Putin announces 'military operation' in Ukraine.

[Penelope]

I did hear on one of the news channels this morning, that vast numbers of conscript ably aged Russians are leaving the country in droves and that home rents in places like Georgia have doubled because of this movement.

[Rewulf]

3 hours ago, Mungler said:

Mind you, if you think that Russia ‘had’ to invade to sort out a security threat or hunt down Nazis or ‘NATO whatever’ then you are lost down the rabbit hole of the mentally challenged. 

There you have it, in a nutshell.
Do not question the official narrative, agree with Mungler , or you are 'mentally challenged'

''IN a free society,'' wrote the French philosopher Montesquieu, ''it is not always important that individuals reason well, it is sufficient that they reason; from their individual thought, freedom is born.''

Exactly two centuries later, in his futuristic novel ''1984,'' the English political novelist George Orwell gave a tragic illustration of what the world would be without the freedom to think. Orwell had the intention to call his book ''The Last Man in Europe,'' as a tribute to the essential quality that distinguished man from the world around him, namely his ability to think for himself.

Winston, the main character of the novel, lives in a country where individual thought is banned, where only the leader, Big Brother, is allowed to reason and to decide. Prodded by his natural need for reflection and critical analysis, Winston finds it hard not to make use of his inborn talents. He starts questioning the wisdom of Big Brother and moves hopefully toward his own liberation. But in his struggle for emancipation he stands alone. The large mass of common people do not find in themselves the need to think independently, to question or to investigate what they have been taught. His fellow intellectuals have sold their inalienable right to think freely for security and a semblance of physical well-being.

3 hours ago, Mungler said:

Well, with you and Stonepark bigging up the   invading murdering Ruskies (and collecting Kremlin points for your Dacha) and a couple of us on the other side backing Ukraine and those being murdered and invaded by the Ruskies, we get a balanced view.

Thats 4 or 5 times youve mentioned that I am somehow being paid by Russia for stating my opinion on here.
Do you want to state for the record, that you are actually joking ?
Because if youre serious, then I think its you that needs to get some help.

Just because someone doesnt agree with your very repetitive , often incoherent rantings, does not make them evil red saboteurs , 5th columnists, or Kremlin spies.
The pages of Pigeon Watch are not a hotbed of geopolitical intrigue 

1 hour ago, timps said:

Whatever regime would ever end up in these so-called new republics they would have to be totally and unwaveringly subservient to Putin in every aspect. Should they stray from this path then there would be another Russian backed “war of independence” to free them from the tyranny of (insert Putin’s new villain of choice here).

Think about what youre saying there.
After Maidan, the new regime was subservient to who ?
The breakaway states were subservient to who ?
Crimea admittedly was occupied by the Russian army, but its been largely occupied by Russians for hundreds of years, it WAS Russia until the 50s.
Its true , that no new state can be truly independent, but subservient ? I think thats a disingenuous comment.
What you are saying is they have run from one master to another, and thats not necessarily the case here, they made a decision that they believed benefitted them (the majority)
Ukraine sought to rein them in using military force, using 'militias' that Kyiv found very difficult to control.
They set out to 'liberate' those that didnt want to be liberated, that is usually called oppression.

[bishop]

11 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

There you have it, in a nutshell.
Do not question the official narrative, agree with Mungler , or you are 'mentally challenged'

''IN a free society,'' wrote the French philosopher Montesquieu, ''it is not always important that individuals reason well, it is sufficient that they reason; from their individual thought, freedom is born.''

Exactly two centuries later, in his futuristic novel ''1984,'' the English political novelist George Orwell gave a tragic illustration of what the world would be without the freedom to think. Orwell had the intention to call his book ''The Last Man in Europe,'' as a tribute to the essential quality that distinguished man from the world around him, namely his ability to think for himself.

Winston, the main character of the novel, lives in a country where individual thought is banned, where only the leader, Big Brother, is allowed to reason and to decide. Prodded by his natural need for reflection and critical analysis, Winston finds it hard not to make use of his inborn talents. He starts questioning the wisdom of Big Brother and moves hopefully toward his own liberation. But in his struggle for emancipation he stands alone. The large mass of common people do not find in themselves the need to think independently, to question or to investigate what they have been taught. His fellow intellectuals have sold their inalienable right to think freely for security and a semblance of physical well-being.

Thats 4 or 5 times youve mentioned that I am somehow being paid by Russia for stating my opinion on here.
Do you want to state for the record, that you are actually joking ?
Because if youre serious, then I think its you that needs to get some help.

Just because someone doesnt agree with your very repetitive , often incoherent rantings, does not make them evil red saboteurs , 5th columnists, or Kremlin spies.
The pages of Pigeon Watch are not a hotbed of geopolitical intrigue 

Think about what youre saying there.
After Maidan, the new regime was subservient to who ?
The breakaway states were subservient to who ?
Crimea admittedly was occupied by the Russian army, but its been largely occupied by Russians for hundreds of years, it WAS Russia until the 50s.
Its true , that no new state can be truly independent, but subservient ? I think thats a disingenuous comment.
What you are saying is they have run from one master to another, and thats not necessarily the case here, they made a decision that they believed benefitted them (the majority)
Ukraine sought to rein them in using military force, using 'militias' that Kyiv found very difficult to control.
They set out to 'liberate' those that didnt want to be liberated, that is usually called oppression.

 On the topic of  who is the "good guy" here, as that is what all this jousting is really trying to figure out--im my experience of eastern europe during  another unpleasant european conflict,the " good guys"  idea is ,sadly, a somewhat blinkered and optimistic take on things . Id respectfully suggest spend some time in a conflict zone before making any presumptive or assumptive remarks on either countries agenda.It takes no time at all to become a very muddled and clouded affair im my experience.

[Rewulf]

17 minutes ago, bishop said:

 On the topic of  who is the "good guy" here, as that is what all this jousting is really trying to figure out--im my experience of eastern europe during  another unpleasant european conflict,the " good guys"  idea is ,sadly, a somewhat blinkered and optimistic take on things . Id respectfully suggest spend some time in a conflict zone before making any presumptive or assumptive remarks on either countries agenda.It takes no time at all to become a very muddled and clouded affair im my experience.

As much as Im not overly excited about voluntary travel into a conflict zone, that is very good advice.

The issue we have here, and I dont think theres any doubt that Russia is the bad guy, is not WHO is to blame, its how to resolve it, preferably without escalation into the abyss of nuclear war.
We need to establish some truths, and when both sides are lying through their teeth on a daily basis, this is difficult.

To many , the thought of Ukraine giving up territory , and somehow letting Russia get away with it , is understandably, a red line .
But the Kyiv regimes idea that no negotiations until Russian troops withdraw, is Russias red line.
The who blinks first scenario is fine when youre sat in your bunker, but for ordinary Ukrainians its really not very comforting.

[bishop]

10 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

As much as Im not overly excited about voluntary travel into a conflict zone, that is very good advice.

The issue we have here, and I dont think theres any doubt that Russia is the bad guy, is not WHO is to blame, its how to resolve it, preferably without escalation into the abyss of nuclear war.
We need to establish some truths, and when both sides are lying through their teeth on a daily basis, this is difficult.

To many , the thought of Ukraine giving up territory , and somehow letting Russia get away with it , is understandably, a red line .
But the Kyiv regimes idea that no negotiations until Russian troops withdraw, is Russias red line.
The who blinks first scenario is fine when youre sat in your bunker, but for ordinary Ukrainians its really not very comforting.

The minsk agreement is very seldom mentioned in the media Rewulf.Parts of this read as follows:

• Constitutional reform in Ukraine including decentralisation, with specific mention of Donetsk and Luhansk.
• Elections in Donetsk and Luhansk.

The agrement was retracted by Moscow as it was found that Ukraine was reluctant to disband para military groups in these areas --although for a while they "removed them from the main stream military".Ukraine also had a big issue with removing military personell  from  these regions.Minsk (2) failed in this area and the second agrements did not really happen at all. Minsk II included removing weapons from borders and regions of Donbas being given self-government. Its just a sad reality that ukraine government was reluctant to allow these areas to choose where they were heading and  where their futures lay.That is not an excuse for this war -its just  part of the messed up reasons it came about.Putin is one sick puppy thats a fact.

Edited August 24, 2022 by bishop

[Mungler]

It all started with an invasion.

‘Invasion : an instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.’

If you believe that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine can be justified and given all the woe that has followed and all the alternative options available, then the sky is the limit for what can be explained away, rationalised or otherwise deemed to be acceptable.

I happen to think that the Russian invasion of the Ukraine (and all that has followed) cannot be justified on any rational basis and as such is and remains unacceptable.

Others may wish to disagree but I have yet to see a cogent argument as to how the Russian invasion of Ukraine was an acceptable course of action / the only course of action available to Russia. Other courses of action are and remain available.

There we go. 

 

Edited August 24, 2022 by Mungler

[Rewulf]

12 minutes ago, bishop said:

The minsk agreement is very seldom mentioned in the media Rewulf.Parts of this read as follows:

• Constitutional reform in Ukraine including decentralisation, with specific mention of Donetsk and Luhansk.
• Elections in Donetsk and Luhansk.

Be careful, or youll be accused of having payouts from Moscow 

The reason its rarely mentioned in the media, is I suppose because Ukraine signed it , then consistently ignored it ?
Its my belief they never had any intention of honouring the agreements, theyve stated categorically they will never accept the breakaway of Donbass, and to hell with what the people who live there think.
Imagine is this was us versus Scotland or Wales, and we refused to let them go , despite a majority wanting to go ?

14 minutes ago, Mungler said:

It all started with an invasion.

‘Invasion : an instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.’

If you believe that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine can be justified and given all the woe that has followed and all the alternative options available, then the sky is the limit for what can be explained away, rationalised or otherwise deemed to be acceptable.

I happen to think that the Russian invasion of the Ukraine (and all that has followed) cannot be justified on any rational basis and as such is and remains unacceptable.

Others may wish to disagree but I have yet to see a cogent argument as to how the Russian invasion of Ukraine was an acceptable course of action / the only course of action available to Russia. Other courses of action are and remain available.

There we go. 

 

Well at least we can be civil now.
Ive moved on from whether it can be justified or not, its simply not relevant anymore, it happened, its not right, but to just believe it happened because one deranged man with dreams of empire wanted it , is a ridiculous notion.

Lets rather discuss how it can be fixed, what concessions are going to have to be made, because unless the Russians are just going to abandon their positions , go home and leave all that shattered equipment and material behind, with all those dead and injured, then concessions are going to have to be made.

Ill be honest , I think the Russians want it over, it IS a Vietnam/Afghan scenario, I think the Ukrainian people want it over, what possible good will it do them to continue, even if they 'win' ?
Look at who doesnt want it over, then you can see where the real problem lies.

[oowee]

26 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Be careful, or youll be accused of having payouts from Moscow 

The reason its rarely mentioned in the media, is I suppose because Ukraine signed it , then consistently ignored it ?
Its my belief they never had any intention of honouring the agreements, theyve stated categorically they will never accept the breakaway of Donbass, and to hell with what the people who live there think.
Imagine is this was us versus Scotland or Wales, and we refused to let them go , despite a majority wanting to go ?

Well at least we can be civil now.
Ive moved on from whether it can be justified or not, its simply not relevant anymore, it happened, its not right, but to just believe it happened because one deranged man with dreams of empire wanted it , is a ridiculous notion.

Lets rather discuss how it can be fixed, what concessions are going to have to be made, because unless the Russians are just going to abandon their positions , go home and leave all that shattered equipment and material behind, with all those dead and injured, then concessions are going to have to be made.

Ill be honest , I think the Russians want it over, it IS a Vietnam/Afghan scenario, I think the Ukrainian people want it over, what possible good will it do them to continue, even if they 'win' ?
Look at who doesnt want it over, then you can see where the real problem lies.

No one knows what the people of the Donbas wanted as they were never asked. It's nothing like the situation with Scotland. It can be fixed by Russia withdrawing. It is not possible to agree anything with an aggressor. Signing bits of paper will not work when they are signed by Putin. Russia will withdraw it's simply a matter of time. 

[Rewulf]

7 minutes ago, oowee said:

No one knows what the people of the Donbas wanted as they were never asked.

Youre not wrong, they didnt ask for EuroMaidan, or moving away from Russia toward the west.
They certainly didnt ask for gangs of armed thugs to be allowed to attack and kill them, but thats what happens when you dont toe the new regimes line in Ukraine.

It's nothing like the situation with Scotland.

Youre not wrong, the UK government would never dream of forcing Scotland to remain part of the UK, or arming and  sending nazi football thugs to terrorize them.

It can be fixed by Russia withdrawing.

Why would they do that ?
It is not possible to agree anything with an aggressor.

Historically, its often been that or annihilation .

Signing bits of paper will not work when they are signed by Putin.
I dont know what to say to that, it means the leader of a superpower cant be trusted to keep to his word.
It throws up too many questions and scenarios for this debate.

Russia will withdraw it's simply a matter of time. 

When theyre ready Im sure they will, but the only way to force them is further western support, militarily and economically, and if that doesnt happen, we are looking at more of Ukraine swallowed up.
There is a fine line of what further support entails, and if Putin doesnt like it, he MAY start using low yield battlefield nukes, then what ?

 

[Mice!]

56 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Ill be honest , I think the Russians want it over, it IS a Vietnam/Afghan scenario, I think the Ukrainian people want it over, what possible good will it do them to continue, even if they 'win' ?
Look at who doesnt want it over, then you can see where the real problem lies.

I don't see it as Vietnam/Afghanistan because there is far more to gain, they speak the same language and its taking place right on the border of Russia.

27 minutes ago, oowee said:

No one knows what the people of the Donbas wanted as they were never asked. It's nothing like the situation with Scotland. It can be fixed by Russia withdrawing. It is not possible to agree anything with an aggressor. Signing bits of paper will not work when they are signed by Putin. Russia will withdraw it's simply a matter of time. 

I just don't see Russia walking away,  otherwise the already would have. 

[bishop]

40 minutes ago, oowee said:

No one knows what the people of the Donbas wanted as they were never asked. It's nothing like the situation with Scotland. It can be fixed by Russia withdrawing. It is not possible to agree anything with an aggressor. Signing bits of paper will not work when they are signed by Putin. Russia will withdraw it's simply a matter of time. 

As i mentioned earlier politics in eastern europe, specifically politics geared  round centralised government can unravel fast when local far right political parties are seen to support local interests more that the central regime.Ive seen that before.Those that think the far right is a myth need to realise that the far right in europe is absolutely not dead,dormant,but very much alive.It thrives,and grows in strength covertly  feeding off  those who feel left out of things ,those who feel disenfranchised when it comes to their futures. I will point out that these far right groups slip in to local affairs using public events ,rock concerts and local  civic pride affairs to show their affinities.I saw that first hand .quite vile.i witnessed thousands doing a salute that should never have been done in europe after ww2 and it sent shivers up my spine. Whole families participating btw -not lone wolf lee harvey oswald types, just the familyS next door with their right hands up in the air.Hot dogs and happy happy dancing with national tv filming it all quite contentedly.That was  30 years ago.If the same thing was happening down in the Donbas i am not too surprised that things have escalated the way they have.

 

Edited August 24, 2022 by bishop

[Raja Clavata]

It didn't all start with an invasion.

[bishop]

3 minutes ago, Mice! said:

I don't see it as Vietnam/Afghanistan because there is far more to gain, they speak the same language and its taking place right on the border of Russia.

I just don't see Russia walking away,  otherwise the already would have. 

sadly speaking the same language means absolutely nothing.

[Mice!]

9 minutes ago, bishop said:

sadly speaking the same language means absolutely nothing.

I realise that,  but in this case one area wanted to join another and they share the same language,  history and religion,  it just makes it different to the usual case of going to a far away jungle or desert and waging war, its almost cvil war.

[Rewulf]

This is an up to date summary, and appears to be largely unbiased, its also quite long, but worth watching for its insights and suggestions.
They also arent reporting from their armchairs like some media does, WION reporters , as you will see, are 'on the ground'

in Ukraine.

[timps]

5 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Think about what youre saying there.
After Maidan, the new regime was subservient to who ?
The breakaway states were subservient to who ?
Crimea admittedly was occupied by the Russian army, but its been largely occupied by Russians for hundreds of years, it WAS Russia until the 50s.
Its true , that no new state can be truly independent, but subservient ? I think thats a disingenuous comment.
What you are saying is they have run from one master to another, and thats not necessarily the case here, they made a decision that they believed benefitted them (the majority)
Ukraine sought to rein them in using military force, using 'militias' that Kyiv found very difficult to control.
They set out to 'liberate' those that didnt want to be liberated, that is usually called oppression.

You do seem to like taking parts of my posts out of context rather than reading them as a whole.

On other threads when we have discussed things it seems you read things out of my post that are not conferred, the whole point of my post was in relation to the comparison to the American war of independence and the involvement of France. However, your conformation bias has some how made this into it is disingenuous to say they will be subservient to their new masters.

Regardless of which master they choose be it Ukraine or Putin a master they will have and not independence as was the case with France’s involvement with the American revolution.

If the republic of Donbas were at any point to do something that would anger Putin are seriously saying that he would allow it to happen with no consequence?

I have in no way conferred that Ukraine would not behave similarly however if Manchester claimed independence by force backed by an outside nation, I would assume it would be met with force from the rest of the UK no matter how many from Manchester supported it.

Regarding the majority wanting this “independence” I have seen no evidence for or against on numbers only that some in the region, with the backing of Russia are prepared to take up arms, and some with the backing of Ukraine are fighting back.

However Russia are in no way going to give them uncontroled independence even if they do prevail the whole context of my post.  

Edited August 24, 2022 by timps

[Newbie to this]

10 hours ago, Mungler said:

Indeed, if rolling tanks and 250,000 troops over a border isn’t something the ‘bad boy’ does then I don’t know what is 😆

Except when it is us 

[Rewulf]

46 minutes ago, timps said:

You do seem to like taking parts of my posts out of context rather than reading them as a whole.

On other threads when we have discussed things it seems you read things out of my post that are not conferred, the whole point of my post was in relation to the comparison to the American war of independence and the involvement of France. However, your conformation bias has some how made this into it is disingenuous to say they will be subservient to their new masters.

Well no , not really, this thread is about Ukraine, not the American war of independence , so its not really my 'confirmation bias' that made me think you were trying to draw some kind of comparison ?
Which I dont agree with.
 

 

56 minutes ago, timps said:

If the republic of Donbas were at any point to do something that would anger Putin are seriously saying that he would allow it to happen with no consequence?

Who knows for sure ?
Ukraine did plenty to annoy him for  8 years before he invaded them ?

50 minutes ago, timps said:

Regardless of which master they choose be it Ukraine or Putin a master they will have and not independence as was the case with France’s involvement with the American revolution.

So you are definitely saying that theres no way Donbass could exist independently without them being subservient to Russia ?
How could you possibly know what the relationship would be , they might vote just to be absorbed into Russia, then what ?
I also notice how you skirted the question of who Ukraine will be subservient to when this is over, and it owes more money than it ever hopes to be able to pay back to its , err, 'friends'

 

59 minutes ago, timps said:

I have in no way conferred that Ukraine would not behave similarly however if Manchester claimed independence by force backed by an outside nation, I would assume it would be met with force from the rest of the UK no matter how many from Manchester supported it.

Where did the Manchester scenario come from ?!

Is there a call in Scotland for independence ? Yes.
Would we forcefully prevent this ? No.
Can you not see the difference ?

1 hour ago, timps said:

Regarding the majority wanting this “independence” I have seen no evidence for or against on numbers only that some in the region, with the backing of Russia are prepared to take up arms, and some with the backing of Ukraine are fighting back.

Did they ever get chance for a vote before the skinheads got tooled up and started shooting ?

 

1 hour ago, timps said:

However Russia are in no way going to give them uncontroled independence even if they do prevail the whole context of my post.  

Again , you have no idea if thats true.
How many countries has Russia invaded , and not given independence to eventually.
Im not saying they are freedom distributing angels of democracy like the US are 😆 but at least theyre honest about their intentions .

Just now, Newbie to this said:

Except when it is us 

You cant use that , 20 years ago , doesnt count 

[Smokersmith]

98 pages of essentially the same argument!!!!

Lets hope the system cuts off at 100!

[Mungler]

33 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Except when it is us 

Us who? I never voted for Blair or Bush. Blair should still be prosecuted for war crimes - I’d vote for that.

But when does a wrong make a right? And when it’s a whole generation / 20 years ago. 

Mind you, go back a bit further and you can have a go at justifying why it was perfectly reasonable for Hitler to roll into Poland on one of his numerous special military operations 😆

[Mungler]

40 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

So you are definitely saying that theres no way Donbass could exist independently without them being subservient to Russia ?
How could you possibly know what the relationship would be , they might vote just to be absorbed into Russia, then what ?
I also notice how you skirted the question of who Ukraine will be subservient to when this is over, and it owes more money than it ever hopes to be able to pay back to its , err, 'friends'

 

Where did the Manchester scenario come from ?!

Is there a call in Scotland for independence ? Yes.
Would we forcefully prevent this ? No.
Can you not see the difference ?

Did they ever get chance for a vote before the skinheads got tooled up and started shooting ?

 

Again , you have no idea if thats true.
How many countries has Russia invaded , and not given independence to eventually.
Im not saying they are freedom distributing angels of democracy like the US are 😆 but at least theyre honest about their intentions .

You cant use that , 20 years ago , doesnt count 

 

Your favourite expression is ‘but how can you know’, well back at you.

As for suggesting Russia giving any country independence, your definition of independence differs from mine and that of the average dictionary.

[Newbie to this]

5 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Us who

The UK

 

6 minutes ago, Mungler said:

But when does a wrong make a right?

Never said it did, stop putting words in my mouth.

 

6 minutes ago, Mungler said:

And when it’s a whole generation / 20 years ago. 

So the Russian invasion will be fine, just in 20 years time 👍

7 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Mind you, go back a bit further and you can have a go at justifying why it was perfectly reasonable for Hitler to roll into Poland on one of his numerous special military operations

Oh dear

[Jaymo]

30 minutes ago, Smokersmith said:

98 pages of essentially the same argument!!!!

Lets hope the system cuts off at 100!

I’m just glad I recently found out that Ditchy’s secret underground bunker is real. 
It’s dead cosy down here, but smells a bit of ginger?

[Mungler]

14 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

The UK

 

Never said it did, stop putting words in my mouth.

 

So the Russian invasion will be fine, just in 20 years time 👍

Oh dear

If you can go back and reference 20 years ago, why not 70?

Serious question.

[timps]

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

Well no , not really, this thread is about Ukraine, not the American war of independence , so its not really my 'confirmation bias' that made me think you were trying to draw some kind of comparison ?
Which I dont agree with.

Well, if you had actually read my post as a whole and the quoted post contained in it that I was responding to, I’m not too sure how you couldn’t see that my post was in response to a post drawing comparison to the war of independence and France’s involvement.

I think my first line of

"It is an interesting premise however the war of independence was just that, Independence from a foreign power, France’s involvement was solely…"

Should have set the context and the fact the whole post it was in response to was actually quoted above it in full.

Your bias was to forget all the other parts of the post just to go after Ukraine oppressing them (which I never mentioned either happening or not) and Russia allowing them independence at the majority’s behest, and I do strongly disagree with this independence from Putin ever happening.

You have zero proof of anything you say but you believe it, so why cannot believe what I say or is it only you that is relieved of your burden of proof when posting your views ?

Why Scotland why not Northern Ireland, how do you think that would have played out if the Republic of Ireland  had openly supported those involved in the armed struggle across the border?

In terms of  how many countries has Russia invaded , and not given independence to eventually well for Ukraine that’s the whole point …. Them ….

 

Edited August 24, 2022 by timps