Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20617
Posted: March 16 2022 at 05:24
jamesbaldwin wrote:
UKRAINE DOES NOT WANT TO DEAL
Last night, Zelensky's deputy premier, Iryna Vereshchuck, a former Ukrainian army officer and minister for the reintegration of occupied Ukrainian areas, was interviewed by three Italian journalists who are experts in international politics.
The aforementioned asked her what Ukraine is willing to negotiate with Russia. Vereschchuck said Ukraine is calling for an immediate ceasefire and that there are working humanitarian corridors. The Italian journalists insisted: Do Ukraine want to negotiate on the basis of the three points requested by Moscow?
1) Neutrality
2) Recognition of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent republics
3) Recognition of Crimea as part of Russia
Zelenskij's deputy premier said Ukraine does not intend to recognize ANYTHING, on the contrary, Ukraine wants these areas to be reinstated to Ukraine with a UN decision.
The Italian journalists then asked her on what basis Ukraine plans to negotiate, but Vereshchuck went back to talking about Russia bombing and massacres, etc.
In the end, one of the Italian journalists concluded, worried, that this being the situation, Ukraine has no intention of negotiating.
Except for you, I don't know of anyone that thinks this is a good idea, especially any NATO country leaders, and that would get them off the hook if it wasn't so unpalpable and unacceptable.
Edited by SteveG - March 16 2022 at 05:29
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Joined: September 25 2015
Location: Milano
Status: Offline
Points: 6052
Posted: March 16 2022 at 06:01
SteveG wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
UKRAINE DOES NOT WANT TO DEAL
Last night, Zelensky's deputy premier, Iryna Vereshchuck, a former Ukrainian army officer and minister for the reintegration of occupied Ukrainian areas, was interviewed by three Italian journalists who are experts in international politics.
The aforementioned asked her what Ukraine is willing to negotiate with Russia. Vereschchuck said Ukraine is calling for an immediate ceasefire and that there are working humanitarian corridors. The Italian journalists insisted: Do Ukraine want to negotiate on the basis of the three points requested by Moscow?
1) Neutrality
2) Recognition of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent republics
3) Recognition of Crimea as part of Russia
Zelenskij's deputy premier said Ukraine does not intend to recognize ANYTHING, on the contrary, Ukraine wants these areas to be reinstated to Ukraine with a UN decision.
The Italian journalists then asked her on what basis Ukraine plans to negotiate, but Vereshchuck went back to talking about Russia bombing and massacres, etc.
In the end, one of the Italian journalists concluded, worried, that this being the situation, Ukraine has no intention of negotiating.
Except for you, I don't know of anyone that thinks this is a good idea, especially any NATO country leaders, and that would get them off the hook if it wasn't so unpalpable and unacceptable.
Steve,
1) I still don't understand who you call NATO leaders
2) apart from me, in Italy most of the commentators and some politicians think that these points are more than acceptable, for the simple fact that:
- Ukraine's entry into NATO was not on the agenda (immediately). If anything, the US and NATO collaborated with them informally, making them believe they could enter, and making it a nation with NATO installations.
- Crimea is already part of Russia, to all intents and purposes: Moscow is only asking to recognize it
- In the 2014 Minsk agreements, a special statute, i.e. semi-independence, was already provided for the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. Since then, however, there has been a struggle of those republics for independence, with a war by Ukraine to repress them.
In short, Moscow has invaded Ukraine, is destroying it, and seems ready to go back without annexing ANYTHING of the Ukrainian territory: what more could the Ucrainians desire?
Edited by jamesbaldwin - March 16 2022 at 06:04
Amos Goldberg (professor of Genocide Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem): Yes, it's genocide. It's so difficult and painful to admit it, but we can no longer avoid this conclusion.
Special Collaborator
Crossover/Symphonic/RPI Teams
Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 53732
Posted: March 16 2022 at 06:12
omphaloskepsis wrote:
progaardvark wrote:
omphaloskepsis wrote:
I'm sure my analyses and the Map has flaws.
Really BIG flaws if you ask me, basing it all on a hugely flawed pro-Russian map. Even the Ukrainian cities are written in their Russian spellings. How do you miss these things?
We've been inundated by an American/NATO/Ukraine propaganda tsunami, so I feel an alternative view is needed to balance the information war. Spellings are minutia. Americans use English spellings.
Please point out specific flaws. I am interested in the truth and reality. If you have factual data Mr. Aardvark...please share it. Instead criticizing...provide alternative data that negates the information I shared.
From my research, I conclude that Russia is winning the physical war, while Ukraine is winning the information war.
The alternative data is there for you to access if you could ever pull yourself out of the right-wing echo chamber you're living in. Anything I would use to debunk your claims would just be followed by a rant from you about mainstream media and probably a lovely example of a Gish gallop. Thus I see no need to engage with you.
The spellings do matter on that propaganda map you posted. By using Russian spellings for Ukrainian cities, it is symbolic of Putin treating Ukraine as if it was Russian and always belonged to Russia. It's an insult to the Ukrainian people.
Need I remind you that before this conflict you distrusted US intelligence sources and thought Putin would not invade Ukraine? Guess which sources were right on that one. Maybe you should reconsider that you're being duped by Putin's propaganda.
---------- i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag that's a happy bag of lettuce this car smells like cartilage nothing beats a good video about fractions
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20617
Posted: March 16 2022 at 06:15
jamesbaldwin wrote:
SteveG wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
UKRAINE DOES NOT WANT TO DEAL
Last night, Zelensky's deputy premier, Iryna Vereshchuck, a former Ukrainian army officer and minister for the reintegration of occupied Ukrainian areas, was interviewed by three Italian journalists who are experts in international politics.
The aforementioned asked her what Ukraine is willing to negotiate with Russia. Vereschchuck said Ukraine is calling for an immediate ceasefire and that there are working humanitarian corridors. The Italian journalists insisted: Do Ukraine want to negotiate on the basis of the three points requested by Moscow?
1) Neutrality
2) Recognition of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent republics
3) Recognition of Crimea as part of Russia
Zelenskij's deputy premier said Ukraine does not intend to recognize ANYTHING, on the contrary, Ukraine wants these areas to be reinstated to Ukraine with a UN decision.
The Italian journalists then asked her on what basis Ukraine plans to negotiate, but Vereshchuck went back to talking about Russia bombing and massacres, etc.
In the end, one of the Italian journalists concluded, worried, that this being the situation, Ukraine has no intention of negotiating.
Except for you, I don't know of anyone that thinks this is a good idea, especially any NATO country leaders, and that would get them off the hook if it wasn't so unpalpable and unacceptable.
Steve,
1) I still don't understand who you call NATO leaders
2) apart from me, in Italy most of the commentators and some politicians think that these points are more than acceptable, for the simple fact that:
- Ukraine's entry into NATO was not on the agenda (immediately). If anything, the US and NATO collaborated with them informally, making them believe they could enter, and making it a nation with NATO installations.
- Crimea is already part of Russia, to all intents and purposes: Moscow is only asking to recognize it
- In the 2014 Minsk agreements, a special statute, i.e. semi-independence, was already provided for the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. Since then, however, there has been a struggle of those republics for independence, with a war by Ukraine to repress them.
In short, Moscow has invaded Ukraine, is destroying it, and seems ready to go back without annexing ANYTHING of the Ukrainian territory: what more could the Ucrainians desire?
As most don't think it's a good idea, then there must be a reason why. Try to find it instead of backing up your suggestions with the few who do.
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10742
Posted: March 16 2022 at 06:20
Russian military leader told to shut up on Russian TV for wanting to honor fallen Russian soldiers. The Russian government and state controlled news does not want the Russian people to know the truth about what is going on.
Joined: September 25 2015
Location: Milano
Status: Offline
Points: 6052
Posted: March 16 2022 at 06:28
SteveG wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
SteveG wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
UKRAINE DOES NOT WANT TO DEAL
Last night, Zelensky's deputy premier, Iryna Vereshchuck, a former Ukrainian army officer and minister for the reintegration of occupied Ukrainian areas, was interviewed by three Italian journalists who are experts in international politics.
The aforementioned asked her what Ukraine is willing to negotiate with Russia. Vereschchuck said Ukraine is calling for an immediate ceasefire and that there are working humanitarian corridors. The Italian journalists insisted: Do Ukraine want to negotiate on the basis of the three points requested by Moscow?
1) Neutrality
2) Recognition of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent republics
3) Recognition of Crimea as part of Russia
Zelenskij's deputy premier said Ukraine does not intend to recognize ANYTHING, on the contrary, Ukraine wants these areas to be reinstated to Ukraine with a UN decision.
The Italian journalists then asked her on what basis Ukraine plans to negotiate, but Vereshchuck went back to talking about Russia bombing and massacres, etc.
In the end, one of the Italian journalists concluded, worried, that this being the situation, Ukraine has no intention of negotiating.
Except for you, I don't know of anyone that thinks this is a good idea, especially any NATO country leaders, and that would get them off the hook if it wasn't so unpalpable and unacceptable.
Steve,
1) I still don't understand who you call NATO leaders
2) apart from me, in Italy most of the commentators and some politicians think that these points are more than acceptable, for the simple fact that:
- Ukraine's entry into NATO was not on the agenda (immediately). If anything, the US and NATO collaborated with them informally, making them believe they could enter, and making it a nation with NATO installations.
- Crimea is already part of Russia, to all intents and purposes: Moscow is only asking to recognize it
- In the 2014 Minsk agreements, a special statute, i.e. semi-independence, was already provided for the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. Since then, however, there has been a struggle of those republics for independence, with a war by Ukraine to repress them.
In short, Moscow has invaded Ukraine, is destroying it, and seems ready to go back without annexing ANYTHING of the Ukrainian territory: what more could the Ucrainians desire?
As most don't think it's a good idea, then there must be a reason why. Try to find it instead of backing up your suggestions with the few who do.
As I have already told you, it is not at all true that few think like me. In Italy, I believe that most citizens would be in favor of this agreement, and I also believe in Western Europe.
Maybe you should be wondering why.
But I'll explain it to you, with great simplicity. As one of the three Italian journalists told Zelenskii's deputy, the best thing would be for Ukraine to win the war and send the Russian army back, but since we have to look at reality and not what "would be right", the reality is that Ukraine can hardly win this war without NATO entry (at most it can drag it along, with the result of self-destructing), so what Ukraine should do is accept these points proposed by Moscow, given that they do not include the annexation of new lands.
Amos Goldberg (professor of Genocide Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem): Yes, it's genocide. It's so difficult and painful to admit it, but we can no longer avoid this conclusion.
Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6907
Posted: March 16 2022 at 07:29
jamesbaldwin wrote:
@omphaloskepsis
I see that you have deleted the comment (in my opinion quite extreme) in which you spoke about what matters to the United States, about which I was now trying to answer you.
So I'll answer you in private.
A Prog Archives moderator shadow-banned my comment with a (Pending Approval) stamped on it... invisible to all but me. You can call Putin a fascist, but I guess it's illegal to criticize American Leadership Class or Zelenskyy.
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20617
Posted: March 16 2022 at 07:51
jamesbaldwin wrote:
SteveG wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
SteveG wrote:
jamesbaldwin wrote:
UKRAINE DOES NOT WANT TO DEAL
Last night, Zelensky's deputy premier, Iryna Vereshchuck, a former Ukrainian army officer and minister for the reintegration of occupied Ukrainian areas, was interviewed by three Italian journalists who are experts in international politics.
The aforementioned asked her what Ukraine is willing to negotiate with Russia. Vereschchuck said Ukraine is calling for an immediate ceasefire and that there are working humanitarian corridors. The Italian journalists insisted: Do Ukraine want to negotiate on the basis of the three points requested by Moscow?
1) Neutrality
2) Recognition of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent republics
3) Recognition of Crimea as part of Russia
Zelenskij's deputy premier said Ukraine does not intend to recognize ANYTHING, on the contrary, Ukraine wants these areas to be reinstated to Ukraine with a UN decision.
The Italian journalists then asked her on what basis Ukraine plans to negotiate, but Vereshchuck went back to talking about Russia bombing and massacres, etc.
In the end, one of the Italian journalists concluded, worried, that this being the situation, Ukraine has no intention of negotiating.
Except for you, I don't know of anyone that thinks this is a good idea, especially any NATO country leaders, and that would get them off the hook if it wasn't so unpalpable and unacceptable.
Steve,
1) I still don't understand who you call NATO leaders
2) apart from me, in Italy most of the commentators and some politicians think that these points are more than acceptable, for the simple fact that:
- Ukraine's entry into NATO was not on the agenda (immediately). If anything, the US and NATO collaborated with them informally, making them believe they could enter, and making it a nation with NATO installations.
- Crimea is already part of Russia, to all intents and purposes: Moscow is only asking to recognize it
- In the 2014 Minsk agreements, a special statute, i.e. semi-independence, was already provided for the republics of Donetsk and Luhansk. Since then, however, there has been a struggle of those republics for independence, with a war by Ukraine to repress them.
In short, Moscow has invaded Ukraine, is destroying it, and seems ready to go back without annexing ANYTHING of the Ukrainian territory: what more could the Ucrainians desire?
As most don't think it's a good idea, then there must be a reason why. Try to find it instead of backing up your suggestions with the few who do.
As I have already told you, it is not at all true that few think like me. In Italy, I believe that most citizens would be in favor of this agreement, and I also believe in Western Europe.
Maybe you should be wondering why.
But I'll explain it to you, with great simplicity. As one of the three Italian journalists told Zelenskii's deputy, the best thing would be for Ukraine to win the war and send the Russian army back, but since we have to look at reality and not what "would be right", the reality is that Ukraine can hardly win this war without NATO entry (at most it can drag it along, with the result of self-destructing), so what Ukraine should do is accept these points proposed by Moscow, given that they do not include the annexation of new lands.
Not what would be right? Conceding one more inch more of Ukrainian soil to Putin is what would not be right. As long as Ukraine does not want to concede it. If it were that Ukraine is looking for that solution, I would say that then it is right. Should we force Ukraine to deal with this two faced lying madman just because a minority of people like you think that this is the way to go? Then maybe we should join the Russians in the bombing and force Ukraine to capitulate.
Edited by SteveG - March 16 2022 at 07:52
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6907
Posted: March 16 2022 at 07:57
progaardvark wrote:
omphaloskepsis wrote:
[QUOTE=progaardvark][QUOTE=omphaloskepsis]
Need I remind you that before this conflict you distrusted US intelligence sources and thought Putin would not invade Ukraine? Guess which sources were right on that one. Maybe you should reconsider that you're being duped by Putin's propaganda.
Thanks for reminding me of my December 11 post, which is still visible on Progarchives. I'll paste it below.
Dec. 11, 2021
"My opinion-
1. As long as Ukraine does not join NATO.
2. As long as NATO/America does not install missiles in Ukraine.
3. As long as NATO/America does not put Troops on the ground in Ukraine.
4. As long as Ukraine does not attack Donbas,
Russia will not attack Ukraine."
1.Ukraine attempted to join NATO. I saw it on America News.
2. Ukraine Nazi battalion "Azov" shelled and attacked the Donbas in the weeks proceeding Russian invasion. The Azov Battalion proudly admit that they are NAZI's. They killed thousands of people in the Donbass.
3. Although America did not put troops on ground. America financed Bio Labs (Which America's Victoria Nuland admitted before the Senate). If you remember, America invaded Iraq after accusing Iraq of Weapons of Mass Destruction. According to International Law, Bio Labs qualify as Weapons of Mass Destruction. Victoria Nuland expressed worry at what Russia would do if Russia took over Ukraine/American Bio Labs.
ProgArdvark wrote-
"The spellings do matter on that propaganda map you posted. By using Russian spellings for Ukrainian cities, it is symbolic of Putin treating Ukraine as if it was Russian and always belonged to Russia. It's an insult to the Ukrainian people."
American Spellings are used on American Media maps of Ukraine. I agree with you ProgArdvark. By using America spellings for Ukrainian cities, it is symbolic of Biden treating Ukraine as if it was American and will always belong to America. It's an insult to the Ukrainian people."
Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6742
Posted: March 16 2022 at 08:00
Lorenzo, I agree with a lot of what you post elsewhere, but here you really don’t speak for the many, but for the few. Perhaps in Italy it is true that most share your view - though you are the only Italian in my circle of friends who thinks this way. You also speak as if you’ve been sucked in by either pro-Russian or anti-US propaganda, when you talk about Crimea being for all intents and purposes Russian, or that the troubles in the Donbas are down to Ukrainian repression.
The only reason Russia is “to all intents and purposes” Russian, is because no one offered to help Ukraine defend it against invasion and occupation in 2014, and that’s in part because (and I am going to sound like a Putin sympathiser here, which I assure you I’m not) the 2014 invasion and occupation is as much the fault of the West as it is Russia. Crimea became part of the Ukraine in 1991. The West drew up new borders, and allocated territories to countries in a manner similar to the aftermath of WWI - and just as that was one cause of WWII, so was Crimea being given to Ukraine one cause of the 2014 invasion.
It may not be the size of Russia, but in Europe, Ukraine is still a larger country in the region, and as such definitely consists of various regions and cultures that can be very different from each other. So just as there are regions elsewhere in Europe, like the Basque and Catalonia, that feel separate in some ways from the countries they exist within, the same can be said for Ukraine. It’s undeniable that some regions were not entirely happy with the way borders were (re)drawn, and that modern Ukraine has regions where the majority are Russians, not Ukrainians. The Maidan was practically unanimously supported in Western Ukraine, but no much in other parts. Thus the 2014 conflict, and the initial incursions into two Ukrainian “separatist states” as “peacekeepers” is partly a consequence of Euromaidan.
Which doesn't mean I justify Russia's or the West's behaviour then, or now. Both sides were and are wrong in different ways. Both sides have little knowledge of each other, and both sides heavily rely on prejudices, stereotypes and propaganda. The only victims are the innocent Ukrainians and Russians, of which there are both This is a war by the leaders of one country, and not of the peoples who live in either.
Now, before someone goes to correct me, and say that Crimea became part of Ukraine in 1954, yes and no. The borders were changed, but it was a purely symbolic change within the USSR in 1954. It was not meant to mean anything more than, for an analogy, giving someone a key to the city. Crimea becoming Ukrainian in 1954 was as real as the Queen being the head of state in the UK. Symbolic only. At the time, the thought that the USSR might one day be dissolved was unthinkable, and borders between SSRs were largely arbitrary and meaningless.
From Putin’s point of view (whether correct or not) Crimea has always been predominantly Russian, and a Russian state. Ukrainians are not only a minority, but the smallest minority within the region. Apart from the symbolic change in 1954, Crimea has been considered Russian since sometime in the 1700s/1800s (and yes, I’m admitting I can’t remember the exact year, but I know I can Google and find it out should you wish me to).
Again, I’m not saying Putin was right to invade Crimea (he wasn’t), but it was potentially inevitable and preventable. As were the recent “peacekeeping activities” in two further Russian majority regions of the Ukraine.
What has happened since is wrong on every level, but what happened prior (from 2014 onwards) was still wrong, but in some ways understandable. Again, I am not exonerating Putin, nor suggesting I agree with anything he has done.
But even though the majority of Crimeans are Russian, many of them (and all the Ukrainians and Tartars) consider Crimea to be Ukrainian. I mentioned regions like the Basque and Catalonia, but realistically Crimea and the Donbas are nothing like this, and have never attempted to become separatist/independent/Russian states. Some people within those regions may have expressed a wish for independence, but by no means were they a majority - and much of the supposed independent movement is either pure propaganda, or comes from Russia, rather than from the Russians who have lived peacefully in the regions.
Lest it be confused, I am against any illegal and aggressive occupation of one country by another, whether that is Ukraine by Russia, Palestine by Israel, or Armenia by Azerbaijan - to name just three. There are sympathisers for both sides of all those invasions/occupations. Why? Because there is no black and white.
Putin is wrong. Putin is guilty. To assume that he is the only wrong party, and the only guilty party is disingenuous at best. But the guilt of the West in events leading up this is now irrelevant. Putin has gone to war, and that is black and white. The guilt is on him alone for that one, and why should Ukraine have to negotiate to his terms. Quite simply, they shouldn’t.
Crimea is Ukraine. The Donbas is Ukraine. That is non-negiotable for Ukraine, and I can completely understand why.
We should be giving far more support to the Ukraines/Palestines/Armenias of this world. (And yes, it is slightly ironic that Russia is aiding Armenia against the Azerbaijani aggression.)
And for sure, the UK government should not still be making arms and fuel deals with Syria.
And there are conflicts in Africa and across the world.
But whataboutism and relativism have no place here. This is war, and despite earlier entreaties by some to the contrary, this is genocide.
I posted on FB on 8 March that I believed that the only reason Putin has consistently declared that Russians and Ukrainians are one people, is to mitigate against claims of genocide. I have seen several people claim that it is impossible to suggest Putin is committing genocide, simply because he keeps making such statements about how Russian and Ukrainian people are one.
Yet targets for shelling have been hospitals (including maternity hospitals), schools, and residential blocks. And despite talk of humanitarian corridors and ceasefires, I have had multiple reports from either friends in Ukraine, or friends throughout the world who are attempting to help their friends in Ukraine, that when these corridors are opened at all, they are allowing safe(r) passage only into Russia.
The very day after I made that post, another maternity hospital was shelled, and because there was video footage of this one, it seemed to hit the news the way previous attacks of hospitals and schools had not.
I have a friend in who is trying to help family in Ukraine. They are stuck in their cold apartment (which no longer has windows or electricity), and who have watched other residents targeted as they attempt to flee. They want to leave, but can’t. Thanks to financial help from my friend, they have money to buy food (as they have almost run out), but leaving their apartment to attempt to get it is risking their lives.
I know some people who seem to think that Ukraine is not innocent in all this, and brought some of this upon themselves. Well, regardless of whether you think that or not, surely you recognise that it wasn’t the Ukrainian people. The ones who are dying. Even if you think Ukraine’s government has been wrong in the past, the Ukrainian people are innocent. Stop blaming the people of a country for the actions of its leader. This goes for Russia and Belarus, too.
I have seen countless posts on FB from friends around the world who are attempting to help friends and family, or complete strangers, in Ukraine. Ceasefires and humanitarian corridors are reported, but have never meaningfully existed (except to allow travel to Russia).
Putin has taken refugees from Ukraine, by opening up corridors to the country for Russians in Ukraine, and supposedly Ukrainians desperate enough to take that route (and though it is hard to find accurate reporting on this, it would appear that very few Ukrainians have taken this option), and he has been targeting the next generation of Ukrainians with schools and maternity hospitals targeted.
And as was posted in this thread, one of the latest atrocities was that a monastery that had opened itself to refugees was targeted. Why? Well clearly not because it has any military capabilities. Rather, I expect, it was because upwards of 500 displaced Ukrainians were seeking refuge there, over half of which were children.
Due to shelling, there are many internally displaced Ukrainians. If they are unable to leave Ukraine, all they can do is seek safer refuge within the country. And those safer refuges are not safe, as seen by the shelling of the Sviatogorsk Lavra monastery.
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10742
Posted: March 16 2022 at 08:39
To understand why the Ukrainians don't want to surrender, just look at how putin's government treats the Russian people. Ukrainins know they will be treated even worse.
Joined: February 02 2022
Location: Izmir
Status: Offline
Points: 2743
Posted: March 16 2022 at 08:50
Easy Money wrote:
To understand why the Ukrainians don't want to surrender, just look at how putin's government treats the Russian people. Ukrainins know they will be treated even worse.
This is a fair point. Putin seems like a guy that thinks he has "unmatched wisdom" (sound familiar?), so he has the "right" to decide on everything. Gosh, how horrendous!..
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10742
Posted: March 16 2022 at 09:00
Yes, there are many victims in this war, the people of Ukraine, Russia, Poland, Lithuania and more will suffer for a long time to come. This is why I donate money to Razom INC, so that they can help provide much needed medical supplies.
Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6742
Posted: March 16 2022 at 09:07
Easy Money wrote:
To understand why the Ukrainians don't want to surrender, just look at how putin's government treats the Russian people. Ukrainins know they will be treated even worse.
And they know that because history has shown them that over an over again. Putin can say all he like that Russia and Ukraine are one people, and that the nations are like brothers, but he doesn’t mean it. And no Ukrainian believes it. Brothers don’t treat each other the way Russia has treated Ukraine for centuries.
Sure Ukraine and Russia have historical ties. They go by the names of war and genocide. Russians are the majority in Crimea because of mass “deportation” of Crimean Tartars. That, along with the Holdomor are examples of genocide against Ukrainian peoples.
During the “better” periods of Soviet Russia, Ukraine was still subject to shortages of many kinds.
Ukrainian culture and language has been subject to persecution and punishment for centuries.
Many Russians who have lived in Ukraine have done so to escape Russia. They are Russian, but they feel Ukrainian. The Russians you hear of who clamour for freedom and independence in the Donbas over the last eight years are almost all new transplants. There has been trouble in the Donbas because Russia has been creating a pretext to invade and occupy the Donbas in the same manner it did Crimea. I don’t know anyone who has been following events in Ukraine since 2014 who was that surprised by the “peacekeeping”. For many observers it was never a matter of if, so much as when.
I admit I didn’t believe Putin would invade beyond the Donbas, and that came as a huge surprise. But perhaps it shouldn’t have. But I definitely don’t believe that either the Donbas nor Crimea should be ceded to Putin, just to stop the aggression. And I find it strange that someone as intelligent as Lorenzo seems to think this is reasonable, or wonders why Ukraine isn’t happy to do this.
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20617
Posted: March 16 2022 at 09:11
Question: Is it difficult to understand that a people would rather die fighting than to be a citizen of a police state oligarchy where civil rights are non existent, state media controls the news and there's no such thing as a free elections?
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: August 11 2007
Location: Memphis
Status: Offline
Points: 10742
Posted: March 16 2022 at 09:13
Archisorcerus wrote:
Easy Money wrote:
To understand why the Ukrainians don't want to surrender, just look at how putin's government treats the Russian people. Ukrainins know they will be treated even worse.
This is a fair point. Putin seems like a guy that thinks he has "unmatched wisdom" (sound familiar?), so he has the "right" to decide on everything. Gosh, how horrendous!..
I understand that a lot of Russians who are currently fleeing their government are headed for Turkey. Have you seen many Russian refugees in Izmir?
Joined: February 02 2022
Location: Izmir
Status: Offline
Points: 2743
Posted: March 16 2022 at 09:14
Easy Money wrote:
Yes, there are many victims in this war, the people of Ukraine, Russia, Poland, Lithuania and more will suffer for a long time to come. This is why I donate money to Razom INC, so that they can help provide much needed medical supplies.
In and around the Europe region, my country is said to be the most negatively affected country economically, prospectively... due to the war in Ukraine. Our economy is already terrible. Painful to imagine the worse. Everybody was cursing the year 2019, but the succeeding years have been even more brutal.
Joined: February 02 2022
Location: Izmir
Status: Offline
Points: 2743
Posted: March 16 2022 at 09:17
Easy Money wrote:
Archisorcerus wrote:
Easy Money wrote:
To understand why the Ukrainians don't want to surrender, just look at how putin's government treats the Russian people. Ukrainins know they will be treated even worse.
This is a fair point. Putin seems like a guy that thinks he has "unmatched wisdom" (sound familiar?), so he has the "right" to decide on everything. Gosh, how horrendous!..
I understand that a lot of Russians who are currently fleeing their government are headed for Turkey. Have you seen many Russian refugees in Izmir?
Actually I haven't. They can be seen around the Alsancak and Konak areas of İzmir, as I guess. I haven't been to those places for a long time.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 2.223 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Reflections on the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
Topic Options
jamesbaldwin wrote:
