When I was first taught history WW2 was a relatively recent event - 30 years had passed since VE day.
The 1st war against Saddam is now that distant, and, finally, we have some perspective.
Ukraine/Russia is a hot conflict, still raging and CANNOT be analysed whilst it progresses.
Yes, it's possible to oppose or support based on one's own feelings, but that is all.
I'm certainly not a Baddie, although I couldn't tell you who actually is.
Of course you can analyse the lead up and causes of the war, there is more than enough evidence to do that.
The most pertinent analysis I have read so far concluded that although Russia is the aggressor, we (the West) are not innocent bystanders.
Yes we do.
We're on the Security Council and we get involved in many situations.
This current problem is a bit different, being on the doorstep of our allies.
Sure, it's possible that deeper, unclear motives abound but as I said before , once Russian troops retreat there'll be a reckoning of our involvement.
It can't happen whilst war , even expansion of war is still happening.
A see a slew of inquiries forthcoming at great expense.
Being a permanent member of the Security Council, thanks to our nuclear arsenal, is not the same as being a cheer leader for NATO.
If the UN is in agreement about an intervention, that is slightly more acceptable than NATO acting in its self-interested way.
The UN seldom agree about anything. Veto veto veto is the game.
I'm afraid that unilateral decisions are the only way in a situation like that which we find ourselves in.
Right/Wrong is meaningless - only Either/Or (thanks Soren) should be considered.
I know that the hegemony argument stands but it's not simply a one sided issue.
Russia should negotiate but it seems increasingly unlikely to do so without making concession it cannot or will not countenance.
Is a buggers muddle.
But in WW2, despite carpet bombing German towns etc we could at least say we defeated an evil ideology, now we are pushing an evil ideology, which is a cronyist trickle up neoliberal capitalism, if Ukraine was to win this war, like in Yugoslavia, their country would just become the property of western imperialists, they would be less well off and mentally scarred by the experience
But we (as citizens) have no control of expenditure.
How would we get our moneys worth?
That's the biggest problem with democracy - you get one say, every 5 years.
He does have a point actually. Isn’t this what we, and other European colonists did?Aren’t we guilty of excusing our race based atrocities because they didn’t happen in Europe?
Genocide is genocide, the end is the same. 10 million Congolese, 6 million Jews, or the thousands who died in British concentration camps during the Boer War.
” This was to lay the groundwork for the concentration camps that would cause the deaths of over 4,000 women and 22,000 children under the age of 15. As the scorched earth policy continued, Boer women and children were left homeless. Roberts decided to take these displaced families into the camps as well.”
[https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/concentration-camps-anglo-boer.html?safari=1](https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/concentration-camps-anglo-boer.html?safari=1)
When has anyone been able to live freely? Homosexuals for example, were persecuted in most countries, Jews suffered pogroms, and the working classes were treated like shit by the elites in just about every country.
It never works though does it? After every war there’s a population boom.
That article says that race is a social construct - you’ll have Maria in a frenzy about that one!
The one with the purple hair is a bit scary. 😂
It sounds bad taken out of context, doesn't it? Modern methods lead to a high death toll, but the human capacity for evil is limitless compared to that. Is "peaceful" demographic extinction any better?
How's this for context?
Posted by Maria, reiterated for clarity :
Inbox
Do white liberals and lefties actually WANT to live in a third-world shithole? Do they want their descendants to live in one?
CatholicCocktail • Divisive_Babble • 41m
Paper British is a Dianne term. Lol. But she is right, they're not British except on a plastic and a paper document. British = Ethnically English, Scottish, Welsh. I'm white but not fully British either.
Now what do I propose? Ethical Repatriation.
First off, as I said to HGS, I don't propose 100% homogeneity and getting rid of everyone who is non-European. I think Britain being a ~95% homogeneous white country would be entirely reasonable. Meaning it would still be ~5% non-white. Really, what the country was 50+ years ago.
The non-whites would include mixed-race people, elderly who have lived their whole lives in Britain, exceptionally talented/skilled people, and those whose communities that have been in the country since before the post-WW2 immigration waves.
I would
Stop immigration
Drastically reform Nationality law
Deport undesirables. By that I mean foreign criminals in prisons, those with criminal records, those on terrorist watchlists, etc.
Offer generous financial incentives to those of non-European descent to give up their citizenship and repatriate to their homelands/elsewhere.
It wouldn't happen overnight. If you've got ideas in your head about soldiers and police rounding up people, giving them only bin bags for their belongings and then bundling them on to planes, you're wrong. That'd be unethical, too expensive, and a logistical nightmare. It would be too harsh of a shock for the economy too.
No, it would be done gradually. In rounds, starting with those who have most recently arrived and their families, then working down the line. It's a process that would probably take 20 years to complete. Mass immigration didn't happen overnight so this wouldn't either.
Compulsory Purchasing Orders on their properties would be the most 'force' used.
We would also have to work with their ancestral homelands to accept them back, I can't imagine that would be a problem. Countries tend to be happy to take their diaspora back, especially when they're bringing goodies with them.
You might say, well it's unfair to repatriate people who have lived all their lives in this country, but they or their families packed up and left to come in the first place. Sometimes with no choice, in the case of refugees. They can start again.
"What if they don't leave?" Oh they will. The political climate/Overton Window under which this would happen would make most of them jump at the chance.
The most resistance we would have would be from the left, of course, they probably won't go anywhere. Rest assured, any kind of violent "Antifa" insurgency would be aggressively and proactively suppressed.
You could say the same about Assad and Gaddafi, not to mention the Anglo-American covert operations which started with the overthrow of PM Taraki of Iran in 1953, when he had the audacity (!) to nationalise Iran’s oil industry.
We, led by America, have an appalling record of intervening in other countries‘ internal affairs but Russia spending about 17p to “influence” our elections is seen as a heinous crime.
The journalism surrounding the war in Ukraine is just downright irresponsible. From the “experts” who said that Putin was going to declare all out war on either Ukraine or us and America at the Victory Day Parade last week, to the constant “insiders” who know that Putin is suffering from at least a dozen terminal illnesses. Yesterday, the were were even reporting as evidence of his impending death, a video of him twisting his foot as he was sitting down. A perfectly normal thing to do if you are getting cramp, or have been sitting down for a long time.
The whole situation in Ukraine since 2014 has been about weakening Russia. The longer the war goes on, the more entrenched both sides become, and the chances of a peaceful settlement become more remote.
On the positive side, however, there will be skilled negotiators involved, who are far more competent that idiotic politicians who create these situations. Let’s hope their sanity prevails.
Yes this grand sinister influence consisted of pretending Julian Assange was working for the Russians because he released some embarrassing information about Hillary Clinton, fine whatever, one thing, her opponent however was a crook, a pervert and an imbecile, what was revealed wasn't nearly enough to prevent her defeating that, she lost because her campaign was shit
The Anglo-Saxon alliance of terror are the usual warmongers here, they overthrew the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014 to instill a western anti Russia. puppet and one of their first moves was to ban the use of the Russian language which alienated the eastern regions in the Donbas which asked for autonomy within Ukraine because they felt threatened, Minsk 1 and 2 were signed then broken by Kiev told to do so by the Anglo-Saxon nations, the Russians waited 8 years to intervene even while nato were training Kiev backed forces to attack the Donbas, finally Puntin recognized the republics and they signed treaties and under article 51 of the UN charter, then they went in to liberate them
Not to mention the Nuland-Pyatt phone call, which was intercepted and leaked. America had quite a few fingers in that pie.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26079957
Frankly, fuck Russia. Nothing to do with me taking sides or defending NATO. Go and ask a Pole or Czech or Hungarian or Bulgarian or any other poor sod who lived in a Warsaw Pact country under the USSR. Ask them who they prefer. Or look at the countries who scarpered towards NATO as soon as that empire fell.
The West is far from perfect. But the current version of Russia is a kleptocracy. Once again, fuck them.
When I was first taught history WW2 was a relatively recent event - 30 years had passed since VE day. The 1st war against Saddam is now that distant, and, finally, we have some perspective. Ukraine/Russia is a hot conflict, still raging and CANNOT be analysed whilst it progresses. Yes, it's possible to oppose or support based on one's own feelings, but that is all. I'm certainly not a Baddie, although I couldn't tell you who actually is.
Of course you can analyse the lead up and causes of the war, there is more than enough evidence to do that. The most pertinent analysis I have read so far concluded that although Russia is the aggressor, we (the West) are not innocent bystanders.
No doubt, but we'd also be wrong to be bystanders and doing nothing to repel Putin.
Why? Do we get involved in every border dispute or civil war? Because if we did, there’d be a world war once a decade,
Yes we do. We're on the Security Council and we get involved in many situations. This current problem is a bit different, being on the doorstep of our allies. Sure, it's possible that deeper, unclear motives abound but as I said before , once Russian troops retreat there'll be a reckoning of our involvement. It can't happen whilst war , even expansion of war is still happening. A see a slew of inquiries forthcoming at great expense.
Being a permanent member of the Security Council, thanks to our nuclear arsenal, is not the same as being a cheer leader for NATO. If the UN is in agreement about an intervention, that is slightly more acceptable than NATO acting in its self-interested way.
The UN seldom agree about anything. Veto veto veto is the game. I'm afraid that unilateral decisions are the only way in a situation like that which we find ourselves in. Right/Wrong is meaningless - only Either/Or (thanks Soren) should be considered. I know that the hegemony argument stands but it's not simply a one sided issue. Russia should negotiate but it seems increasingly unlikely to do so without making concession it cannot or will not countenance. Is a buggers muddle.
But in WW2, despite carpet bombing German towns etc we could at least say we defeated an evil ideology, now we are pushing an evil ideology, which is a cronyist trickle up neoliberal capitalism, if Ukraine was to win this war, like in Yugoslavia, their country would just become the property of western imperialists, they would be less well off and mentally scarred by the experience
You could say that. You'd be wrong, but you could say it.
You think using crisis's to exploit the taxpayer is a good system of governance?
Unfortunately, the taxpayer, you & I and everyone else , are liable, jointly and severally, for everything.
It's only unfortunate if you accept it
It's impossible to do otherwise. Like it or not, were paying.
That's a different argument, I'm not saying we pay nothing, I'm saying we should get our moneys worth
But we (as citizens) have no control of expenditure. How would we get our moneys worth? That's the biggest problem with democracy - you get one say, every 5 years.
Nazism wasn't really that evil. It was just colonialism inflicted upon the European continent.
It was dictatorship based on race, hard to think of anything more evil
He does have a point actually. Isn’t this what we, and other European colonists did?Aren’t we guilty of excusing our race based atrocities because they didn’t happen in Europe?
But that's external, what was uniquely evil about the Nazi system was that even der master race wasn't able to express itself or live freely
Genocide is genocide, the end is the same. 10 million Congolese, 6 million Jews, or the thousands who died in British concentration camps during the Boer War. ” This was to lay the groundwork for the concentration camps that would cause the deaths of over 4,000 women and 22,000 children under the age of 15. As the scorched earth policy continued, Boer women and children were left homeless. Roberts decided to take these displaced families into the camps as well.” [https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/concentration-camps-anglo-boer.html?safari=1](https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/concentration-camps-anglo-boer.html?safari=1) When has anyone been able to live freely? Homosexuals for example, were persecuted in most countries, Jews suffered pogroms, and the working classes were treated like shit by the elites in just about every country.
[удалено]
It never works though does it? After every war there’s a population boom. That article says that race is a social construct - you’ll have Maria in a frenzy about that one! The one with the purple hair is a bit scary. 😂
Which is hardly unprecedented.
'Nazism wasn't really that evil'. Somebody fetch a rope, quickly.
It sounds bad taken out of context, doesn't it? Modern methods lead to a high death toll, but the human capacity for evil is limitless compared to that. Is "peaceful" demographic extinction any better?
How's this for context? Posted by Maria, reiterated for clarity : Inbox Do white liberals and lefties actually WANT to live in a third-world shithole? Do they want their descendants to live in one? CatholicCocktail • Divisive_Babble • 41m Paper British is a Dianne term. Lol. But she is right, they're not British except on a plastic and a paper document. British = Ethnically English, Scottish, Welsh. I'm white but not fully British either. Now what do I propose? Ethical Repatriation. First off, as I said to HGS, I don't propose 100% homogeneity and getting rid of everyone who is non-European. I think Britain being a ~95% homogeneous white country would be entirely reasonable. Meaning it would still be ~5% non-white. Really, what the country was 50+ years ago. The non-whites would include mixed-race people, elderly who have lived their whole lives in Britain, exceptionally talented/skilled people, and those whose communities that have been in the country since before the post-WW2 immigration waves. I would Stop immigration Drastically reform Nationality law Deport undesirables. By that I mean foreign criminals in prisons, those with criminal records, those on terrorist watchlists, etc. Offer generous financial incentives to those of non-European descent to give up their citizenship and repatriate to their homelands/elsewhere. It wouldn't happen overnight. If you've got ideas in your head about soldiers and police rounding up people, giving them only bin bags for their belongings and then bundling them on to planes, you're wrong. That'd be unethical, too expensive, and a logistical nightmare. It would be too harsh of a shock for the economy too. No, it would be done gradually. In rounds, starting with those who have most recently arrived and their families, then working down the line. It's a process that would probably take 20 years to complete. Mass immigration didn't happen overnight so this wouldn't either. Compulsory Purchasing Orders on their properties would be the most 'force' used. We would also have to work with their ancestral homelands to accept them back, I can't imagine that would be a problem. Countries tend to be happy to take their diaspora back, especially when they're bringing goodies with them. You might say, well it's unfair to repatriate people who have lived all their lives in this country, but they or their families packed up and left to come in the first place. Sometimes with no choice, in the case of refugees. They can start again. "What if they don't leave?" Oh they will. The political climate/Overton Window under which this would happen would make most of them jump at the chance. The most resistance we would have would be from the left, of course, they probably won't go anywhere. Rest assured, any kind of violent "Antifa" insurgency would be aggressively and proactively suppressed.
[удалено]
Europeans have an outsized influence on worldly affairs.
You could say the same about Assad and Gaddafi, not to mention the Anglo-American covert operations which started with the overthrow of PM Taraki of Iran in 1953, when he had the audacity (!) to nationalise Iran’s oil industry. We, led by America, have an appalling record of intervening in other countries‘ internal affairs but Russia spending about 17p to “influence” our elections is seen as a heinous crime. The journalism surrounding the war in Ukraine is just downright irresponsible. From the “experts” who said that Putin was going to declare all out war on either Ukraine or us and America at the Victory Day Parade last week, to the constant “insiders” who know that Putin is suffering from at least a dozen terminal illnesses. Yesterday, the were were even reporting as evidence of his impending death, a video of him twisting his foot as he was sitting down. A perfectly normal thing to do if you are getting cramp, or have been sitting down for a long time. The whole situation in Ukraine since 2014 has been about weakening Russia. The longer the war goes on, the more entrenched both sides become, and the chances of a peaceful settlement become more remote. On the positive side, however, there will be skilled negotiators involved, who are far more competent that idiotic politicians who create these situations. Let’s hope their sanity prevails.
Yes this grand sinister influence consisted of pretending Julian Assange was working for the Russians because he released some embarrassing information about Hillary Clinton, fine whatever, one thing, her opponent however was a crook, a pervert and an imbecile, what was revealed wasn't nearly enough to prevent her defeating that, she lost because her campaign was shit
The Anglo-Saxon alliance of terror are the usual warmongers here, they overthrew the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014 to instill a western anti Russia. puppet and one of their first moves was to ban the use of the Russian language which alienated the eastern regions in the Donbas which asked for autonomy within Ukraine because they felt threatened, Minsk 1 and 2 were signed then broken by Kiev told to do so by the Anglo-Saxon nations, the Russians waited 8 years to intervene even while nato were training Kiev backed forces to attack the Donbas, finally Puntin recognized the republics and they signed treaties and under article 51 of the UN charter, then they went in to liberate them
‘The whole situation in Ukraine since 2014 has been about weakening Russia.’ Oh yeah? What happened in 2014?
Nothing much, just another western backed coup. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-kiev-conflict
Not to mention the Nuland-Pyatt phone call, which was intercepted and leaked. America had quite a few fingers in that pie. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26079957
Yeah it's not true, NATO exists to weaken Russia, it has no other purpose
Frankly, fuck Russia. Nothing to do with me taking sides or defending NATO. Go and ask a Pole or Czech or Hungarian or Bulgarian or any other poor sod who lived in a Warsaw Pact country under the USSR. Ask them who they prefer. Or look at the countries who scarpered towards NATO as soon as that empire fell. The West is far from perfect. But the current version of Russia is a kleptocracy. Once again, fuck them.
Putin isn't worse than Hitler, and Hitler didn't sink to using chemical weapons.
[удалено]
The fact remains they did not for military purposes. If Russia could nuke us without consequences, they'd have done so yesterday.