but it is OK for Russia to lie in this case?

BTW, the article you posted about the far right in Ukraine is 4 years old (did you read it or are you just now trying to find something on the internet to support your position?). You also claim it is Zelenski is controlling that. Zelenski was not president at that time. For example:

In an ideal world, President Petro Poroshenko would purge the police and the interior ministry of far-right sympathizers...
Poroshenko, BTW, had a bit of corruption problem. Also:

To be clear, the Kremlin’s claims that Ukraine is a hornets’ nest of fascists are false: far-right parties performed poorly in Ukraine’s last parliamentary elections, and Ukrainians reacted with alarm to the National Militia’s demonstration in Kiev.
And note, Zelenski would become the new president later that year (And seriously, how does a Jewish presidential candidate get support from Neo-NAZIs?). And if you read that article carefully, you would also see that these nationalists were reacting to pro-Russian forces in Eastern Ukraine from the Russian-backed invasion in 2014.

OK, let talk about the treat of rockets on the border of Russia (even though, that is not what Putin is saying the invasion is for). Rockets, in and of themselves, is a defensive technology (you need ground troops for an invasion). You are saying that Ukraine, a sovereign nation, should not have the ability to defend itself? But lets go on and say that this hypothetical build up of Ukrainian military rockets is to invade Russian, a country 30 times larger with a much larger military. Has Ukraine shown interest in expansion? The real reason is Putin does not want Ukraine to be able to defend itself. Apparently, you feel Ukraine should not either.

You understand there is no need to have actual land-base rockets in Ukraine to strike Russia. There is the technology already in existence that can be used to strike any nation in the world from a distance. And even if this technology did not exist, it would be more practical and closer to potential Russian military targets to put those weapons in Estonia and Latvia. Has NATO put long range rockets in those countries?

But you still can't show NATO is an actual threat to Russia. You keep dodging that historical question about Russian aggression.

You seem to think I find some war crimes OK and some not. Where have I said that? And that is the largest weakness in your argument, you are claiming a position I do not hold. You seem to be arguing since the US has committed war crimes, then you think is is OK for Russia and Putin. I actually think there are many countries that need to be held accountable. But unlike you, I just don't want to get into whataboutism. We are talking about this war.

You clearly have an anti-American view of the world, and that is fine as the US have a very dark history, yet you do not seem to understand European history. Putin is just one in a long line of European dictators who wants to build an empire. When does Europe stand up to this kind of nationalism? Perhaps you support this? You don't like economic sanctions (which I will point out have killed no Russians), but it is precisely economics that have brought Europe one of its longest periods of peace. Naturally, if the Russian don't like the sanctions, they can pull their military out of Ukraine--so a solution exists.

But you objectives have been coming much clearer. The bottom line from your argument is you think it is OK for Putin to invade a sovereign nation. And you feel that aggression should not have any response from the international community. You do not believe in the sovereignty of Ukraine. I am happy to show solidarity with Ukraine, even if it is to counter the messages you are expressing here to justify this war.
 

lensbian

New member
They can hate us all they like. I will smile back because my great country, the United States of America has done more than most other countries to help others. I do not care what they or anyone else says about it. I have already given monetary aid to Ukrainian fundraisers because I was brought up by American parents that taught their children to help others.
 

Thorkil

Well-known member
as told, no further comments from me in this thread.
And Stanley, you can now see if you will be able to get a full recovery
 
Last edited:

Duff photographer

Active member
This anti American harangue from Thorkil and Duff is misplaced here…makes me sick
Stanley
I thnk you are being very selective in what you read and interpret. I am and have never been anti-American. I am anti-violence. I am against all those who think that violence is a solution. I trust this simple statement will get through to you.

They can hate us all they like. I will smile back because my great country, the United States of America has done more than most other countries to help others. I do not care what they or anyone else says about it. I have already given monetary aid to Ukrainian fundraisers because I was brought up by American parents that taught their children to help others.
"Hate" is a very emotive word and implies an intense dislike on behalf of the person or person that has been accused. To accuse someone, without reason, of 'hating' is disturbing. It may be that home truths about double standards and hypocrisy have hit home, but you may notice that my criticism has been aimed at governments and the media in general, not individuals, and certainly not here. The pointing out of those home truths is not an indication of hate, just a indication that I believe accountability is for all. I started a separate thread about that, and any criticism should be placed there and not here.

Indeed, the USA has helped many abroad, but it does not make up for the violence around the world caused by US government interference and military intervention. The US at home is seen as the home of Hollywood, MacDonalds, and American Football. The US abroad is seen as CIA instigated regime change, war crimes, assassination, and indiscriminant bombing, This sounds distasteful, and it is, but it is the experience of those that suffered from it. Of course, the US is not the only country to be embroiled in such matters, my own country could be regarded as the Daddy of them all. The British Empire is riddled with extreme violence and much of its population is still wrapped up in a 'superiority complex', refusing to accept the empire's dark past. Some, such as myself, have learnt from it.

To point out the failings and hate of human beings does not nullify the success and kindness of others just as much as pointing out those that do good should absolve those that uphold violence.

So don't assume that people who point out reality are hateful. They merely seek to balance out a one-sided reality and to encourage people to show humility and understand that no-one on this planet has the moral high ground.

Meanwhile, I recently sold a very nice lens (600mm Nikkor) to a friend, and have donated the proceeds to the Yemen Appeal run by UNICEF to "partly counter" (a very grandiose statement on my part) the fact that British made and British supplied weaponry is being used to kill or maim Yemenis children.

On this, I will end my contribution to this thread (Shashin can breath a sigh of relief), and any criticism of what I have written can be sent to me by private message (although please restrain any abuse or I may copy and paste it for all to see ;)).


Cheers,
Duff.
 
Last edited:

Thorkil

Well-known member
Quote, Duff: "Meanwhile, I recently sold a very nice lens (600mm Nikkor) to a friend, and have donated the proceeds to the Yemen Appeal run by UNICEF to "partly counter" (a very grandiose statement on my part) the fact that British made and British supplied weaponry is being used to kill or maim Yemenis children. "

👍👍
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I have been quiet about this lately. The reason is this:
A few weeks ago, I spent a few days with a Ukrainian friend of mine. He told me why he, his brother and several other Ukrainian men started leaving the country after the coup in 2014. He talked about the cancellation of Russian language and culture (like with most Russian speaking Ukrainians, his family has veen living in the country for generations, and like most Russian speakers there, he's fluent in both languages), the danger of being forcedly enrolled to an ultra nationalist military unit to fight other Russian speaking Ukrainians, how the ultra nationalists have infiltrated most political parties (which is the reason why there is currently no ultra nationalist party in Ukraine) and so on.

I have found that when trying to convey his messages to others, I'm mostly accused of lying, being a Putin apologist, supporting the Russian invasion, or any combination of the three. Better to shut up and let others enjoy their war fantasies. My friend also told me that he doesn't see any future for himself in Ukraine if the current government and their backers remain in power. Moving to Russia is not an option, since as he says, he's a Ukrainian, not a Russian. He is just as much not a Russian as a Brazilian is not a Portuguese and a Swiss is not French or German.
 

alajuela

Member
So you are saying the only way for Russia to have security is to invade a sovereign nation? And more to the point, to lie about the threat (actually, Putin is saying they are invading because the Jewish president is a Neo-NAZI and a drug addict). You say the US invasion of Iraq is illegitimate, which was a lie based on a national defense idea of Iraq having weapons of mass destruction, but it is OK for Russia to lie in this case?

BTW, the article you posted about the far right in Ukraine is 4 years old (did you read it or are you just now trying to find something on the internet to support your position?). You also claim it is Zelenski is controlling that. Zelenski was not president at that time. For example:



Poroshenko, BTW, had a bit of corruption problem. Also:



And note, Zelenski would become the new president later that year (And seriously, how does a Jewish presidential candidate get support from Neo-NAZIs?). And if you read that article carefully, you would also see that these nationalists were reacting to pro-Russian forces in Eastern Ukraine from the Russian-backed invasion in 2014.

OK, let talk about the treat of rockets on the border of Russia (even though, that is not what Putin is saying the invasion is for). Rockets, in and of themselves, is a defensive technology (you need ground troops for an invasion). You are saying that Ukraine, a sovereign nation, should not have the ability to defend itself? But lets go on and say that this hypothetical build up of Ukrainian military rockets is to invade Russian, a country 30 times larger with a much larger military. Has Ukraine shown interest in expansion? The real reason is Putin does not want Ukraine to be able to defend itself. Apparently, you feel Ukraine should not either.

You understand there is no need to have actual land-base rockets in Ukraine to strike Russia. There is the technology already in existence that can be used to strike any nation in the world from a distance. And even if this technology did not exist, it would be more practical and closer to potential Russian military targets to put those weapons in Estonia and Latvia. Has NATO put long range rockets in those countries?

But you still can't show NATO is an actual threat to Russia. You keep dodging that historical question about Russian aggression.

You seem to think I find some war crimes OK and some not. Where have I said that? And that is the largest weakness in your argument, you are claiming a position I do not hold. You seem to be arguing since the US has committed war crimes, then you think is is OK for Russia and Putin. I actually think there are many countries that need to be held accountable. But unlike you, I just don't want to get into whataboutism. We are talking about this war.

You clearly have an anti-American view of the world, and that is fine as the US have a very dark history, yet you do not seem to understand European history. Putin is just one in a long line of European dictators who wants to build an empire. When does Europe stand up to this kind of nationalism? Perhaps you support this? You don't like economic sanctions (which I will point out have killed no Russians), but it is precisely economics that have brought Europe one of its longest periods of peace. Naturally, if the Russian don't like the sanctions, they can pull their military out of Ukraine--so a solution exists.

But you objectives have been coming much clearer. The bottom line from your argument is you think it is OK for Putin to invade a sovereign nation. And you feel that aggression should not have any response from the international community. You do not believe in the sovereignty of Ukraine. I am happy to show solidarity with Ukraine, even if it is to counter the messages you are expressing here to justify this war.
Well Put
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
And seriously, how does a Jewish presidential candidate get support from Neo-NAZIs?
He doesn't, and that is part of the problem. Zelensky was elected on a program of de-escalation. When he tried to deliver on his promise, and arranged a meeting with the separatists in the Donbass region, the ultra nationalists refused to back off on any point, and was reported to threaten the president not to give anything. The negotiations unsurprisingly stopped there and then.

The ultra nationalists hate Russians, Jews, homosexuals etc. They probably also hate Zelensky, but Zelensky is weak, so he's useful to them, and he holds convincing speeches to western leaders, which brings more weapons into the country. The ultra nationalists, many of them not even Ukrainians, are not seeking peace. They are seeking dominance. They have been killing Ukrainians who disagree with them for 8 years, and they are still doing that, also outside the Donbass region.
 

alajuela

Member
He doesn't, and that is part of the problem. Zelensky was elected on a program of de-escalation. When he tried to deliver on his promise, and arranged a meeting with the separatists in the Donbass region, the ultra nationalists refused to back off on any point, and was reported to threaten the president not to give anything. The negotiations unsurprisingly stopped there and then.

The ultra nationalists hate Russians, Jews, homosexuals etc. They probably also hate Zelensky, but Zelensky is weak, so he's useful to them, and he holds convincing speeches to western leaders, which brings more weapons into the country. The ultra nationalists, many of them not even Ukrainians, are not seeking peace. They are seeking dominance. They have been killing Ukrainians who disagree with them for 8 years, and they are still doing that, also outside the Donbass region.
Zellenskyy was elected with 75% of the vote on a anti corruption platform. No Ukrainian is going to give away any of their land, let alone run for office on that platform . You have the Wagner group (little Green Men) in the Donbass, for the last 8 years. I'll file your opinion in the same file that Zelensky is weak - in the round file. I'll help you out here - The Problem is Putin and Russian Orthodox Church. Next time your attend the internal negotiations in the Ukrainian Government - be sure to let us know in real time. BTW name me a country that does not "Ultra Nationalists" as part of their political system.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Zellenskyy was elected with 75% of the vote on a anti corruption platform. No Ukrainian is going to give away any of their land, let alone run for office on that platform . You have the Wagner group (little Green Men) in the Donbass, for the last 8 years. I'll file your opinion in the same file that Zelensky is weak - in the round file. I'll help you out here - The Problem is Putin and Russian Orthodox Church. Next time your attend the internal negotiations in the Ukrainian Government - be sure to let us know in real time. BTW name me a country that does not "Ultra Nationalists" as part of their political system.
It's not a question of "giving away any of their land", but of living up to the Minsk agreement that all parties agreed to.

Yes, many countries have ultra nationalists, but few countries equip them with heavy weaponry and integrate them in the regular armed forces. Few countries let them fight on the frontline of a civil war, killing whoever they don't like. Few countries celebrate their past ultra nationalists with monuments and street names or name them "National Hero". Few countries accept that ultra nationalists infiltrate most political parties as is the case in Ukraine.

Nobody is defending Putin and his war, but without having a realistic picture of the actual situation in Ukraine, permanent peace will be very difficult to achieve. The country has had an ongoing armed conflict since 2014 with thousands of people dying. Strong forces within the country started the erasure of anything Russian the same year, including the status of the Russian language. But Russian language is a part of Ukraine, just like French is a part of Canada and Switzerland. Russian speaking Ukrainians are Ukrainians too. Not even Putin wanted to accept independence for the Donbass region until a couple of weeks before he invaded, but a high degree of autonomy, something all parties agreed on with the Minsk agreements. Why did he change his mind? Possibly because of the vast increase in attacks on that region by Ukrainian forces starting on 16 February (see the article by Jacques Baud).

Stop reading the news with one eye closed. Yes, there is Russian propaganda, but there is Ukrainian propaganda too, and American and EU propaganda. Yes, war is terrible, and that is being proven in several countries across the globe right now with an assortment of attackers being responsible. The war in Ukraine is not even the worst, although media try to convince us that it is. When placing the blame takes priority over ending the war, no solution will be found. People are dying, and that has to stop. There is unfortunately no fair solution in sight.

 

alajuela

Member
It's not a question of "giving away any of their land", but of living up to the Minsk agreement that all parties agreed to.

Yes, many countries have ultra nationalists, but few countries equip them with heavy weaponry and integrate them in the regular armed forces. Few countries let them fight on the frontline of a civil war, killing whoever they don't like. Few countries celebrate their past ultra nationalists with monuments and street names or name them "National Hero". Few countries accept that ultra nationalists infiltrate most political parties as is the case in Ukraine.

Nobody is defending Putin and his war, but without having a realistic picture of the actual situation in Ukraine, permanent peace will be very difficult to achieve. The country has had an ongoing armed conflict since 2014 with thousands of people dying. Strong forces within the country started the erasure of anything Russian the same year, including the status of the Russian language. But Russian language is a part of Ukraine, just like French is a part of Canada and Switzerland. Russian speaking Ukrainians are Ukrainians too. Not even Putin wanted to accept independence for the Donbass region until a couple of weeks before he invaded, but a high degree of autonomy, something all parties agreed on with the Minsk agreements. Why did he change his mind? Possibly because of the vast increase in attacks on that region by Ukrainian forces starting on 16 February (see the article by Jacques Baud).

Stop reading the news with one eye closed. Yes, there is Russian propaganda, but there is Ukrainian propaganda too, and American and EU propaganda. Yes, war is terrible, and that is being proven in several countries across the globe right now with an assortment of attackers being responsible. The war in Ukraine is not even the worst, although media try to convince us that it is. When placing the blame takes priority over ending the war, no solution will be found. People are dying, and that has to stop. There is unfortunately no fair solution in sight.

[/QUOTE

Unfortunately for you I do not have one eye closed, I see very clearly with both eyes. As far the Minsk accords they have been violated by Putin,. Also I see you have neglected (maybe had an eye closed) the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. Ukraine like it or not is not a country at Putin's whim, Ukraine is victim here. To express otherwise is lose any sense of humanity or dignity.
As far a language goes, conveniently there is a word for it "Russification" goes back to Czarist times. Also next time you are in Putin's head and checked when he wanted the Donbass, look harder When I was there it was 2014, not last week. He wants a land bridge all the way to Crimea - it is not feasible. A solution is in sight, the invader can not expect to take spoils of war. Ukraine did not invade Russia. Your solution rests on a false equivalency.

PS as of Today it looks like France is gaining a large Ultra Party. Hungary is already has. You are defending Putin by obscuring the basic fact that Putin invaded Ukraine, has been bombing cities, because he says the Country must be stop because it is run by Nazis.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Let one thing be very clear:
I do not in any way defend Russia's invasion of Ukraine. However, without understanding why it happened, finding a way to peace will be very difficult. If the Ukrainians want to achieve a military victory, that will be their choice, but it will lead to enormous suffering and many deaths. Negotiations are always preferable, even if the result probably won't please anybody much.

As for the Minsk agreement, there wasn't really anything to break. Ukraine didn't even try to live up to it, and it should be well known what fraction of the Ukrainians wouldn't cooperate. They state their views very clearly in only videos. The civil war continued as if the agreement didn't exist, with thousands dying. Few seemed to worry about that.

This war is already a fact. Discussing how evil Putin is won't lead to peace. Only negotiations between him and Zelensky, or their chosen representatives, will lead to lasting peace.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
But USA targeting civilian infrastructure plus bombing and killing civilians in Syria is of course unproblematic, because Americans are "the good guys". Solidarity with Syria? Nah....

read the whole article, not just the headline. It's interesting.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top