Russia invades Ukraine

giratina said:
1) On the internet, everybody is glorifying the Ukrainians who are fighting Russia back and calling them Heroes and supporting them in fighting Russians (And to make it clear I agree that they should fight back and not give their homes for free). On the contrary, I saw no such things for Irak people when they manage to kill American soldiers or destroy their vehicles. If anything, they probably were called terrorists, I am not sure tho. Why didn't the western people support (with thoughts and prayers at least) the Irak people in fighting back the Americans ? Why didn't they call them Heroes ?
Click to expand...

Because the resistance in Iraq was very, very different. We knew that from the get-go. We all knew that the Iraqi people were living under the brutal dictatorship of Saddam and we knew that they would not be very supportive of him when shit would hit the fan; but we also knew that once Saddam was gone, the various social, ethnic and religious groups of Iraq would turn on each other and the region would collapse to chaos. Nobody in the west ever liked or supported Saddam, we knew what a terrible person he was, but we also knew that war was not the right way to get rid of him. The ordinary Iraqi population wasn't actually resisting; the regular Iraqi forces folded very quickly. The guys who ended up leading the insurgency were for the most part radical Islamists. Really bad people, who were ready to send their own children to death for the glory of Allah. Unlike the people in Ukraine today, they weren't fighting for democracy, and a lot of them weren't even fighting for their own people. That's why we didn't consider them heroes.

giratina said:
2) Everybody is making Putin look like a super villain almost on the same level as Hitler and saying that he should be removed / exciled / jailed, but when George Bush did the same people were much more forgiving (I know he is still hated to this day, but not to the same level as Putin), they even elected him again in 2004. I understand that Putin is a dictator, and Bush was not, but still, it seems strange to me.
Click to expand...

Obvious reason: Because Bush was a democratically elected head of state (the elections were problematic, but he did leave after eight years), whereas Putin only pretends to be. However:

iu
iu
iu


I have more where that came from.

giratina said:
3) People are almost not allowed to say that they support Russia, I have seen on LinkedIn some Indian CEO or executive sayting that he supports Russia and Putin, because when the West turned against India, Russia supported India. I have seen people calling him out in the comments saying that this is disgraceful (some people disagreed with him respectfully tho). Did people who supported Bush or USA back then receive the same amount of criticism ? As far as I know, No.
Click to expand...

There is more at play here. Russia has been internationally isolated for years, it is a country that subdues its own population. Critics of Putin have been murdered. The Ukraine War was essentially the last straw, but Putin was a pariah before that. Putin had started a war in Georgia before this and he illegally annexed Crimea. The protests weren't this hard, then. It's a cumulation of outrage at many, many, many years of Putin despising international law and showing his contempt for independent nations.
The Iraq War was wrong and I still think Bush was a monster for having started it - but he left office after eight years (Putin has been in power for 22 years now), and the Iraq War was very, very different in many ways from the one in Ukraine.
 
Yax said:
You have already been showered in them yet keep resorting to whataboutism. Why does everybody hate Hitler so much? Look at the 30 year war in the 17th century. Look at Carolus Rex. That is the essence of your argument and it is tiresome. In the spirit of your whataboutism I contributed with a straw man argument. You are welcome.
Click to expand...
This is not a whataboutism because I am not supporting russia, all I am saying is that I find the general opinion of the prople on the internet is more forgiving to the USA/NATO/West and harsher on other powers like Russia.
 
I mean, a lot of people on the internet are from USA/NATO/West, but at the end of the day, it comes down to this, for me: the Western order has made many, many mistakes, gotten into dumb/bad/illegal wars, and they have a whole pile of massive problems with the social order and a hundred other things.

But in general, when a leader loses an election, they leave. When a court rules someone is harming another person, the harm ceases. When a reporter reports on something that hurts someone in power, they are free to report the next story.

So despite the mistakes and harms caused by USA/NATO etc, I am still on their side because, well, at the end of the day, I am vastly more free than someone in Russia or China or Belarus. Afghanistan was run by a religious caliphate that repressed their own people and executed anyone against them brutally and Iraq run by a brutal dictator who used chemical weapons on Kurds.

Ukraine has a host of problems. There's a current of neo-Nazis that have too much power, there's a huge amount of corruption, and there's a lot of uncomfortable stuff in their past. But they were given a choice. Russia gave them a Putin-style dictator, and they overwhelmingly rejected him. They had an election where they could choose their path, and they overwhelmingly chose the man who wanted to join EU and NATO. And for that choice, for trying to be better and grow as a nation, Ukraine is being punished.

That is why the West is so solidly in support of Ukraine. They chose to grow and become more like the ideals of what we want, and Putin is trying to cut off their head for it.
 
Perun said:
Because the resistance in Iraq was very, very different. We knew that from the get-go. We all knew that the Iraqi people were living under the brutal dictatorship of Saddam and we knew that they would not be very supportive of him when shit would hit the fan; but we also knew that once Saddam was gone, the various social, ethnic and religious groups of Iraq would turn on each other and the region would collapse to chaos. Nobody in the west ever liked or supported Saddam, we knew what a terrible person he was, but we also knew that war was not the right way to get rid of him. The ordinary Iraqi population wasn't actually resisting; the regular Iraqi forces folded very quickly. The guys who ended up leading the insurgency were for the most part radical Islamists. Really bad people, who were ready to send their own children to death for the glory of Allah. Unlike the people in Ukraine today, they weren't fighting for democracy, and a lot of them weren't even fighting for their own people. That's why we didn't consider them heroes.
Click to expand...
I think there was not that much resistance because it was brutalized by the US forces. I have seen recently videos of crowds in Ukrain walking down Russian soldiers, and the Russian soldiers were backing up. This would never have happened in Iraq. And I think if Russia used the same brutality as USA, there would not be much resistance in Ukrain. In Ukrain we can see a tragic view of a destroyed civilians building here and there. In Irak ir Syria we can see entier cities in ruins. It was a very different type of resistance in Iraq because It was a very different type of occupation. I am sure Iraq people would have resisted more if they had the chance, but they could not.

Perun said:
Obvious reason: Because Bush was a democratically elected head of state (the elections were problematic, but he did leave after eight years), whereas Putin only pretends to be. However:

iu
iu
iu


I have more where that came from.
Click to expand...

Yes this is a good point, if this point of view about Bush is mainstream enough. I was not aware that people compared him to Hitler.

Perun said:
There is more at play here. Russia has been internationally isolated for years, it is a country that subdues its own population. Critics of Putin have been murdered. The Ukraine War was essentially the last straw, but Putin was a pariah before that. Putin had started a war in Georgia before this and he illegally annexed Crimea. The protests weren't this hard, then. It's a cumulation of outrage at many, many, many years of Putin despising international law and showing his contempt for independent nations.
Click to expand...

This is also a good point that I was not aware of.
 
russia how do you like it?
Japan has declared today that the southern Kurils is their sovereign territory. The Prime Minister of Japan Fumio Kishida announced it during his speech in the parliament on March 7,–JIJI reports

edit: maybe, not entirely correct quote, but he mentioned Kurils, and that southern islands belongs to Japan.
 
Last edited:
giratina said:
I think there was not that much resistance because it was brutalized by the US forces. I have seen recently videos of crowds in Ukrain walking down Russian soldiers, and the Russian soldiers were backing up. This would never have happened in Iraq. And I think if Russia used the same brutality as USA, there would not be much resistance in Ukrain. In Ukrain we can see a tragic view of a destroyed civilians building here and there. In Irak ir Syria we can see entier cities in ruins. It was a very different type of resistance in Iraq because It was a very different type of occupation. I am sure Iraq people would have resisted more if they had the chance, but they could not.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this. The Russian attack on Ukraine is far more brutal than the American one on Iraq was. The Americans targeted military and government facilities; of course they also hit civilians, but this was not the aim. This is in fact one of the main reasons why I'm against any kind of military strike, no matter how hard you try to make it "surgical", you will always hit innocents.
Russia is targeting civilians, big time. The reason why Ukrainian cities are not entirely in ruins yet is because the war has only been going on for a few days. Most observers believe that the full assaults on major cities such as Kiev are still coming up. Probably those cities will look very different in one or two week's time.
The cities of Iraq and Syria are in ruins because they have experienced 10+ years of war. In the case of Iraq, it was the American invasion that triggered it, but it was for the most part factions in the ongoing civil war that destroyed them. Syria on the other hand has had a civil war since 2011 and the American impact was negligible; it was various domestic factions, the Syrian government under Assad, and indeed, Assad's ally Russia who are responsible for most of it.
There is another thing. Yes, American troops committed war crimes in Iraq, but they were held accountable for it by their own government. The investigations weren't as thorough as they should have been in every case, but there was enough public pressure to not just sweep it under the carpet. There are no proven cases of war crimes in Ukraine yet, but that is just a matter of time, because it happens in any war. There certainly are plenty of allegations already. And the Russian government is certainly not going to investigate them.
 
LooseCannon said:
I mean, a lot of people on the internet are from USA/NATO/West, but at the end of the day, it comes down to this, for me: the Western order has made many, many mistakes, gotten into dumb/bad/illegal wars, and they have a whole pile of massive problems with the social order and a hundred other things.

But in general, when a leader loses an election, they leave. When a court rules someone is harming another person, the harm ceases. When a reporter reports on something that hurts someone in power, they are free to report the next story.

So despite the mistakes and harms caused by USA/NATO etc, I am still on their side because, well, at the end of the day, I am vastly more free than someone in Russia or China or Belarus. Afghanistan was run by a religious caliphate that repressed their own people and executed anyone against them brutally and Iraq run by a brutal dictator who used chemical weapons on Kurds.

Ukraine has a host of problems. There's a current of neo-Nazis that have too much power, there's a huge amount of corruption, and there's a lot of uncomfortable stuff in their past. But they were given a choice. Russia gave them a Putin-style dictator, and they overwhelmingly rejected him. They had an election where they could choose their path, and they overwhelmingly chose the man who wanted to join EU and NATO. And for that choice, for trying to be better and grow as a nation, Ukraine is being punished.

That is why the West is so solidly in support of Ukraine. They chose to grow and become more like the ideals of what we want, and Putin is trying to cut off their head for it.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree with what you say, living in USA/NATO/West is better than living in the Saddam regim for example. And also the West is way more democratic than other counties.

I understand what you said about the fact that USA supposedly "liberated" Irak and left, and is not intending to comeback to put in place a government of their choice (the thing that Russia is trying to do in Ukrain now that their initial puppet government was regected). But I would much rather live in Iraq pre 2003 in Saddam regim than post 2003 in an elected democratic govenment (if they have one).

My initial question was about the fact that I felt that it is more acceptable (according to the internet) to the West to start a war, than it is for another country like Russia. I start to see some differences between this Russian invasion, and other recent invasions from the West. But I am still not convinced 100% yet so I will have to look more into it.
 
giratina said:
Yes this is a good point, if this point of view about Bush is mainstream enough. I was not aware that people compared him to Hitler.
Click to expand...
Prior to Trump, George W. Bush had been the poster child for presidential overreach in the post-Nixon era, making the first feints toward demonizing the free press, setting up the Guantanamo Bay prison camp, approving the use of torture against enemy combatants, and making lame excuses to justify unnecessary wars. Many people were disgusted by his behavior, especially in light of his questionable electoral win. Hitler comparisons were hyperbolic, but not uncommon.

Of course, George W. seems rather quaint by comparison after Trump's presidency, since Bush still believes in the general concept of the republic.
 
giratina said:
My initial question was about the fact that I felt that it is more acceptable (according to the internet) to the West to start a war, than it is for another country like Russia. I start to see some differences between this Russian invasion, and other recent invasions from the West. But I am still not convinced 100% yet so I will have to look more into it.
Click to expand...
Starting a war is almost always a shitty thing to do. Finishing a war can be anything between shitty and noble, depending on the circumstances.

Fighting a war to topple a dictatorship is pretty much always going to be less shitty than fighting a war to topple a democracy. I think that's the main apple vs. orange difference here. When you overthrow a dictator, there's at least a chance that something better may sprout up in their place. When you overthrow a democracy, you're pretty much guaranteeing a worse outcome.
 
"There are times, young fellah, when every one of us must make a stand for human right and justice, or you never feel clean again."
Arthur Conan Doyle, The Lost World​
 
MDJackson_rousingspeech_3.jpg
Sons of Gondor!

Of Rohan!

My brothers.

I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me.

A day may come when the courage of Men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day.

An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the Age of Men comes crashing down, but it is not this day!

This day we fight!

By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!
 
Last edited:
giratina said:
I understand what you said about the fact that USA supposedly "liberated" Irak and left, and is not intending to comeback to put in place a government of their choice (the thing that Russia is trying to do in Ukrain now that their initial puppet government was regected). But I would much rather live in Iraq pre 2003 in Saddam regim than post 2003 in an elected democratic govenment (if they have one).
Click to expand...
There's a lot of shades of grey in here, of course. First, the USA seemed to really believe their own bullshit about how all you have to do is remove the dictators and a beautiful democracy will spring up. They (and the modern day Republicans) have forgotten that democracies are messy, dirty, difficult things that require us to educate our populace and fight to maintain. They were legitimately shocked.

And as for living in Iraq pre or post 2003, it depends on who you are. For some people today is a lot worse. For the Kurds, I think they like today better.

But that's still whataboutism. The Ukrainian people are almost completely united. There was no threat to Russia, none. Ukraine chose to reject them for other countries, and for that, death and bloodshed.
 
LooseCannon said:
First, the USA seemed to really believe their own bullshit about how all you have to do is remove the dictators and a beautiful democracy will spring up. They (and the modern day Republicans) have forgotten that democracies are messy, dirty, difficult things that require us to educate our populace and fight to maintain. They were legitimately shocked.
Click to expand...
If by “the USA” you mean “the George W. Bush administration”, then yes. If you mean the populace at large, then I think you’re painting with far too broad a brush. Most thinking people were under no illusions about the difficulty of trying to establish stable democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq.
 
Okay, can we leave the straw man be now and return to focus on Ukraine?
 
Looks like Biden is going to announce an oil ban today ... I hope, as reported as an option to replace that oil, there is not a lift of the ban on Venezuela.

www.politico.com

Biden bans Russian oil under pressure from Congress

Inside the White House, there's concern about the economic fallout. But momentum to shut off imports built fast on the Hill and within the administration.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
 
Perun said:
@giratina I greatly appreciate that you're actually reading our responses and engaging with our arguments, and admitting when you see you might have been wrong about some things. This is something rarely seen these days.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the first time ever seen on the internet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top