Arming the Ukrainians

[ad_orientem]

My point is this. The government calls Ukrainians 'our Ukrainian friends'. I agree with this, but if the reality is that they are dying in their hundreds of thousands, perhaps eventually millions, and we are not willing to fight with them, then is it really them we care about or is it the land they are fighting for? A much better way to help them would be like how we helped Hong Kongers, allowing them to settle in Europe, alive.

Alternatively, instead of holding back (worrying about imaginary red lines), we could just give Ukraine everything it needs to kick every last ruSSian barbarian out as quickly as possible and with minimum loss of life (for the Ukrainians, that is). You know, things like long range missiles, more air defence, and fighter jets.

[jeremyp]

My point is this. The government calls Ukrainians 'our Ukrainian friends'. I agree with this, but if the reality is that they are dying in their hundreds of thousands, perhaps eventually millions, and we are not willing to fight with them, then is it really them we care about or is it the land they are fighting for? A much better way to help them would be like how we helped Hong Kongers, allowing them to settle in Europe, alive.

You mean we should let Russia win? 

[ad_orientem]

The cycle of constant ruSSian aggression against its neighbours needs to be broken. At the heart of it is the idea of ruskiy mir, an imperial mindset that sees ruSSians and ruSSian culture as superior to all others. So ingrained is this mindset that the only way to get rid of it is to surgically remove it. The first step is making sure Ukraine wins, that it regains all its occupied territories. RuSSia needs to suffer a heavy defeat. The next step is accepting collective responsibility. Yes, all ruSSians are responsible. War crimes tribunals have to be held, reparations made, and they have to be made to come to terms with their imperial past, which is essentially 500 years of genocide against its neighbours. Finally, ruSSia has to accept that its borders may have to change. RuSSia has to go through the same sort of process as Germany did after WWII

[Sebastian Toe]

My point is this. The government calls Ukrainians 'our Ukrainian friends'. I agree with this, but if the reality is that they are dying in their hundreds of thousands, perhaps eventually millions, and we are not willing to fight with them, then is it really them we care about or is it the land they are fighting for? A much better way to help them would be like how we helped Hong Kongers, allowing them to settle in Europe, alive.

Maybe Putin could help the hungry of the world by not bombing grain stores?

[Outrider]

My point is this. The government calls Ukrainians 'our Ukrainian friends'. I agree with this, but if the reality is that they are dying in their hundreds of thousands, perhaps eventually millions, and we are not willing to fight with them, then is it really them we care about or is it the land they are fighting for? A much better way to help them would be like how we helped Hong Kongers, allowing them to settle in Europe, alive.

No. For exactly the same reason that we should have stood up harder to the Chinese, we need to ensure that our allies in Ukraine can stand up to the aggression of Russia. If Russia gets what it wants from throwing its military around, it will continue to do so - we reward Russian aggression, we get more Russian aggression.

O.

[ad_orientem]

No. For exactly the same reason that we should have stood up harder to the Chinese, we need to ensure that our allies in Ukraine can stand up to the aggression of Russia. If Russia gets what it wants from throwing its military around, it will continue to do so - we reward Russian aggression, we get more Russian aggression.

O.

Exactly this! The only way to stop it is to face up to it.

[Spud]

Alternatively, instead of holding back (worrying about imaginary red lines), we could just give Ukraine everything it needs to kick every last ruSSian barbarian out as quickly as possible and with minimum loss of life (for the Ukrainians, that is). You know, things like long range missiles, more air defence, and fighter jets.

That is basically escalation. Russia would match anything. Furthermore, they are no more likely to surrender than Ukraine is, so you're looking at the last Ukrainian, then the last Pole, and so on until the last Russian. Don't be naiive, no western country is going to give up enough of its weapons to enable Ukraine to win without all of them being killed.

Think of it this way. When Solomon as the new king of Israel had to decide which of two women was a baby's real mother, he knew by the way the real mother cared so much for the baby's life that she was willing to let it be given to the other woman.
If you really care about Ukraine, meaning the people of Ukraine, then you will be willing to give it up so that the slaughter can stop.

No. For exactly the same reason that we should have stood up harder to the Chinese, we need to ensure that our allies in Ukraine can stand up to the aggression of Russia. If Russia gets what it wants from throwing its military around, it will continue to do so - we reward Russian aggression, we get more Russian aggression.

O.

You all keep saying "we" but until NATO puts boots on the ground to help, you mean "they". You're effectively telling them to go and commit suicide.

[ad_orientem]

That is basically escalation. Russia would match anything. Furthermore, they are no more likely to surrender than Ukraine is, so you're looking at the last Ukrainian, then the last Pole, and so on until the last Russian. Don't be naiive, no western country is going to give up enough of its weapons to enable Ukraine to win without all of them being killed.

Think of it this way. When Solomon as the new king of Israel had to decide which of two women was a baby's real mother, he knew by the way the real mother cared so much for the baby's life that she was willing to let it be given to the other woman.
If you really care about Ukraine, meaning the people of Ukraine, then you will be willing to give it up so that the slaughter can stop.
You all keep saying "we" but until NATO puts boots on the ground to help, you mean "they". You're effectively ordering your slaves to go and commit suicide so you can be safe.

You are wrong. The ruSSian army is a mess. It can and will be defeated as long as we, the West, have the will to do so. The might of the ruSSian army is a myth. As for Ukraine, they fight for what we believe in. We have a duty to help them. RuSSian aggression must stop!

[Spud]

You are wrong. The ruSSian army is a mess. It can and will be defeated as long as we, the West, have the will to do so. The might of the ruSSian army is a myth. As for Ukraine, they fight for what we believe in. We have a duty to help them. RuSSian aggression must stop!

The Russian army is supported by it's air force and navy, and backed by a bigger nuclear arsenal than that of NATO, which gives them confidence.
Which prophet was it that told Israel not to trust in Egypt for help against Babylonia?

[ad_orientem]

The Russian army is supported by it's air force and navy, and backed by a bigger nuclear arsenal than that of NATO, which gives them confidence.
Which prophet was it that told Israel not to trust in Egypt for help against Babylonia?

I'd be surprised if any ruSSian nuclear weapons work. It's all a bluff. Still, the only language they know is strength. Backing down only encourages them.

[Spud]

I'd be surprised if any ruSSian nuclear weapons work. It's all a bluff.

So are you saying that Russia won't use any nukes because it knows most of them won't work and it would be annihilated by those of NATO? If so, why is NATO ensuring it doesn't get drawn in? Could that be because they think Russia's nukes would work?
 

Still, the only language they know is strength. Backing down only encourages them.

But for Ukraine, backing down is necessary in this case, because it does not have the comfort of a nuclear deterrent to fall back on.

[ad_orientem]

So are you saying that Russia won't use any nukes because it knows most of them won't work and it would be annihilated by those of NATO? If so, why is NATO ensuring it doesn't get drawn in? Could that be because they think Russia's nukes would work?
 But for Ukraine, backing down is necessary in this case, because it does not have the comfort of a nuclear deterrent to fall back on.

I'm saying we should just ignore ruSSia's nuclear rhetoric. It's all bullshit. It's a bluff. We should be calling their bluff. I said it from the beginning.

[Nearly Sane]

This could have huge repurcussions


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66253143

[ad_orientem]

This could have huge repurcussions


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66253143

Indeed. Will the West and NATO have the balls to do what it should do or will we just have a statement saying this is "deeply concerning"?

[jeremyp]

That is basically escalation. Russia would match anything.

Russia could de-escalate simply by withdrawing from Ukraine, a country they invaded.

Furthermore, they are no more likely to surrender than Ukraine is,

I think they are. I think it just requires the removal of Putin. His successor would not be quite so invested in the war and might therefore withdraw in exchange for the lifting of some sanctions.

so you're looking at the last Ukrainian, then the last Pole, and so on until the last Russian. Don't be naiive, no western country is going to give up enough of its weapons to enable Ukraine to win without all of them being killed.

Nope. You forget that, if Russia wins, they'll be genociding the Ukrainians anyway.

Think of it this way. When Solomon as the new king of Israel had to decide which of two women was a baby's real mother, he knew by the way the real mother cared so much for the baby's life that she was willing to let it be given to the other woman.
If you really care about Ukraine, meaning the people of Ukraine, then you will be willing to give it up so that the slaughter can stop.

Yes, but there is no Solomon in this case to restore the baby to its rightful parent. If the wrong woman wins the baby, she'll just do it again when she decides it needs a sibling.

You all keep saying "we" but until NATO puts boots on the ground to help, you mean "they". You're effectively telling them to go and commit suicide.

If Ukraine decides to give up, I will not stand in their way, but it's their country and their decision and I don't think giving up will make things better.

[Outrider]

You all keep saying "we" but until NATO puts boots on the ground to help, you mean "they". You're effectively telling them to go and commit suicide.

No, we're supporting them financially and militarily, we're providing training, equipment, expertise and housing for the displaced. That we aren't sending in troops is an attempt to prevent further escalations on the part of the ILLEGAL RUSSIAN INVASION. This is where we've decided to draw a line - we didn't do it for Chechnya, we didn't do it for Crimea, and not doing it emboldened Russia, so now we draw a line and we coordinate our response in conjunction with our allies.

If we don't provide the Ukrainians with arms and armaments, do you believe they'll just decide to become Russian, just accept the invasion of their country by a hostile foreign power? Do you believe that the Russians will suddenly stop violating rights and start treating people decently in Ukraine, even though they don't back in the Motherland? They are fighting, with or without our help, to avoid become meat for the Russian grinder, and we are providing assistance to that resistance that will happen anyway.

O.

[Spud]

No, we're supporting them financially and militarily, we're providing training, equipment, expertise and housing for the displaced. That we aren't sending in troops is an attempt to prevent further escalations on the part of the ILLEGAL RUSSIAN INVASION. This is where we've decided to draw a line - we didn't do it for Chechnya, we didn't do it for Crimea, and not doing it emboldened Russia, so now we draw a line and we coordinate our response in conjunction with our allies.

It looks more as though we don't want our troops being killed.

If we don't provide the Ukrainians with arms and armaments, do you believe they'll just decide to become Russian, just accept the invasion of their country by a hostile foreign power?

The people of Eastern and Southern territories would become part of the Russian Federation, yes - this would protect them from the rest of Ukraine, which would become neutral.

Do you believe that the Russians will suddenly stop violating rights and start treating people decently in Ukraine, even though they don't back in the Motherland?

Which rights do you mean? Same sex marriage?

They are fighting, with or without our help, to avoid become meat for the Russian grinder, and we are providing assistance to that resistance that will happen anyway.

O.

Actually a lot of them are being rounded up and compelled to fight. You are assisting that.

[ad_orientem]

I find your concern quite fake. More like, why won't you let ruSSia win already! Plus you're just regurgitating ruSSian lies. Bambili bambas!

[Spud]

Russia could de-escalate simply by withdrawing from Ukraine, a country they invaded.

Yes, but that's irrelevant. We are encouraging Ukraine to fight, knowing that Russia will match, then exceed their strength.

I think they are. I think it just requires the removal of Putin. His successor would not be quite so invested in the war and might therefore withdraw in exchange for the lifting of some sanctions.

But Putin is more popular in Russia than Biden is in the US, or Sunak is in the UK, iirc.

Nope. You forget that, if Russia wins, they'll be genociding the Ukrainians anyway.

What evidence do you have for that? Anyone with a Nazi tatoo may be in some trouble.

Yes, but there is no Solomon in this case to restore the baby to its rightful parent. If the wrong woman wins the baby, she'll just do it again when she decides it needs a sibling.

But at least the baby will be alive.

If Ukraine decides to give up, I will not stand in their way, but it's their country and their decision and I don't think giving up will make things better.

The problem is that two wrongs don't make a right. We need to stand in Russia's way, unarmed. Or at least not try to outgun Russia - that makes us or Ukraine more of a target.

[Spud]

I find your concern quite fake. More like, why won't you let ruSSia win already! Plus you're just regurgitating ruSSian lies. Bambili bambas!

Why don't you try seeing things from their point of view?

[ad_orientem]

Why don't you try seeing things from their point of view?

RuSSia always lies. What more do I need to know?

[jeremyp]

It looks more as though we don't want our troops being killed.

Well we don't. But we also don't want to escalate this into a world war.

The people of Eastern and Southern territories would become part of the Russian Federation, yes - this would protect them

Now they've experienced Russian occupation, they are probably less enthusiastic about this idea than they were before the war started. They weren't up for it then.

from the rest of Ukraine, which would become neutral.

It was neutral before. That didn't stop Russia from invading.

Which rights do you mean? Same sex marriage?

Their right to life and liberty.

Actually a lot of them are being rounded up and compelled to fight. You are assisting that.

Being under Russian rule doesn't stop that from happening to you.

[jeremyp]

Yes, but that's irrelevant. We are encouraging Ukraine to fight, knowing that Russia will match, then exceed their strength.

The facts show that Russia is not matching or exceeding Ukraine's strength. Ukraine doesn't need any encouragement from us to fight.

But Putin is more popular in Russia than Biden is in the US, or Sunak is in the UK

Oh FFS, Putin will not be deposed by a democratic election. He'll either die of natural causes (he's not in the best of health) or deposed by one of his minions.

, iirc.What evidence do you have for that? Anyone with a Nazi tatoo may be in some trouble.

Because it's Russia. They are already talking about exterminating Ukraine.

But at least the baby will be alive.

You mean babies. If Russia gets away with this, they'll do it again and again and again.

The problem is that two wrongs don't make a right. We need to stand in Russia's way, unarmed. Or at least not try to outgun Russia - that makes us or Ukraine more of a target.

You go and stand in Russia's way unarmed. It'll just get you killed.

[ekim]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/vladimir-putin-conscripts-pensioners-to-fight-ukraine-as-russian-president-becomes-desperate/ar-AA1e8ak6?ocid=mailsignout&pc=U591&cvid=3c5ac0fd2fbc45da8b5801f1a78b997d&ei=33

[Outrider]

It looks more as though we don't want our troops being killed.

We don't want anyone's troops killed. More importantly, we don't want non-combatants killed, but Russia does not seem to have those concerns. If we send troops, the situation escalates, and the Chief Twat of Russia gets desperate - who knows what sort of atrocities he'll let loose if that happens? Aside from that, the best prognosis for a de-escalation comes from Russia itself finally kicking Putin out of office and coming back to reality, and if NATO puts boots on the ground that becomes less likely.

You seem to have a perhaps religious 'pacifism' angle on this where the only goal is not having anyone killed no matter what the other consequences are, or an depiction that to support but not get involved is some sort of moral cowardice, and a complete failure to appreciate any sort of nuanced position that acknowledges there are legal and political factors at play, not just moral and military ones.

The people of Eastern and Southern territories would become part of the Russian Federation, yes - this would protect them from the rest of Ukraine, which would become neutral.

How about Ukraine gets a say in whether Russia gets to steal huge swathes of its territory? How about, at the very least, the residents of those regions of Ukraine get a say?

Even if this happens, the net result is that Putin learns if he invades somewhere he gets a reward - how does that safeguard the 'neutral' part of Ukraine from futue aggresssion? How does that in any way discourage Putin from regrouping, maybe trying to remedy some of grosser examples of inadequacy and corruption from his military, and trying again? Why should Ukraine be obliged by Russian aggression to adopt some sort of 'neutral' position because Putin doesn't want them to join an organisation set up to specifically combat exactly the sort of aggression that he's demonstrating?

Which rights do you mean? Same sex marriage?Actually a lot of them are being rounded up and compelled to fight. You are assisting that.

I was actually thinking more of the right to take part in democratic action to determine the future of their own country, but I guess that generally hateful recidivism of Russian orthodox Christianity's influence on their current politics is also something to take up arms against, now that you mention it.

That you think standing up to Russian aggression is somehow responsible for Russian ill-treatment of gay people is emblematic of how disproportionate your view of these events seems to be.

O.