Just chatting

Owl

Avery The Ukraine has (or had, if they'e been killed) pilots who can fly Migs. The plan was to provide the Ukraine with Migs currently in Poland.

Maybe I had misunderstood you. So with helping to close Ukrainian airspace you meant to deliver fighter jets to Ukraine so they fight more effectively against Russia? I inquire since the vast of majority of proposals about closing airspace, no-fly zones or similar I heard of were connected to third parties enforcing it.

Avery Go away.

I'd like to understand. When you said, "Go away", did you feel angry because you perceived my reference to Europe or a previous answer lacking respect?

Owl

Cb85

Hi Cb85, while I concur a significant portion, particularly about no easy solutions. I'm not so sure about the nature of good and evil. For me it feels like a battle that takes part within me, rather than somewhere out there.

I hope you don't mind if I add another nifty complication, in this regard. A quote that says that everybody necessarily is the hero of their own story. ( https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/02/16/life-hero/ ) Sometimes extended by "The villain is the hero of the other side." ...

Cb85

@Owl
A stupid man knows neither themselves nor their opponents, a smart man knows themselves, and wise man knows both themselves and their opponents.

History does indeed dictate that there is both evil and good, and the wise can discern the difference.

Different does not necessarily mean evil.
Evil violates others natural rights willfully with out remorse and without legitimate reason.

Unfortunately our governments are now so overwhelming run by greedy elites that the solutions are elusive at best and unattainable at worst.

Owl

Cb85

Thank you. That's a definition of evil that helps me to understand. Indeed that happens frequently and probably will between humans for a long time, although I think we have to say something about the extend of it. It seems a bit more tricky for me to use the same moral labels. When I take the influence of our biological foundations like genome, prenatal and childhood imprinting, our upbringing, or even chronic or acute situations like mental illness into account, I sometimes struggle to name it "evil". (*)

Although I can absolutely understand any feelings when one becomes witness or even victim of such violation. I once fell victim to burglars (tried to stop them, beaten down) and I can still recall my hate at the time. Had I been able to rise up again and wield the force I wanted ... well, in my fantasies they'd been reduced to dead bodies. And it was a kindergarten event compared to what happens in more serious crime or even war.

(*) Update: How I label it changes nothing about accountability, the requirement of people to enforce norms or our right to protect ourselves (under restriction of commensurability).

Angelina

maybe i'm a bit too pacifistic, but seriously. war leads to more war and i'm probably the only one who is still against arms deliveries or other actions. please help only on a humanitarian level.
a war is the end and the escalation of every diplomacy and even putin can have no interest if his own population dies in the war or starves to death because of the sanctions. when did we forget how to talk? when did we get the idea that in the 21st century a war with weapons is still a solution?
Unfortunately, we are currently regressing strongly 🙁

PS: Happy easter to the entire forum 🙂

Cb85

Angelina your not wrong your just a bit naive.
Talking is best. But talk from a position of weakness only invites invasion.

The hard truth is many elites dont give a rip if their population suffers or dies as long as they maintain their position and power.
Ppl aren’t all loving caring ppl some ppl are very much like hitler, do whatever it takes to keep power.
If those jews were well armed they wouldn’t have been slaughtered.

Eventually good guys with guns killed the bad guys and then things got better.

A well armed population can’t be easily victimized.

The two worst groups for violating ppls rights are Religious groups, and governments.

Joh

Angelina a war is the end and the escalation of every diplomacy and even putin can have no interest if his own population dies in the war or starves to death because of the sanctions. when did we forget how to talk?

He shows with his action he doesn't care how many soldiers die. Thousands of dead soldiers are lying in Ukraine and they have written to Russia to bring them back and bury them with honour. They don't care.

For the last decades, Germany has acted according to the motto: "Change through action." Everyone believed that we would have a positive influence. Putin has used it to his advantage, lied to the West countries, started a war and will probably only stop when he has no soldiers and material or has been defeated.
I am against war as well but I see no other solution at the moment.

Angelina

Cb85

yes, but i have heard these arguments so often now and i am a bit annoyed by them. how do we think this should end? instead of supplying weapons or, in the worst case, interfering in the war, we should do everything we can to help the two states find a diplomatic solution that will end the war. everything else only delays it.

Owl

In case of an attack/occupation, I'd say that the immediate value of peaceful strategies for the defender, implying surrendering of the "defender" and restricting resistance to civil disobedience, strongly depend on the actions of the occupying power and particularly what's effectively happening in the occupied region.
The more the occupying power only aims for political dominance and the less atrocities happen in occupied regions the more valuable the civil/peaceful strategy becomes.
The less the occupier limits itself to just political dominance and the more atrocities happen in occupied regions, the less valuable the civil/peaceful strategy becomes.

(Unfortunately, current observations and alleged war crimes makes for a grim prognosis…)

For the sake of completeness: Everything becomes even more complicated, if long-term effects and/or indirect effects on other regions have to be taken account as well. As can be expected in almost every real scenario.

Very roughly and in extremely generalized terms, I'd say: Try peace, trust, and de-escalation as long as you can, but keep yourself armed enough to let potential occupiers expect serious difficulties and trouble for themselves if they tried.
And if there is peace, play fair - or at least be one step fairer than your (potential) rivals. To break dreadful 'But the other one started it!' escalation spirals.

Kaja

Angelina But one side doesnt want peace. Putin wants only victory...

He understoods only to force.

You cant act without force in your Back

Joh

Angelina Russia has no intention for a diplomatic solution. The whole negotiations went only in one direction: you accept our demands or we will continue the bombardment. No sign of compromise.

Cb85

Kaja

Angelina you’ve heard them often because it’s common sense.

Russia has taken Crimea and ?Bulgaria? What’s the other one? Now Ukraine.
Moldova will be next? Poland?
If the allied nations had put their foot down and banded together early ww2 would have been squashed. But Russia is picking pieces of land up every ten years or so and and nato does nothing.

Eventually they will try to take one to many countries and then full out war.

Giving the bully what they want only encourages more aggressive actions from Russia.
Knock the bully on his ass and tell him you’ll kill him while he’s sleeping if he tries it again and they back down.
If your willing to kill to protect liberty the chances are you won’t need to.

Angelina

Kaja But one side doesnt want peace. Putin wants only victory...

I agree that he wants victory, but definitely not war.
putin wants to win, the war is only a means to an end. we should make him an offer that will at least get him to stop the war. it will not work without losses, but what would be another solution. putin can also have no interest in taking over a country that has been completely destroyed

Kaja

Russia is the same like "Dark Side" in star warw. SSSR died (like palpatin and Imperium), but new gangster have been born (Putin). We have to battle with dark, evil for freedom, democracy, happynes and justness.

Megan

Kaja Russia is the same like "Dark Side" in star warw. SSSR died (like palpatin and Imperium), but new gangster have been born (Putin). We have to battle with dark, evil for freedom, democracy, happynes and justness.

Pretty much yes

Jen

Angelina what if it was your city baby putin was taking? Should the rest of the country fight or give up.

Angelina

Jen what if it was your city baby putin was taking? Should the rest of the country fight or give up.

i know i'm a bit too romantic, but i believe in peace, not war. if Putin attacks my city, let him come to me and we can talk.

Joh Which would be to prove whether they are really innocent. Putin has been in power for 20 years and he has been elected several times by his people, with high approval ratings. So they are partly responsible for what the government is doing.
We Germans were partly to blame for what the Nazis did after WWII. No one could stand up and say I am innocent. That's the way it is when you let the government do what it wants.

Putin has not been waging war for 20 years, just as Hitler did not in the beginning. I agree with your last sentence, but no one could have known that. I didn't believe it myself just a few days before the attack.

Joh I am against war as well but I see no other solution at the moment.

i still wonder how this will end. reaction leads to counter-reaction. what happens if putin doesn't win? what would be the consequence? i try to think about it from the end.

Joh Russia has no intention for a diplomatic solution.

But Putin certainly has no interest in owning a destroyed country, that would be simply stupid.

Joh

Owl You are right that we have a higher expectation now. But lets look at the UN charter
Russia signed the charter and breaking it now.
Puting's predecessor recognised Ukraine's sovereignty.
Russia held military exercises on the border of Ukraine and in Belarus. All the time they assured that they will not attack Ukraine.
The Security Council is supposed to pass resolutions when acts of war take place, but since the permanent members have a veto, they always obstruct each other when self-interest is at stake.
Ergo, the UN is incapable of acting when it matters. It is better to spend the money on the right things instead of wasting it on hot air.

Angelina or is it just a punishment against innocent athletes?

Which would be to prove whether they are really innocent. Putin has been in power for 20 years and he has been elected several times by his people, with high approval ratings. So they are partly responsible for what the government is doing.
We Germans were partly to blame for what the Nazis did after WWII. No one could stand up and say I am innocent. That's the way it is when you let the government do what it wants.

Owl

Wish I had more time to discuss with you all then available today. Hope I can address some points without causing too much irritation or distraction because of shortened answers. But hey, Owl finally forced to avoid (too much) walls of texts. Now that's something!

Joh You are right that we have a higher expectation now. But lets look at the UN charter
Russia signed the charter and breaking it now.
[…]
The Security Council is supposed to pass resolutions when acts of war take place, but since the permanent members have a veto, they always obstruct each other when self-interest is at stake.
Ergo, the UN is incapable of acting when it matters. It is better to spend the money on the right things instead of wasting it on hot air.

Wouldn't say you are wrong when it comes to the UN Security council. It has been unable to act against the interests of the big 5 ever since. Just want to hypothesise, that the UNSC does have a beneficial effect in other matters; Plus UN as a whole fulfills even more roles. Personally as of now it's the better alternative compared to dissolution (w/o reasonable replacement) and … what then atm? Don't think we'd be better off with having countries to regulate all matters individually / bi-/trilaterally, again. I presume some aspects of a world government are actually helpful.

But maybe I got you wrong. Wouldn't like to beat strawmen. What's would be your proposal how to handle international matters (just questions of security or also commerce, health, development cooperation, dealing with migration etc?), better than UNSC (or whole UN?)?

Other topic: Concerning Russia, Putin, and the last decades, that's quite big topic. Even going into parts would probably railroad me into more Wall of Text. The only thing I dare to add in a hurry: Everything has a context. Not justifying this war in any way, IMO. I just think that western countries and NATO states did made decisions that poured fuel to the fire as well, since sometime in the 1990's. And countries in between were forced to take sides in a totally needless way.

Joh

Angelina what would be the consequence? i try to think about it from the end.

I hope he will not destroy the world because he has children and grandchildren.

Angelina But Putin certainly has no interest in owning a destroyed country, that would be simply stupid.

He did it in Chechen Republic and Syria and he is doing it in Ukraine as well. If he can have it nobody should have it and he destroy the whole country.

Saintprudence

Angelina the fact Putin didn’t think about it from the end is how he got into this mess. All along it’s clear that the plan was a mass blitz attack and then Kyiv would surrender on day two. When Kyiv didn’t surrender, Putin had to keep going with an army that wasn’t equipped for a drawn-out fight. War has a way of quickly escalating out of control.

Putin assumed that Zelenskyy would load up a helicopter with briefcases full of money and flee to the USA. He didn’t have a backup plan for if Ukraine actually started to fight.

Angelina

Joh I hope he will not destroy the world because he has children and grandchildren.

i hope so too, i mean what if russia doesn't win? does ukraine get russia. do you understand, i lack consistency?

Joh If he can have it nobody should have it and he destroy the whole country.

but a destroyed country, what does he want with that, that is nonsense

Joh

Angelina does ukraine get russia.

No. The fight to whole time only to protect Ukraine at Ukraine. The never attacked a place outside Ukraine.

Angelina Joh If he can have it nobody should have it and he destroy the whole country.

but a destroyed country, what does he want with that, that is nonsense

Sorry. Typo! It should be "If he can't have it....."

« Previous Page Next Page »