I can’t support the Ukrainian Government any longer, even though Putin was wrong to invade

[The Liturgist]

[Irrelevant exposition on Islamism excised.]



Through all of you equivocation of Ukraine and Russia; of Zelenskyy and Putin, you just don't get it do you.

A capitulation by Ukraine would only result in a brutal repression by Putin's army. A repression they are already imposing in the cities they control with replaced mayors, house to house searches, and summary killings.

Does the attainment of "peace" ending the violence known as war with shelling and rockets matter so much to you that you would have the people of Ukraine submit themselves to other violence at the hands of Putin's thugs? Violence they would be even less able to resist.

An unconditional surrender would run a remote risk of that, however, random summary executions are unlikely, except as a result of the Islamists and the Neo Nazis Putin and Zelenskyy cried havoc and let slip humans who make the dogs of war look admirable (Putin perhaps inspired by Zelenskky).

A conditional surrender coupled with removal of sanctions if Russia complies with the terms which would be assessed through neutral monitors is achievable, however, based on everything I have seen.

 

[Hans Blaster]

An unconditional surrender would run a remote risk of that, however, random summary executions are unlikely, except as a result of the Islamists and the Neo Nazis Putin and Zelenskyy cried havoc and let slip humans who make the dogs of war look admirable (Putin perhaps inspired by Zelenskky).

A conditional surrender coupled with removal of sanctions if Russia complies with the terms which would be assessed through neutral monitors is achievable, however, based on everything I have seen.

He's ALREADY DOING IT. What makes you think he would stop?

 

[Hans Blaster]

An unconditional surrender would run a remote risk of that, however, random summary executions are unlikely, except as a result of the Islamists and the Neo Nazis Putin and Zelenskyy cried havoc and let slip humans who make the dogs of war look admirable (Putin perhaps inspired by Zelenskky).

A conditional surrender coupled with removal of sanctions if Russia complies with the terms which would be assessed through neutral monitors is achievable, however, based on everything I have seen.

Supplemental: What's all this about "islamicists"? This isn't some sort of Islamic war.

 

[Halbhh]

Ukraine can only delay the inevitable

Actually at the moment Ukraine seems to have been stopping the invasion militarily, and Putin can only bomb and shell cities, killing civilians. It begins to look like the invasion may fail entirely no matter if cities are temporarily beaten down and held for a while.

Therefore, the defenders will continue resistance against the invasion.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

You do realize that nuclear deterrence is a two way street? Because clearly you understand the concept, but you argue for Putin to be tried and executed and somehow that’s not going to get thousands of MIRV-equipped missiles with multiple warheads launched at the US?

The United States or our allies are not going to make Putin face justice. But I am hoping that the Russian people would. Am I making sense to you now? There will never be any hope of peace with Russia as long as Putin is in power.

 

[Andrewn]

The influencers behind the Ukrainian PR machine

 

[cow451]

The influencers behind the Ukrainian PR machine

Ok. And?

 

[Andrewn]

The Ukrainian people are willing to fight the evil one. If they weren’t, we would not be having this discussion.

Consider a scenario where Texas is allowed to separate from the US under the condition that it remains part of NORAD and NATO. Then 30 years later some Texans put in their constitution that they wish to join a military alliance with Russia or China. Would the US be the evil one if it invaded Texas?

Remember the Bay of Pigs invasion? Or Vietnam for that matter?

Of course, whatever we do is good, and whatever Russia and China and Iran do is evil.

 

[o_mlly]

Would the US be the evil one if it invaded Texas?

In just war theory, the country that initiates the aggression is the default unjust party. The phrase "innocent aggressor" is oxymoronic.

 

[Andrewn]

Putin doesn't seem like the type to surrender.

Putin better surrender quickly. Otherwise, Zelenskiy warned, It will take Russia "several generations" to recover from its losses in the war.

Ukraine's Zelenskiy tells Russia to hold peace talks or suffer for generations

 

[Andrewn]

Zelensky strikes the wrong note to bring Knesset to his side - analysis

 

[A_Thinker]

With all due respect, I don’t think you realize the implications of unrestricted thermonuclear war between the US and Russia and/or China. And if we were to take the enormous risk of nuking anyone with nuclear weapons, North Korea, China and Pakistan are much more of a threat to our national security. And if we were to nuke anyone at all without risking the death of the entire human race, it would have to be a country like North Korea which has a small nuclear arsenal and which could not launch a credible second strike with anything approach force parity to the US.

China cannot reliably launch nuclear warheads to the US. Neither can North Korea or Pakistan.

Of course, Russia can ...

 

[The Liturgist]

China cannot reliably launch nuclear warheads to the US. Neither can North Korea or Pakistan.

Of course, Russia can ...

Only Pakistan is unable to strike the United States (North Korea may not be a threat to the lower 48, but it might be, and is the power most likely to use them). China has liquid fueled nuclear weapons that are a danger, which the PRC claims are normally not assembled for launch, but the PRC is less than trustworthy. Their conventional forces are also an extreme threat.

Pakistan is a threat primarily because it is an Islamist nation whose intelligence services, the ISI, sheltered Osama bin Laden while obsequiously pretending to assist us, having been heavily infiltrated by radical militant elements, and they are the only Islamic majority nation with nuclear weapons, primarily as a deterrence against invasion from India.

Russia does pose the greatest nuclear threat to the US, which is why the rhetoric being used in this conflict is so dangerous. There is a real risk of Russia’s “dead hand” system malfunctioning and unleashing WWIII by accident. It is for this and other reasons that we need to pressure Ukraine to work with Russia to secure a peaceful settlement, because the continuation of this hopeless conflict is morally unjustifiable.

I haven’t always agreed with the Peace Churches like the Quakers, SDA and Anabaptists in the past, but in this conflict, their way is the only way. We cannot afford a return of the Cold War to human civilization.

 

[A_Thinker]

As to nuclear weapons, the United States had a missed perfect opportunity with the fall of the Soviet Union to greatly disarm the nuclear capability of the Russia.

That would have been quite a feat ...

I believe this was a lot because the left in the U.S. seemed in love with Soviet leadership.

Wasn't Republican George Bush Sr. in power when the USSR fell ?

 

[A_Thinker]

Because clearly you understand the concept, but you argue for Putin to be tried and executed and somehow that’s not going to get thousands of MIRV-equipped missiles with multiple warheads launched at the US?

The US would not be prosecuting ... and it would only happen if Russia is defeated ... or if Putin is removed from power ...

 

[A_Thinker]

Consider a scenario where Texas is allowed to separate from the US under the condition that it remains part of NORAD and NATO. Then 30 years later some Texans put in their constitution that they wish to join a military alliance with Russia or China.

These promises weren't made ...

 

[Andrewn]

These promises weren't made ...

Commonwealth of Independent States - Wikipedia

Minsk agreements - Wikipedia

 

[A_Thinker]

Commonwealth of Independent States - Wikipedia

Ukraine ended its association with CIS in 2018 ...

 

[Andrewn]

Ukraine ended its association with CIS in 2018 ...

Yes it did and on 7 February 2019, the Verkhovna Rada voted to amend the constitution to state Ukraine's strategic objectives as joining the European Union and NATO. By so doing, Ukraine provided context for the current invasion.

 

[A_Thinker]

Yes it did and on 7 February 2019, the Verkhovna Rada voted to amend the constitution to state Ukraine's strategic objectives as joining the European Union and NATO. By so doing, Ukraine provided context for the current invasion.

So ... a sovereign state decides to change its national alliances ... and that justifies an attack by a former ally ?

Even after that former ally has invaded and effectively annexed Ukrainian territory ... and began to support efforts to take even more territory.

It should be acknowledged that the relationship between Russia and Ukraine has always been one where Russia treats them as a vassal state.

There may have been some justifications for the 2014 actions ... where, from Russia's viewpoint, they were sort of squaring up accounts upon dissolution of association, ... but these latest actions have gone beyond this. Zelensky has already essentially has stated that he's ready to accede to most of Putin's demands, ... aside from abject surrender ... yet Russia pummels on ...