Putin The Guilty

[TheTexan]

I was in France one night and saw a man beating a woman. I ran up to intervene. He said this is my wife. I looked at her, she said yes. I then walked away, and the beating continued.

If she had said no, this is no longer my husband, he would have either stopped or I would have made him stop.

As would any man of moral character.

I cannot blame Putin for doing the same.

 

[osan]

For the sake of your own edification regarding the right to self determination, I will address this specifically.

It is a complex topic with many considerations, but ultimately it boils down to this:

When someone (anyone) secedes, the default position (for any non-tyrant) has to be:

How can we make this work?

The tyrant's default position, in contrast is:

How can we crush them under our boot?

OK up to this point, but self-determination is not the relevant issue at hand. You seem to be painting Putin as some guardian angel. He's not. He's a prick like the rest.

Continuiing...

I know very little about Coney Island but on brief research it has a population of 24,000 and a Russian population of about 40%.

As I am not a tyrant, if the Russians in Coney Island were to secede, I would ask: How can we make this work?

1) As they represent only 40% of Coney Island, is there a smaller region of coney island that is more densely populated with Russians they can choose to secede with?

2) The US will understandably have concerns regarding military weaponry and activities around this region. What agreements can we make to make this secession work?

3) And so on.

And here you go off the rails. The original question had nothing to do with Russian secession in Coney Island, but simply postulated US "government" attacks on them. We can assume the army starts shelling Coney Island. GIVEN THOSE CONDITIONS, are you happy with Russia sending troops into New York state, bombing the crap out everything on the pretext of protecting the Russians in Coney Island?

If Coney Island were to secede, and the US by default just decided to crush them under their boot, then Putin, or anyone has the right to intervene, to the extent and scope necessary, to help them.

Dead wrong. Given the reality we've been dealt... you know, the shitty one with nation-states that are perforce by their nature tyrannical, national sovereignty leaves that situation as none of anyone's business, and for VERY sound reasons, again given the garbage context.

You are attempting to apply the principles of liberty to a planet that has become a gigantic, open-air prison where no man can escape the tyrant's boot heel. We have gone the route of superorganization, of which nothing is wrong in itself. But we've failed to keep any pace at all in out moral growth. Superorganization has, in fact, become an enabling factor in our moral degeneration. Superorganization is a manifestation of power, and we all know (or should know) what human beings tend to become the moment power comes to our hands.

We humans could have done all this so very differently. But no, we had to take the devil's path to civilization and now we have no idea how to stop ourselves. Be you in no measure surprised if the bombs start falling. Sanity has left the building.

(As far as countries murdering people in their own countries that havent seceded - I would see it as a domestic dispute. As with any domestic dispute, I don't see any reason for anyone to get involved, as long as the disputing parties remain of their of free will, in the same union.)

The point you make here is one of a distinction without a difference. The point of secession is irrelevant, but let us take it to its logical conclusion for the sake of clarity. This can be done quickly and easily by asking where one draws the line. Assuming there are 10 million in the population in question... let's call it Donbass just to keep it closer to the real, you appear to be saying that the mere declaration of secession is sufficient to bring in the troops when the current lord of the realm react unhappily.

What if only half, 500K, of that population want to secede? There is already a giant crack in your logic. One quarter? One eigth? We can walk that question right down to a single individual, the logically absurd conclusion, and once more ask the question: if Sergey Liketojerkoff "secedes" and the local burgermeister lay siege to his house, will you send in your army and risk nuclear annihilation for his sake, particularly when he begs help? If yes, you are insane. If no, you are perhaps sane, but a hypocrite.

So where's that line to be drawn and how do you justify its placement?

It won't always be possible for someone to secede.

And yet you appear to be cherry picking the winners v. losers.

But anyone who is not a tyrant, must at least give it a honest assessment, of how it can be made to work.

Anyone who isn't a tyrant ISN'T IN A POSITION TO MAKE SUCH DECISIONS. You're trying to force your normative view, with which it seems I agree, onto the positive and uninterested world.

But I do know, that the Donbass region, is a very reasonable secession, and there is little to no reason why it can not be made to work.

I see, so now the secession has to be "reasonable". You've just opened yet another can of worms. Reasonable by what standard? Who gets to set that standard? Why them and not me? By what standard is the standard set? We can go on and on quite literally forever on that merrygoround precisely because the fundamental nature of the "solution" is arbitrary, which leaves the door wide open for ever further, and valid, questioning, precisely because the answers are perforce unsatisfying due to their arbitrary nature.

Ukraine would just rather crush them under their boot.

And Russia is no whit different.

 

[osan]

You know who would say such a thing? A tyrant.

Unsupported assertion. FAIL.

This is precisely what a tyrant from Ukraine might say. The tyrant from Russia would say he's "liberating" Donbas. It is ALL bullshit, and yet you cling to the notion that Russia is a good guy here. They are the devil, just like the rest.

You claim to oppose tyranny, yet you hold no respect for the right to self determination.

That is a lie and I have proved it so time and again.

"These are Ukrainians", you say? Says who?

Says the dog-pile reality that has been dealt to every human being walking the earth.

The Ukrainian right sector, Azov, and many in the Ukraine government, have taken the position explicitly (spoken and admitted) or implicitly (passing anti-Russian laws) that these people are NOT Ukrainian.

A valid issue but orthogonal to the relevant point. Ukraine has a defined territory, just as does Russia, Poland, Connecticut. The "government" there is as valid as any other you care to name, which is to say, it's not valid at all, and yet there they are, same as in Russia, Poland, Connecticut, etc. NONE of them are valid, but they are there - mobs of armed maniacs more than pleased and eager to don their armored cars and sally forth into the breech of protest to use whatever force they deem fit to their missions.

Their goal is to push them out and keep their land.

Jesus fucking christ osan, if you want to see a tyrant, merely look in the mirror.

You have clearly failed to grok what I have written, even in the least measure.

I'll do us both a gigantic favor: you win.

It's done.

 

[acptulsa]

OK up to this point, but self-determination is not the relevant issue at hand. You seem to be painting Putin as some guardian angel. He's not. He's a prick like the rest.

Do you have a point to make?

We have our own self-determination problems and bigger pricks a hell of a lot closer to home. Why even participate in this distraction at all, much less help our very own pricks finish destroying our local economy for the benefit of cocaine-snorting Burisma stockholders?

We have more immediate concerns than Vladimir Putin.

This is like watching a busybody follow her neighbor's kids around to see if they're skipping school when her own brats are out stealing cars.

 

[vita3]

Interesting responses, but Nihilism ain’t my bag.

 

[TheTexan]

[/B]

OK up to this point, but self-determination is not the relevant issue at hand. You seem to be painting Putin as some guardian angel. He's not. He's a prick like the rest.

Continuiing...



And here you go off the rails. The original question had nothing to do with Russian secession in Coney Island, but simply postulated US "government" attacks on them. We can assume the army starts shelling Coney Island. GIVEN THOSE CONDITIONS, are you happy with Russia sending troops into New York state, bombing the crap out everything on the pretext of protecting the Russians in Coney Island?




Dead wrong. Given the reality we've been dealt... you know, the shitty one with nation-states that are perforce by their nature tyrannical, national sovereignty leaves that situation as none of anyone's business, and for VERY sound reasons, again given the garbage context.

You are attempting to apply the principles of liberty to a planet that has become a gigantic, open-air prison where no man can escape the tyrant's boot heel. We have gone the route of superorganization, of which nothing is wrong in itself. But we've failed to keep any pace at all in out moral growth. Superorganization has, in fact, become an enabling factor in our moral degeneration. Superorganization is a manifestation of power, and we all know (or should know) what human beings tend to become the moment power comes to our hands.

We humans could have done all this so very differently. But no, we had to take the devil's path to civilization and now we have no idea how to stop ourselves. Be you in no measure surprised if the bombs start falling. Sanity has left the building.




The point you make here is one of a distinction without a difference. The point of secession is irrelevant, but let us take it to its logical conclusion for the sake of clarity. This can be done quickly and easily by asking where one draws the line. Assuming there are 10 million in the population in question... let's call it Donbass just to keep it closer to the real, you appear to be saying that the mere declaration of secession is sufficient to bring in the troops when the current lord of the realm react unhappily.

What if only half, 500K, of that population want to secede? There is already a giant crack in your logic. One quarter? One eigth? We can walk that question right down to a single individual, the logically absurd conclusion, and once more ask the question: if Sergey Liketojerkoff "secedes" and the local burgermeister lay siege to his house, will you send in your army and risk nuclear annihilation for his sake, particularly when he begs help? If yes, you are insane. If no, you are perhaps sane, but a hypocrite.

So where's that line to be drawn and how do you justify its placement?




And yet you appear to be cherry picking the winners v. losers.



Anyone who isn't a tyrant ISN'T IN A POSITION TO MAKE SUCH DECISIONS. You're trying to force your normative view, with which it seems I agree, onto the positive and uninterested world.





I see, so now the secession has to be "reasonable". You've just opened yet another can of worms. Reasonable by what standard? Who gets to set that standard? Why them and not me? By what standard is the standard set? We can go on and on quite literally forever on that merrygoround precisely because the fundamental nature of the "solution" is arbitrary, which leaves the door wide open for ever further, and valid, questioning, precisely because the answers are perforce unsatisfying due to their arbitrary nature.



And Russia is no whit different.

Osan none of this is coherent. At best I can determine, your position that the "Russians in Ukraine are Ukrainians and not Russians despite them declaring themselves to be Russians" , which is a tyrannical position ( don't lie to yourself by again claiming its not ), is OKAY, because the world itself is tyrannical and therefore your tyrannical position is somehow not tyrannical.

I won't even bother responding in detail... your head is a mess on this subject. Get your head right.

 

[osan]

Interesting responses, but Nihilism ain’t my bag.

Nihilism? Where?

 

[TheTexan]

I have grown to expect better from you osan. I am genuinely disappointed.

 

[vita3]

Nihilism? Where?

In your posts.

 

[TheTexan]

You claim to oppose tyranny, yet you hold no respect for the right to self determination.

That is a lie and I have proved it so time and again.

It is the truth and you have proven it so time and again in this thread.

I am re-posting this for your own edification. The below statement is really at the root of your tyranny, so perhaps later you can reflect and see your error:

That aside, the "ethnic" Russians are NOT Russian citizens. Were it otherwise, Putin might have a leg on which to stand. But they are Ukrainian citizens.

Anyone with any respect for self determination would not say the above quote.

What you have said above is indefensible, from any kind of libertarian position.

I hope you see that some day.

 

[Madison320]

If Coney Island were to secede, and the US gave it an honest effort with actual good faith negotation, then Putin would have no right to intervene. (regardless of whether the US recognizes the secession or not)

If Coney Island were to secede, and the US by default just decided to crush them under their boot, then Putin, or anyone has the right to intervene, to the extent and scope necessary, to help them.

The problem is that you're assuming everything is a known fact. That it's a legitimate secession, that the US decided to crush them under their boot, etc. In reality we usually don't really know any of these things. All we know for sure is one country is militarily crossing into another country. That's why I'm assigning a little more of the blame on Russia. Either way the US should not be involved, all we are doing is making it worse. Biden is pushing for a prolonged war to make his ratings go up. If the US was not supporting Ukraine there's a good chance this would already be over.

I don't trust anyone who has thinks this is 100% the fault of Russia or 100% the fault of Ukraine. If I had to assign blame I'd say 60-40 Russia.

What's your blame ratio on this?

 

[Madison320]

Why would they do that? It all but guarantees a third Russian invasion.

You can't possibly know that.

 

[acptulsa]

You can't possibly know that.

Someone or something has transformed that account from one that went around telling Team Red that they can't know the crap they like to presume, into one that goes around trying to sell the crap that Team Blue likes to presume.

 

[TheCount]

You can't possibly know that.

The invasion is possible because Ukraine is unable to defend itself against Russian aggression.

And the solution is to make them less able to defend themselves against Russian aggression?


If your neighbor declared that their household was the only household in the area allowed to have guns, and that they would attack anyone else who attempted to purchase guns, would that make you want guns less?

 

[TheCount]

Someone or something has transformed that account from one that went around telling Team Red that they can't know the crap they like to presume, into one that goes around trying to sell the crap that Team Blue likes to presume.

At the point that you're on your third invasion of a neighboring state in 15 years and your second invasion of the same state, you're setting a trend.

 

[TheTexan]

The problem is that you're assuming everything is a known fact. That it's a legitimate secession, that the US decided to crush them under their boot, etc. In reality we usually don't really know any of these things. All we know for sure is one country is militarily crossing into another country. That's why I'm assigning a little more of the blame on Russia.

My interest in the 2020 election fraud stuff started off very casual. I didn't care. I suspected there was probably some fraud. But I was continually being told that this was the fairest election in history... which triggered my bullshit detector. I began to research election fraud, not even because I was interested in the election fraud, but moreso how there can be so much election fraud, and all of it was successfully swept under the rug. I just found that aspect of it fascinating, and it fueled me to research even further. It wasn't a complete waste of time - it was enlightening (and frightening) to realize just how powerful the US media machine is, just how broken the courts are, and how extremely susceptible to brainwashing the American people are. I don't regret the time I spent, as this is valuable knowledge to have.

It's a similar thing with this Ukraine stuff. My bullshit detector was triggered, long ago. And I have been neck deep in research on this shit since basically it started.

Most people are ignorant on this stuff- and that's fine. Few people have the time to waste on this stuff, and for good reason. I'm just trying to give you some context on the amount of time and effort I have spent understanding this conflict.

And I can say with near 100% certainty that Donbass was basically a textbook legitimate secession. Donbass is ethnically Russian, with Russian speakers, and the vast majority of them are pro-Russia. With millions of people, it's large enough to sustain itself as an independent country. They are ethnically and culturally distinct from the people living in Western Ukraine. The Donbass shares a border with Russia, which minimizes any complexities around them possibly joining Russia. They seceded peacefully, without any aggression on their part. Basically every criteria you would expect from a legitimate secession, the Donbass met this criteria.

When they seceded, at first the Ukrainian army was not willing to use violence to pull them back in. They sent up their tanks, but eventually they were ordered to back off and disarm.

It wasn't until the Azov Battalion got involved that real fighting had begun. The Azov Battalion (and right sector in general) have ultra-nationalist views, and have a profound hatred for Russians. They were determined to drive out the people living in Donbass, through violence and political oppression. The Azov were taken into the official Ukraine military, and have since had a growing influence in Ukraine over the past 8 years and have taken up many positions in the Ukrainian government. They have used this influence to shut down businesses in Ukraine, deny pensions to the Donbass population, and otherwise make it impossible to live or work in the Donbass.

And ever since 2014, the Donbass people have been suffering from a genuine genocide. The Azov and the Ukrainians in general (it's not just Azov) are not simply reckless with the aiming of their artillery. They intentionally target and shoot civilians. And they have been doing that for 8 years.

The only reason people have been able to live in the Donbass region at all is because of the food that Russia has been sending to them.

So it should come to no surprise, that they were very happy to hear, that Russia decided to answer their call for help. They did not feel "invaded", but rather relieved.

Either way the US should not be involved, all we are doing is making it worse. Biden is pushing for a prolonged war to make his ratings go up. If the US was not supporting Ukraine there's a good chance this would already be over.

Absolutely, I don't think there's anyone on this board that would disagree.

None of our business, 100%.

I don't trust anyone who has thinks this is 100% the fault of Russia or 100% the fault of Ukraine. If I had to assign blame I'd say 60-40 Russia.

What's your blame ratio on this?

I would put 50% on the US and 50% on Ukraine. 0% on Russia.

The US started this mess, by instigating the 2014 coup which forced Crimea (and later, Donbass) to secede.

Ukraine has a good share of the blame, because they denied the Donbass' right to self determination. They had 0 reason (ZERO) to justify their aggression against DPR/LPR. Their only reason, was to retain the sovereignty of their imaginary borders. Which is not a valid reason, ever.

I put 0% of the blame on Russia, because I can't think of anything Russia has done "wrong".

Maybe Russia has 1% of the blame, for not managing the situation better, to convince Ukraine that maybe they shouldn't be Nazi's? To convince the US/West that they shouldn't be interfering in other countries affairs?

The only thing that Russia has done in this conflict, is recognize the sovereignty of a legitimate secession, and then use force to defend it. There is nothing to "blame" in those actions, nor in his stated intentions. His stated intentions are to help Donbass and that is exactly what he is doing. (Regardless of whatever "evil" motivations are truly behind his decision to help)

 

[acptulsa]

At the point that you're on your third invasion of a neighboring state in 15 years and your second invasion of the same state, you're setting a trend.

I love watching propagandists use the word "invasion". It's so evocative of using a battering ram to bust the front door down that people forget the same term can be legally applied when the homeowner's daughter opens her bedroom window, removes the screen, and says, "Climb on in."

Their only reason, was to retain the sovereignty of their imaginary borders. Which is not a valid reason, ever.

I put 0% of the blame on Russia, because I can't think of anything Russia has done "wrong".

Maybe Russia has 1% of the blame, for not managing the situation better, to convince Ukraine that maybe they shouldn't be Nazi's? To convince the US/West that they shouldn't be interfering in other countries affairs?

When those imaginary lines surround petroleum, the West never fails to make it their business.

 

[TheTexan]

 

[TheCount]

I love watching propagandists use the word "invasion". It's so evocative of using a battering ram to bust the front door down that people forget the same term can be legally applied when the homeowner's daughter opens her bedroom window, removes the screen, and says, "Climb on in."

Well when you're driving tanks down the street from Belarus to Kiev, it sure looks like an invasion to me.


But if it's not an invasion and not a war, then I suppose Ukraine should just summarily execute any Russians they find.

 

[TheTexan]

then I suppose Ukraine should just summarily execute any Russians they find.

They pretty much do