Time to join Nato

[Purple]

Who is the shameful apologist?

You.

Imagine wanting Putin to be brought before The Hague? Is that the view of a Putin apologist?

Imagine lumping a State leader that sanctioned an illegal invasion of a sovereign state based on wholly false intelligence and lies, in with Putin?

Imagine lumping Putin in as a war-criminal with a State leader who actually has an international arrest warrant to face charges of war crimes like Netenyahu?

Putin is an unaccountable dictator who has dismantled the free media in his country, murders opposition leaders and journalists and invaded a sovereign democratic State with whom Russia had an international treaty guaranteeing their shared border. He is far worse than any of the leaders you have mentioned but even then lumping them all in together with no nuance is an act of misdirection and an attempt to establish a false moral equivalence that there is no real difference between a totalitarian dictatorship and a democratic State.

Its clear who the apologist for war crimes and tyranny is.

Yes it is.

I share the views of Sachs, either rebuke them with points of substance or stop your bare-faced lying about my views on Putin or any other matters

I'm not going to get into a rebuttal of a video you stumbled across but his analysis of the Kosovo bombing campaign is ridiculous, as is much that followed. It's like listening to Jordan Peterson talking about politics; the selective use of some fact to present a biased view of events.

 

[Purple]

The Russians aren't wearing uniforms in donbass, that's how they snook into pokrovsk. Its also how they invaded Crimea in 2014 with their "little green men" basically Russian army in disguise.

True, strong parallels with the German Gleiwitz Incident in Poland which they used as a pretext to invade Poland. (The Nazi spy Oskar Schindler was a member of the Abwehr, German military intelligence, and led the network of spies who did the preparation for the incident).

 

[Firefly]

The personal attacks on @Sister Sara are completely unwarranted. I am disappointed to see this from posters who often make valuable contributions here.

Make your point, rebut those you don’t agree with, and leave out questioning other’s motives.

Hi cremeegg,

I thought long & hard before posting #15. Just too many years of pulling threads down rabbit holes, knocking western civilisation and all the while, subtly promoting Russia, China, and even North Korea.

Firefly

 

[Purple]

I thought long & hard before posting #15. Just too many years of pulling threads down rabbit holes, knocking western civilisation and all the while, subtly promoting Russia, China, and even North Korea.

Firefly

I support countries and cultures which respect and seek to live by the principles outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Right.

I do not support countries or cultures which don't respect or seek to live by those principles.
Russia, China and North Korea, as well as most of the countries in the Middle East, are opposed to those principles.
When a country with no real democracy, no due process, no free press and which oppresses it's own citizens as a matter of course attacks a free democratic country which is seeking to make itself more free, more democratic and less corrupt then I'll back the guys defending themselves from attack.

 

[Sister Sara]

I thought long & hard before posting

Obviously not long enough. You were asked politely to desist from personal attacks but continue. Thats not a very nice way to behave, is it?

Your only 'contribution' to the topic are two random blurbs about China, N Korea and rabbit-holes directed at me! In a topic about NATO!!
Irony is not your strongest attribute?

I'm not going to get into a rebuttal of a video you stumbled across but his analysis of the Kosovo bombing campaign is ridiculous, as is much that followed. It's like listening to Jordan Peterson talking about politics; the selective use of some fact to present a biased view of events.

You are not going to get into rebuttal of a video and then start to rebuke his points? Albeit, typically, without any points of substance.
I have no issue if you disagree, that is after all a principle of democracy and free-speech. But trying to shut-down discussion because you don't agree with someone else's viewpoints is the opposite of a democrat.

I'm happy to engage on the basis of courtesy and respect, but most of all consistency.

Please no more;

The Western media can be biased and in many cases is biased

next breathe

Yet you accuse the Western media of bias

I don't want masses of money from the Middle East and Russia undermining the institutions of power and weakening the power of the electorate.

next breathe

London... "The City" is the centre of the most corrupt money laundering racket in the Western World. It makes the Swiss look clean.

try to have some consistency.

Supporting illegal invasions of sovereign states is a consistent position.

Whether it Putin, Blair, Bush or whoever. There is no 'nuance' to it. The principles of Western values - democracy, justice, free-speech, and Human Rights insist that that you abide by the rules of law, international law, maritime law.

Once these rules are being broken then that is anti-Western, anti-American, anti-democratic - just like Putin, just like Netenyahu, just like Trump now (dont rely on me, some Democrats are calling it a war crime but I suspect thats just for show), just like Blair and Bush.
Even ardent supporters of the invasion at the time don't hide the fact that it was one big fat lie, and still no-one held accountable.

Placing a former Al-Qaeda leader in power in Syria is one of the most gross back-stabbings I have ever seen. A New Yorker! putting a wanted Al-Qaeda leader in charge of Syria!!
Doing arms deals with Saudi leaders who are implicated by US Intell in the callous murder of one of its own journalists - and we know how aggrieved you are about that?

Defending, and hosting a wanted criminal for war crimes like Netenyahu where more journalists have been killed than any other war, so save us the fake moral outrage over Putins killing of journalists.

They all should be in The Hague, but unlikely to ever to be so the next best thing is to deal with the real politik of it all.

I'm a firm believer in the principles of democracy, free-speech and human rights. Part of those principles is the standard of holding people to account and that starts at home and it involves, always, always questioning the official narrative.

As I have said before, Ukraine has the sovereign right to join NATO or EU or whatever, but the real politik of Ukraine moving in that direction was dangerous and has turned out to be tragic. NATO, EU should told Ukraine there will be no entry until at least Putin was out of power and then perhaps, perhaps, a more forward thinking Russian leader emerged.

In the end, I'd rather see a totalitarian Putin in charge of Russia with a peaceful functioning Ukraine outside of EU and NATO, rather than a totalitarian Putin in charge of Russia with Ukraine on its knees, being destroyed, with US and EU making a mess of it.

And that is the essence of the points being made by Sachs, and many others. The sorry mess that would occur if NATO moved for Ukraine, or vice-versa.

I'll leave the last words to Finnish President Stubb, in recent days “all the conditions for a just peace we’ve talked so much about over the past four years are unlikely to be fulfilled.” It's a reality check, tragic and it was all totally avoidable.

 

[Sister Sara]

Hi @Purple @Firefly I've discovered there is an 'Ignore User' available. Can you place that on me and I will place it on you. Thanks, Sara

 

[Purple]

This is the internet, not real life. Nobody’s opinion here should hold enough weight to require that it be ignored.

 

[Purple]

try to have some consistency.

Both views are entirely consistent.

 

[Purple]

I'm a firm believer in the principles of democracy, free-speech and human rights. Part of those principles is the standard of holding people to account and that starts at home and it involves, always, always questioning the official narrative.

As I have said before, Ukraine has the sovereign right to join NATO or EU or whatever, but the real politik of Ukraine moving in that direction was dangerous and has turned out to be tragic.

You’re a firm believer until those principles butt up against real politics. Then Ukraine and the EU etc should pragmatically acquiesce to the demands of a totalitarian dictator and allow him to enslave millions of Ukrainians.

I suppose that the real politik of upsetting the Russians should have prevented the Americans stopping a genocide of Muslims in Europe by bombing Kosovo. You seem to agree that stopping that genocide was a bad thing. Was that because there were no Jews involved, because it upset the Russians or was there some other reason?

 

[Purple]

In the end, I'd rather see a totalitarian Putin in charge of Russia with a peaceful functioning Ukraine outside of EU and NATO, rather than a totalitarian Putin in charge of Russia with Ukraine on its knees, being destroyed

A Ukraine on its knees is what the EU and Ukraine are trying to prevent. If we, the EU, were sufficiently militarily powerful we could do that without cow towing to the Americans. As things stand the most likely outcome is a weakened and divided Ukraine and an emboldened Russia because of a weak EU and America not wanting to have to keep spending billions defending Europe.

 

[Firefly]

I'm a firm believer in the principles of democracy, free-speech and human rights.

Hi @Purple @Firefly I've discovered there is an 'Ignore User' available. Can you place that on me and I will place it on you.

Irony is not your strongest attribute?

 

[Sister Sara]

Back on topic, the details of this case being reported are shocking.

Democrats ‘Deeply Disturbed’ by Briefing on Caribbean Strike as Republicans Defend It

Here are some views of people who are pro-Western Civilisation, pro-Democracy, pro-America.

Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut expressed similar concerns. “War crimes or murder are criminal offenses,”
“Clearly, in my view, very likely a war crime was committed here,” Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee
“We don't use our military to help intervene when it comes to drug running, and what the Trump administration has done is manufactured cause for conflict with respect to going after drug boats and engaging in extrajudicial killing when the real aim is clearly regime change in Venezuela.”

Considering the US took a Venezuelan oil tanker by piracy, why was there a need to destroy and murder the occupants, who were in distress, of the much smaller vessel?

Senator Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat, echo Van Hollen's assessment, expressing concern about the trajectory of U.S. actions in the region. "I have no idea why the president is seizing an oil tanker and I'm fairly gravely concerned that he's sleepwalking us into a war with Venezuela," he said. Senator Mark Warner raised similar concerns, writing on social media: "So they can seize an oil tanker, but not a drug boat?"

Republican Senator Rand Paul told NewsNation that "seizing someone's oil tanker is an initiation of war," adding, "Is it the job of the American government to go looking for monsters around the world, looking for adversaries and beginning wars?" Paul had said last month that the administration was "pretending we are 'at war'" to "justify blowing up boats all without a vote."


However, I do wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, if there was a Democrat President in office what tune would be sung then?

My guess is that no-one will be held accountable for any crimes committed in these acts of murder and piracy.

 

[Itchy]

This is Admiral Frank Bradley. I often wonder what idea of himself a man can have going around with stupid ribbons like this on his chest and ridiculous gold braid on his sleeves and his hat. And further what kind of people take him seriously, who is impressed by this silly dressing up.

Anyway that is not my point.

On the second of September last Frank oversaw a US warship which fired on a boat allegedly carrying drugs. The boat sank, but two of those on board survived. Frank then ordered a second strike to kill the two people in the water.

This act has nothing to do with NATO and everything to do with American domestic politics.

Classic example of the anti-NATO mind disease we have in Ireland. Same stuff repeated all over Irish Social media.

 

[cremeegg]

This act has nothing to do with NATO

Of course not.

The US is the dominant element in NATO, its domestic politics has largely driven its foreign policy in recent years.

On the Russian invasion of the Ukraine the US under Biden gave consistent if limited support to Ukraine, under Trump it has been anything but consistent in its approach and the reasons given are all about US domestic policy.

• Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA): As one of the earliest and most vocal critics, she stated that Ukraine aid "puts America last" and means "we're ignoring our own people's problems".
• President Donald Trump: He has repeatedly criticized the level of U.S. assistance to Ukraine, arguing the money should be spent on domestic priorities instead.
• House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA): In May 2022, while a Representative, Johnson voted against a $40 billion aid package, stating at the time that his focus was on solving domestic "affordability challenges".

From Google AI

 

[Sister Sara]

This act has nothing to do with NATO and everything to do with American domestic politics.

That is true, but as current commander of US Special Operations Command he oversees US contributions to NATO operations and shapes US military objectives within NATO.

He is a big influencer in NATO operations, lets say.

How do you think NATO partners of the US will view this if, as appears to be the case, he ordered a murder on distressed persons at sea?
Will there be any consequences or accountabilty?

 

[Marsupial]

How do you think NATO partners of the US will view this if, as appears to be the case, he ordered a murder on distressed persons at sea?
Will there be any consequences or accountabilty?

I would imagine that the Gazan precedent will apply.

 

[Sister Sara]

I would imagine that the Gazan precedent will apply.

I'm not sure I understand.

 

[Marsupial]

I'm not sure I understand.

That's abundantly clear from your earlier contributions to this thread!

 

[Sister Sara]

That's abundantly clear from your earlier contributions to this thread!

Thanks, maybe you could try explain for me please?

 

[Sister Sara]

Lavrov issues new warning on NATO troops *

NATO chief warns European allies they could be Russia’s next target *

I'm no expert of course, just an armchair commentator and I can only go with what is presented in front of me. Perhaps, at best, try to read between the lines and try put forward a viewpoint that I perceive to be logical.

1. Russia's position (my interpretation not endorsement of, the public views expressed) - NATO troops on Ukraine soil equals escalation toward greater, wider war, further in Europe.

2. NATO position (my interpretation not endorsement of, of the public views expressed) - Europe cannot stand idly by and allow Putin dictate to the rest of Europe, so arm-up, get NATO boots ready on the ground to go into Ukraine.

So what option to take?

Personally to me, option 2 is worst.

I am Ireland first.

I do not want us to prospectively get involved in direct military conflict with Russia, or anyone else that is not a direct or even indirect existential crisis for Ireland - that view is obviously subjective so take in the spirit of goodwill of peaceful societies in the round.

Military neutrality 100% - 21st century Military defence capabilities - 100%.

This is consistent with my views on Israel. I do not want us to prospectively get involved in direct military conflict with Israel, or Russia, or Hamas.


Its all needless, more so knowing that this the greatest era of human existence, food, medicine, communication, education, health, ever.


*both articles above sourced from pro-Western Civilisation outlets, or at least thats my impression. It's hard to get media from Putin controlled , Russia media, so I went to Russian sponsored RT.com broadcast in Europe and North America. Unfortunately the Free-Speech world has, like Putin, censored that too.‍