What is really happening in the Ukraine Conflict?

[Scott777]

I am intuiged by the idea Zelensky is a NATO puppet.

In what way is he a NATO puppet? He seems to spend his time badgering them to give him more weapons with less restrictions. If NATO wanted to give him more weapons or strike deeper into Russia why do they seem to be the ones.dragging their feet?

It seems strange behaviour for a puppet.

It only seems strange if you expect a simplistic answer.  It's all about power.  NATO does not have all the power.  The richest people have the power.  Bill Gates, George Soros, Jeff Bezos, families like Getty, Rockefeller.  They all benefit from globalisation, and Russia is a thorn in the side of that agenda.  NATO serves that agenda, as does Zelensky.

The question for them is, how to remove Russia without starting WWIII and while not alienating the Western population.  So it has to be done strategically, and while appearing to be moral.  They can't just bulldoze their way through Russia.

[Scott777]

In a debate you have to qualify your claims, if you don't then your posts became worthless. Your choice.

I don't have to qualify my claims if they have not been disputed.  So what are you disputing?  That there was a revolution?

[Scott777]

Apologies if there's been any misrepresentation of you, you seem to often strongly hint Putin/Russia are more in the right than Ukraine, that's all

No worries.  Then just for clarification, I don't view the invasion in terms of right and wrong, because it makes no sense to me.  If we had a one world government (thank god we don't), they could decide what is right and wrong in a global sense.  But because Russia is its own thing, independent of any global sense of right and wrong, we should view it in terms of the Russian Bear.  What matters is how to avoid a fight with a bear, not whether the bear is right or wrong, because we cannot impose that on a bear.  We can try, but it does not have to accept it.  And the way to avoid such a conflict is not to poke the bear.  Calling Russia "the bad guys" or "the good guys" does nothing to help the situation.  Certainly I would not like to be on the wrong side of Putin, for fear of being disappeared.

[Scott777]

Direct quote
But Yanukovich was careful to say that Ukraine remained committed to joining mainstream Europe one day and would seek to improve its eligibility for European Union membership by raising living standards and reforming its economy.
"We will follow a pragmatic and balanced foreign policy. We will continue to develop the process of Euro-integration. But its basis will be the modernization and transformation of Ukraine internally," he said.


I think that puts beyond doubt that he was looking to deepen ties with the EU. An association agreement is one of the options.

After election he was urging his parliament where his party had a majority to pass laws to help ease the association agreement.

Not the association agreement would not violate his aim of neutrality as it was in no way a military alliance. Ukraine wouod not be part of NATO (it would have been near impossible at the time as the Ukrainian armed forces were still operating Warsaw pact military standards) or PESCO. It would remain a mimitaeily neutral state but would ha easier trade with the EU states.

So, "joining mainstream Europe one day."  "raising living standards and reforming its economy."  But not the Association Agreement.  So if that's what he was elected on, we then have to ask why there was a violent revolution, in which police and protesters were killed.  Was it really because he broke promises which were NOT part of his election campaign, or because he wasn't joining mainstream Europe "one day", or not "raising living standards and reforming its economy."  Or was it because the CIA were behind it?  Which seems more likely to you?

[BeElBeeBub]

The war crimes Ukraine have committed and their leader's puppetry for NATO

I am intuiged by the idea Zelensky is a NATO puppet. 

In what way is he a NATO puppet? He seems to spend his time badgering them to give him more weapons with less restrictions. If NATO wanted to give him more weapons or strike deeper into Russia why do they seem to be the ones.dragging their feet?

It seems strange behaviour for a puppet. 

[BeElBeeBub]

And HRW pointed out Ukraine has used cluster munitions and killed many civilians with it, using it in built-up areas. That is a fact. I gave you the link earlier but you never bother clicking on any of my links, it's rather apparent now

I click on links. 

Let vs lit some context around your extract. 
Here is the direct quote fro. HRW

Ukrainian forces have used cluster munitions that caused deaths and serious injuries to civilians. Russian forces have extensively used cluster munitions, causing many civilian deaths and serious injuries.

The HRW report confirmed 8 deaths and 15 injuries with likely more unreported.

There is a difference in scale and use of cluster munitions between the sides.

Cluster bombs are militariliy useful weapons but there are. 2 objections. 

1. They have a wide area of effect. This is. What. Makes them useful, but does make using them near civilians dangerous 
2. They often leave unexploded bomb let's that pose a threat to civians for years afterwards. 

Issue 1 solved by restrained use - Ukraine has used fewer and against military targets with less chance of civilians nearby (doesn't mean zero chance). Russia has used far.more and over heavily civilian areas. 

Issue 2 is more a philosophical point. Ukraine is using the munitions on itvs own territory in an existential war. That is itvs choice. Russia is using them on foreign soil in an expansion war. Itvs the.dofference between letting my.dog shit on my lawn or sending it next door to shit on my neighbours lawn. 

. 

[BeElBeeBub]

The way you recast Stepan Bandera as a "nationalist" as opposed to a Nazi and clearly said that the Soviets were even worse than the Nazis, suggesting he was somehow right to fight against them [Soviets] absolutely is defending a Nazi war criminal terrorist, as many in Ukraine have attempted to do - even going so far as calling him a national hero.

Again, to be clear for those who struggle. 

SB was a NAZI collaborator who committed war crimes and atrocities. The distinction between a full NAZI and collaborator is the motivation. Not everyone committing war crimes was doing so with the aim of furthering the third reich and Hitler. Some were working with them for their own ends. SB allied with Hitler for his own nationalist reasons. Stalin allied with Hitler to invade Poland. To be clear, that in no way absolves them of any guilt, but it does explain why SOME Ukrainians view SB as nationalist hero and why some Russian view Stalin as great figure of the. Soviet Union despite both having allied with the NAZIs

Again to be clear, I condemn all of them and hope they are all toasting away in hell. 

[Nick]

Yes I can.  Not everything requires evidence.  What are you disputing?  The Revolution?  That VY was elected on a neutral campaign with no military alliances, and then removed by force, and a new government installed which was more in favour of the EU?  What evidence do you want?

In a debate you have to qualify your claims, if you don't then your posts became worthless. Your choice. 

[Borg Refinery]

You seem to have a big problem with reading comprehension. Did you have lead pipes in your childhood home?

How did you get "defended Stepan Bandera and Nazi war criminals"

From


But given you are hard of thinking I will make it really clear.

I condemn Bandera, he collaborated with the NAZI occupiers and committed war crimes.

Is that clear enough for you.?

Now we have both laid out our dislike of the NAZI regime, do you care to comment on Russia's Nazi problem? For example the use of the Rusich PMC or these men being in the Russian forces?







The laa

The last guy is an MMA fighter in Russia. He is allowed to fight with those markings - no public outry, no bans. Now he is a prominent member of a PMC composed of far right football "ultras" that has fought IN Ukraine. I believe he even earned a medal.

What happened to But you just swerve and go off on name calling. You are a terrible debate,(sic)? 

All whataboutery. No one has even hinted that there aren't Nazis, war criminals in Russia and worse, not even Sampan, the way war crimes by Ukraine are excused in the West is the point and it's absolutely outrageous the way people will defend them to the hilt and then lie about it

The way you recast Stepan Bandera as a "nationalist" as opposed to a Nazi and clearly said that the Soviets were even worse than the Nazis, suggesting he was somehow right to fight against them [Soviets] absolutely is defending a Nazi war criminal terrorist, as many in Ukraine have attempted to do - even going so far as calling him a national hero. The name calling on top of that absolutely proves my point - thuggish Nazi brutality seems to be part and parcel of defending war crimes

For some reason the forum won't post my replies and keeps insisting that the page has expired, so they've had to be cut down as at least 3 replies have been chopped. This has never happened before, interesting

[Borg Refinery]

What does "turned towards Russia" even mean?  You need to be a bit more precise than that.  Was there going to be a military alliance with Russia?  Joining the EU or NATO would mean a military alliance.

So where is the evidence Yanukovich was not neutral?  Just some Russian interference?  Is that it?

You have misrepresented me.  When did I say Russia is good or neutral?  I said Yanukovich was neutral, not Russia, although I'm open to evidence he was not.

Apologies if there's been any misrepresentation of you, you seem to often strongly hint Putin/Russia are more in the right than Ukraine, that's all

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Yanukovych

Yanukovych argued in favour of economic modernisation, increased spending and, initially, continuing trade negotiations with the European Union (EU). He pledged to remain non-aligned in defence policy. However, his years in power saw what analysts described as democratic backsliding,[9] which included the jailing of Tymoshenko, a decline in press freedom[10] and an increase in cronyism and corruption.[11] In November 2013, Yanukovych made a sudden decision, amidst economic pressure from Russia,[12] to withdraw from signing an association agreement with the EU and instead accept a Russian trade deal and loan bailout. This sparked mass protests against him that ultimately led to his ousting as President.[13][14][15]

The war crimes Ukraine have committed and their leader's puppetry for NATO don't justify an invasion by an imperial superpower [Russia], even if they did have Nazis in their country (which Russia also has in plentiful supply), it still wouldn't justify going in and attacking it, their leader is Jewish

[Borg Refinery]

Ukraine has been using drones to depot thermite over fortified positions like trenches and treelines.

By their nature's, drones are fairly precision weapons.

Here is footage of a strike

https://youtube.com/shorts/dTIHDHD2w6Y?si=1Y0SYQ2O0oBtLXYC

And the aftermath of a strike (not necessarily the same one).
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1fajigj/footage_of_a_russian_military_showing_the/


You can clearly see burned out machine guns and other military equipment


Now. Here is a. Russian strike on a town.

https://youtu.be/ZISFFQLoPMY

Do you see the difference? . One is a precise strike on a remote military position. The other one is showering thermite over several square km of a town.

Or are. You going to claim they are the same?

Likewise,.whilst Ukraine has employed cluster munitions the majority have been as individual bomblet's from drones.

All the HIMARS strikes have used thr improved cluster munitions *which don't have bomblets* they are essentially a giant shotgun that spreads tens of thousands of tungsten balls over an area. There is no residual risk to civilians.

Russia deployed cluster bombs in civilian areas from early on.

And HRW pointed out Ukraine has used cluster munitions and killed many civilians with it, using it in built-up areas. That is a fact. I gave you the link earlier but you never bother clicking on any of my links, it's rather apparent now

Yes, both sides commit terrible atrocities, that is noted fact - whether you want to talk about torture and murder of POWs, using thermite, or using cluster munitions in civilian areas and targeting civilians. And yes both sides have Nazis as you've now tacitly acknowledged in another post by bringing up whataboutery to distract from the truth that Ukraine also has a Nazi problem, as even Western liberal media has acknowledged

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/ukraine-has-nazi-problem-vladimir-putin-s-denazification-claim-war-ncna1290946

That you want to deflect from all the accusations with "but.." shows the weakness of the argument.

I acknowledge the war crimes of Russia and its imperial warmongering, but that can't be said of one-sided Western terrorist supporters who think it's OK as long as their countries do it or support it. The same thing is true with Palestine as well as the USA continues to send bombs to Israel to blow up Palestinian children.

One can oppose groups like the Russian government and Hamas without supporting war crimes, but some people choose to tacitly endorse war crimes. What a terrible indictment of Western foreign policy.

[Unlucky4Sum]

Liar.  No mention of an Association agreement.

What a shabby and incorrect accusation.  I'd expect no better of you.

[BeElBeeBub]

Yes I can.  Not everything requires evidence.  What are you disputing?  The Revolution?  That VY was elected on a neutral campaign with no military alliances, and then removed by force, and a new government installed which was more in favour of the EU?  What evidence do you want?

I'd say the claim the revolution was a CIA backed coup needs some evidence.

The claim. VY was forced out because he wouldn't align Ukraine with the EU and NATO needs evidence. 
Why is it so hard to believe the Ukrainian people were angry that the chance for them to have kser ties with a much richer and more prosperous neighbour was taken away? 

Given the violent repossession of the protests is it hard to believe the backlash would be for even closer ties with the EU than before the revolution? 

[BeElBeeBub]

Liar.  No mention of an Association agreement.

Direct quote
But Yanukovich was careful to say that Ukraine remained committed to joining mainstream Europe one day and would seek to improve its eligibility for European Union membership by raising living standards and reforming its economy.
"We will follow a pragmatic and balanced foreign policy. We will continue to develop the process of Euro-integration. But its basis will be the modernization and transformation of Ukraine internally," he said.


I think that puts beyond doubt that he was looking to deepen ties with the EU. An association agreement is one of the options. 

After election he was urging his parliament where his party had a majority to pass laws to help ease the association agreement. 

Not the association agreement would not violate his aim of neutrality as it was in no way a military alliance. Ukraine wouod not be part of NATO (it would have been near impossible at the time as the Ukrainian armed forces were still operating Warsaw pact military standards) or PESCO. It would remain a mimitaeily neutral state but would ha easier trade with the EU states. 

[Scott777]

Yep  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4038803.stm
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/yanukovich-vows-to-keep-ukraine-out-of-nato-idUSTRE6062P3/ 

"Ukraine's integration with the EU remains our strategic aim."

Liar.  No mention of an Association agreement.