Arming the Ukrainians

[Spud]

What are you actually going on about?

"Excuse me just a moment before you do whatever you are going to do can you just let me know is this a rape or murder?"

"TEll you what luv, I'll do two for the price of one"

You aren't real Spud. You are some kind of grotesque made up bot.

To be clear, I'm not against resistance in that situation. I wasn't sure about going as far as killing him in self defense, but since in Deuteronomy 22:25 rape is punishable by death, I would assume for now that it would be permissible.
Also, I think it's clear from Luke 22:35-38 that killing in self defence is justified, so if a country is invaded then it is justified in defending itself.
I'm just not convinced that appealing to the rest of the world to protect you is the best thing, as it has resulted in devastation of the country, the death of innocent people and worldwide economic destruction. It might have been better, for example, to sanction Russia and wait until it gives up Ukraine.

[Nearly Sane]

To be clear, I'm not against resistance in that situation. I wasn't sure about going as far as killing him in self defense, but since in Deuteronomy 22:25 rape is punishable by death, I would assume for now that it would be permissible.
Also, I think it's clear from Luke 22:35-38 that killing in self defence is justified, so if a country is invaded then it is justified in defending itself.
I'm just not convinced that appealing to the rest of the world to protect you is the best thing, as it has resulted in devastation of the country, the death of innocent people and worldwide economic destruction. It might have been better, for example, to sanction Russia and wait until it gives up Ukraine.

So if the Nazis had just committed genocide on the Jews, and not invaded other countries, your take is that it would have been wrong of the Jews to appeal for help.

[Roses]

So if the Nazis had just committed genocide on the Jews, and not invaded other countries, your take is that it would have been wrong of the Jews to appeal for help.

That is what Spud appears to be suggesting!

[Aruntraveller]

Russia wanted to rob Ukraine, they didn't want to kill them. But they brought weapons with them knowing that Ukrainians would try to kill them.
If it is unjust to kill a robber, then Ukraine is guilty of initiating the war.

and

Also, I think it's clear from Luke 22:35-38 that killing in self defence is justified, so if a country is invaded then it is justified in defending itself.

You are all over the place on this.

Go on have a lie down.

[Spud]

So if the Nazis had just committed genocide on the Jews, and not invaded other countries, your take is that it would have been wrong of the Jews to appeal for help.

The Jews survived that kind of attack under the Persian empire, see book of Esther. But that was because they were supported by the Persian king who was married to a Jewess.
I doubt the Jews could have been helped in your scenario, as a similar thing happened in Rwanda and nothing was done. That was because of its suddenness and the reluctance of UN forces to intervene.
A big reason, it seems, for the rest of the world helping Ukraine, is because of the perceived threat to Europe. But that is not necessarily so much of a threat as is made out, as Europe is mostly part of NATO and protected by nuclear deterrents.

[Nearly Sane]

The Jews survived that kind of attack under the Persian empire, see book of Esther. But that was because they were supported by the Persian king who was married to a Jewess.
I doubt the Jews could have been helped in your scenario, as a similar thing happened in Rwanda and nothing was done. That was because of its suddenness and the reluctance of UN forces to intervene.
A big reason, it seems, for the rest of the world helping Ukraine, is because of the perceived threat to Europe. But that is not necessarily so much of a threat as is made out, as Europe is mostly part of NATO and protected by nuclear deterrents.

And your position is that asking for help when genocide is being committed against you is wrong.

[ad_orientem]

Is he raping her or killing her or both?
If it's just rape, suppose she has a knife. Would it be better to kill him or let him rape her?
If someone robs you do you kill them?
Do not repay evil for evil, but overcome evil with good.
Russia wanted to rob Ukraine, they didn't want to kill them. But they brought weapons with them knowing that Ukrainians would try to kill them.
If it is unjust to kill a robber, then Ukraine is guilty of initiating the war. Many Ukrainians in Donbas did not resist with violence, but protested and stood in front of the tanks etc. I think that was the right thing to do.

So this is Ukraine's fault? Go do one, vatnik! There's a very nasty place in hell reserved for you lot.

[Spud]

And your position is that asking for help when genocide is being committed against you is wrong.

It's not genocide though. Genocide implies (to me at least) attacking Ukraine even if Ukraine had surrendered or agreed to Russia's terms for peace.

[Nearly Sane]

It's not genocide though. Genocide implies (to me at least) attacking Ukraine even if Ukraine had surrendered or agreed to Russia's terms for peace.

The post I replied to was about the Jews, who you would have let be murdered.

[ad_orientem]

It's not genocide though. Genocide implies (to me at least) attacking Ukraine even if Ukraine had surrendered or agreed to Russia's terms for peace.

Ha! You're having bubble surely! Really what you're saying is that Ukraine should have just bent over! And what guarantee is that seeing we're dealing with Russia here? We all know what Russian "peace" means. Just ask the Baltics or any other of the countries that have been subject to Russian colonialism. Try this!

"the mother of all #RussianColonialism threads" https://twitter.com/i/events/1508142337079267341?t=zjYTr-ZH1q5mCH6wOTu0Vg&s=09

[Spud]

The post I replied to was about the Jews, who you would have let be murdered.

No, I would have helped them, because that was genocide. This situation is not genocide, as Zelensky has the option to agree to peace terms.

[Roses]

No, I would have helped them, because that was genocide. This situation is not genocide, as Zelensky has the option to agree to peace terms.

Are you one of Putin's buddies, it certainly seems like that is the case?

[ad_orientem]

No, I would have helped them, because that was genocide. This situation is not genocide, as Zelensky has the option to agree to peace terms.

Again, we all know what Russian "peace" looks like: being shot in the back of the head in front of a shallow grave or being sent to the gulag.

BTW, did you read that thread I linked to?

[Nearly Sane]

No, I would have helped them, because that was genocide. This situation is not genocide, as Zelensky has the option to agree to peace terms.

So say the Nazis had said to the Jews 'We won't kill you if you agree to be our slaves', you would have been fine with that? After all, it's just 'peace terms'.

[ad_orientem]

No, I would have helped them, because that was genocide. This situation is not genocide, as Zelensky has the option to agree to peace terms.

Imagine having a moral code where the bully's always allowed to win!

[Outrider]

No, I would have helped them, because that was genocide. This situation is not genocide, as Zelensky has the option to agree to peace terms.

It's not genocide? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/27/russia-guilty-inciting-genocide-ukraine-expert-report These thirty expert scholars and lawyers appear to disagree with you, on the basis of the forcible relocation of children, the deliberate destruction of cultural heritage and the ongoing propoganda effort to try to depict Ukrainians as just 'mislabelled' Russians without an identity of their own.

Genocide is the crime of trying to eradicate a culture - the Nazis opted to try to do that by killing entire populations, but Russia, like China with the Uyghur Muslims, is trying to suppress the identity and idea in any way it can.

Now, maybe that's a form of genocide that you wouldn't feel as obligated to fight back against, I can understand the logic of that stance (though I wouldn't agree with it), but this is clearly an attempt to undermine the concept of Ukraine and being Ukrainian, and therefore it's a form of genocide.

O.

[Spud]

So say the Nazis had said to the Jews 'We won't kill you if you agree to be our slaves', you would have been fine with that? After all, it's just 'peace terms'.

How do we deal with modern slavery? By shooting those who are guilty of it?

[Nearly Sane]

How do we deal with modern slavery? By shooting those who are guilty of it?

Certainly not by standing by and ignoring it as you want to do.

[Spud]

It's not genocide? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/27/russia-guilty-inciting-genocide-ukraine-expert-report These thirty expert scholars and lawyers appear to disagree with you, on the basis of the forcible relocation of children, the deliberate destruction of cultural heritage and the ongoing propoganda effort to try to depict Ukrainians as just 'mislabelled' Russians without an identity of their own.

Genocide is the crime of trying to eradicate a culture - the Nazis opted to try to do that by killing entire populations, but Russia, like China with the Uyghur Muslims, is trying to suppress the identity and idea in any way it can.

Now, maybe that's a form of genocide that you wouldn't feel as obligated to fight back against, I can understand the logic of that stance (though I wouldn't agree with it), but this is clearly an attempt to undermine the concept of Ukraine and being Ukrainian, and therefore it's a form of genocide.

O.

Okay, thanks for the link. Looking at it from the Russian perspective, a few points:
Firstly, Ukrainians armed their citizens, in case Russian troops managed to enter cities. This means that any attacks on apartment blocks etc were not strictly attacks on defenseless citizens. It means that in order to take a city that hasn't surrendered, Russian troops would have to engage in street to street fighting against well-prepared citizens, and therefore you can see why they would first bombard cities and destroy infrastructure, making it harder for the inhabitants to fight.
Secondly, I saw a report from a town that had been occupied early in the invasion, where a woman was standing in front of a Russian soldier and shouting at him, yet the soldier was heard to say, "please don't make this difficult" and did not retaliate, as far as the film made out. So I don't think we can assume that from the outset, killing non-combatants was the Russian aim. It appears that they intended to use force only when met with force. The incidents we do know of unarmed people being shot in cold blood may be isolated ones, rather than the norm.
Thirdly, Ukraine fabricated the myth of the fighter pilot who shot down 40-odd Russian aircraft, who turned out to have shot down a few before being killed. This was in order to boost morale, yet it was deceptive like the Russian denial of plans to invade. It amounts to encouraging people to fight when they are unable to win, thus leading them to their death.
The article cites children being deported etc, but this is not murder as we saw in Rwanda or Nazi Germany. And we have to remember the overall strategy of Russia which was to protect itself in the face of NATO expansion.

[Roses]

Spud is away with the fairies and them some. That is me being polite and not saying exactly what I think of his crazy comments.

[Aruntraveller]

Firstly, Ukrainians armed their citizens, in case Russian troops managed to enter cities. This means that any attacks on apartment blocks etc were not strictly attacks on defenseless citizens.

Why shouldn't they?

It's their fucking country.

They wouldn't need to defend their country if the Russians hadn't invaded. Just who do you think is at fault here? Clue: It's not the Ukrainians.

By your argument, we shouldn't have had the Home Guard in WW2.

It would be best if you got your water supply checked, there is something in it that is not doing your thought processes any good.

[Roses]

Why shouldn't they?

It's their fucking country.

They wouldn't need to defend their country if the Russians hadn't invaded. Just who do you think is at fault here? Clue: It's not the Ukrainians.

By your argument, we shouldn't have had the Home Guard in WW2.

It would be best if you got your water supply checked, there is something in it that is not doing your thought processes any good.

Or maybe he is taking some substance, which interfers with his thought processes so he can't see how inane his comments on this topic are.

[ad_orientem]

Or maybe he is taking some substance, which interfers with his thought processes so he can't see how inane his comments on this topic are.

Yeah. Russian cum!

[jeremyp]

Is he raping her or killing her or both?
If it's just rape, suppose she has a knife. Would it be better to kill him or let him rape her?
If someone robs you do you kill them?
Do not repay evil for evil, but overcome evil with good.
Russia wanted to rob Ukraine, they didn't want to kill them. But they brought weapons with them knowing that Ukrainians would try to kill them.
If it is unjust to kill a robber, then Ukraine is guilty of initiating the war. Many Ukrainians in Donbas did not resist with violence, but protested and stood in front of the tanks etc. I think that was the right thing to do.

Somebody who is being raped has every right to stop the rape happening by any reasonable means, as far as I'm concerned. If that means stabbing the rapist with a knife, I'd say that is acceptable and if the rapist subsequently dies, again, that is acceptable.

If I was being robbed I would only consider stabbing the robber if they were actually doing violence to me or if I was sure they will be doing violence to me.

Russia invaded Ukraine. They wanted to subjugate Ukraine and its people. Had they succeeded in the first few days as they expected, most of the incumbent government would have been murdered. They would probably have started ethnically cleansing certain territories and you can be sure there would be robbery, rape and murder going on, because that's what occupying soldiers do. Ukraine has every right to fight back.

[jeremyp]

The Jews survived that kind of attack under the Persian empire, see book of Esther.

The book of Esther is acknowledged to be a work of fiction. Think of it as a historical novel.

A big reason, it seems, for the rest of the world helping Ukraine, is because of the perceived threat to Europe. But that is not necessarily so much of a threat as is made out, as Europe is mostly part of NATO and protected by nuclear deterrents.

Yes, basically, Russia has to be stopped, and bluntly, for NATO members, this is better than committing our own troops. If Russia* had overrun Ukraine and they probably would have without our help, they would be looking towards thew next target now.

By "Russia" I really mean Vladimir Putin because I don't think most Russians really care about restoring the empire.