Euromaidan demonstrations & Russia's intervention in Ukraine

Lord Spencer wrote:
I think its more to do with Europe being the under the US's thumb. Otherwise, if Europe was so worried about war with Russia, they wouldn't continue to expand NATO eastward and basically weaponize the border with them.

That being said, if sport is going to be pulled into this, then the murderous US regime and their UK lackeys should be the first to be kicked out. Along with Russia, China, some Gulf states, and any country that currently engage in open or covert warfare.

To suddenly treat one war more important than others sends a signal that other countries' people are less important (or that some aggressors and their allies are untouchable).

Finally, while it makes sense for Europe to take the war more seriously than others, it should be noted that other countries (Japan), international organizations (FIFA), and even supposedly neutral countries that were castrated by the US (Switzerland), have all weighed into this issue when NONE of them paid any attention to US continuous crimes throughout the last 30 years and more.

Well said, fully agree with this

Apparently the BBC News website has been getting millions more visits from Russia. I wonder how long until Putin orders a blockade of foreign news websites?

Art Morte wrote:Apparently the BBC News website has been getting millions more visits from Russia. I wonder how long until Putin orders a blockade of foreign news websites?

I've seen reports Putin is blocking Youtube in russia so people cant watch what actually happens so my guess is not that long

Lord Spencer wrote:To suddenly treat one war more important than others sends a signal that other countries' people are less important (or that some aggressors and their allies are untouchable).

Yes it depends on the perspective and whether the war/conflict directly affects/threatens you or changes your geopolitical situation. You're naive if you think everyone will be treated equally by everyone. It has never in the history of history been the case.

The war in Ukraine has immense significance in terms of the global superpower games namely the so-called West versus Russia+China. Essentially even Ukraine is reduced to a pawn in the big game that the elites play but it definitely has much more meaning politically than war in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East for that matter. It's a harsh reality

Another one of those apart from Ukraine is Taiwan. It's all a game

Besides, it's even more fucked up than that. Look at the 2 World Wars.
USA and Russia are painted as the greatest enemies
but in WW1 they were allies and in WW2 they were allies as well !

USA will wreck your country but their operations are never a direct threat to world peace (as far as i know)

I think Fifa are forced to take a stance against Russia otherwise it would be bad for their image/business. Don't think Infantino cares more about ukrainan lives over irakian lives for example. In private this reptilian pos is probably praying for more innocent victims.

Russians love their VPNs anyway, so I don't expect blocks to do all that much.
ATM they're not trying to curb the whole thing through censorship, they're doing it through intimidation. I got a Russian ex who I'm still friends with, and she's well-networked with Russian expats in Germany, and their social media feeds are blowing up, sharing mistreatment of Russian anti-war protestors in Russia, they're collecting money for Ukraine and for Russian NGOs that want to combat state sponsored propaganda.
The precipice of WWIII aside, it's borderline inspiring what some people are doing ATM.

Myesyats wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:To suddenly treat one war more important than others sends a signal that other countries' people are less important (or that some aggressors and their allies are untouchable).

Yes it depends on the perspective and whether the war/conflict directly affects/threatens you or changes your geopolitical situation. You're naive if you think everyone will be treated equally by everyone. It has never in the history of history been the case.

The war in Ukraine has immense significance in terms of the global superpower games namely the so-called West versus Russia+China. Essentially even Ukraine is reduced to a pawn in the big game that the elites play but it definitely has much more meaning politically than war in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East for that matter. It's a harsh reality

Another one of those apart from Ukraine is Taiwan. It's all a game

Besides, it's even more fucked up than that. Look at the 2 World Wars.
USA and Russia are painted as the greatest enemies
but in WW1 they were allies and in WW2 they were allies as well !

I don't buy that Ukraine is more significant than Iraq, which   sits in top of the oil region of the world and has a lot of geopolitical influence.

Now, even disabled athletes are being banned.

Yemen right now is much worse than what Ukraine could ever become (hopefully Ukraine doesn't see a fraction of what happened in Yemen), and no party in the war, including the US and UK are getting any ramifications because of it.

Ah , and I was thinking  ... This situation is hiding some potential but very dangerous side effect in Ukraina

Jihadists Chechen ( merchernaries ,  basically  it was enough to pay them) have been sent to fight by Russia

In support of the filo-Russian Donbass   there are the worst neo-nazi dregs from all over Europe  , i (the mythical "denazification" entrusted to the Nazis, the Putin cyrcus ).

And other groups as The Wagner Group

In support of the Ukrainians other militiamen are arriving, including suspicious people from Croatia
Moreover Zelenski  announced  to free and arm all detainees who 're available  to fight

Basically Ukraine is becoming  hideous gathering of totally uncontrollable and armed people.
When it wull all over, how will we bring back them into line ?

There's the risk to create a "new Afghanistan" in Ukrain, a country subjugated from lords of wars, a school for foreign fighters, but in the middle of Europe .

LS first off let me say I broadly agree, politics and football should remain separate and kicking out Russia while not condemning or taking similar action on prior invasions is hugely hypocritical.

That said, while I think Iraq and Ukraine are comparable, I don't think they're quite equal, and I think there's valid reasons for why 'the west' is reacting more strongly to this than to other US-based conflicts (beyond the fact that they're allied to the US).

In Iraq the US went in under false pretenses but the objective was always regime change and establishing a friendly democracy to the west. Ultimately the conflict was limited to just Iraq and Iraqi people would get to decide how to approach their future. It was a huge catastrophe still.

At a surface level, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is similar (regime change in Ukraine for a friendlier government to Russia). But there's some important differences:

1.Russia is denying Ukraine's right to exist. Putin has been very clear he thinks Ukraine is not a real country and just a mistake of history.
2. Russia is denying that there is a Ukrainian people, arguing that Russians and Ukrainians are "one people" and as such have no right to self determination or their own culture. This is cultural cleansing, one of the components of genocide.
3. This now establishes a trend of Russia carving up neighboring states. First in 2008 with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, then in 2014 with Crimea and the 2 eastern provinces of Ukraine, and now with the entirety of Ukraine. So the scope of this conflict is not Ukraine itself, but rather what Putin will do if he is allowed to continue down this path. This could very realistically go down the path of WW3.
4. He has threatened the world with nuclear war! Even if just threats, they are already causing more countries to consider arming up, putting the entire world at risk.

So I think there's a lot more to it than just that Ukraine is close to major European countries and white, and valid reasons for the difference in reaction. Not that I'm excusing the lack of action for prior US-led conflicts, but the scope is clearly not the same here and many countries that might not have cared about Iraq's invasion feel personally threatened but Ukraine's invasion.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:LS first off let me say I broadly agree, politics and football should remain separate and kicking out Russia while not condemning or taking similar action on prior invasions is hugely hypocritical.

That said, while I think Iraq and Ukraine are comparable, I don't think they're quite equal, and I think there's valid reasons for why 'the west' is reacting more strongly to this than to other US-based conflicts (beyond the fact that they're allied to the US).

In Iraq the US went in under false pretenses but the objective was always regime change and establishing a friendly democracy to the west. Ultimately the conflict was limited to just Iraq and Iraqi people would get to decide how to approach their future. It was a huge catastrophe still.

At a surface level, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is similar (regime change in Ukraine for a friendlier government to Russia). But there's some important differences:

1.Russia is denying Ukraine's right to exist. Putin has been very clear he thinks Ukraine is not a real country and just a mistake of history.
2. Russia is denying that there is a Ukrainian people, arguing that Russians and Ukrainians are "one people" and as such have no right to self determination or their own culture. This is cultural cleansing, one of the components of genocide.
3. This now establishes a trend of Russia carving up neighboring states. First in 2008 with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, then in 2014 with Crimea and the 2 eastern provinces of Ukraine, and now with the entirety of Ukraine. So the scope of this conflict is not Ukraine itself, but rather what Putin will do if he is allowed to continue down this path. This could very realistically go down the path of WW3.
4. He has threatened the world with nuclear war! Even if just threats, they are already causing more countries to consider arming up, putting the entire world at risk.

So I think there's a lot more to it than just that Ukraine is close to major European countries and white, and valid reasons for the difference in reaction. Not that I'm excusing the lack of action for prior US-led conflicts, but the scope is clearly not the same here and many countries that might not have cared about Iraq's invasion feel personally threatened but Ukraine's invasion.

I broadly agree on all political actions (sanctions, pulling ambassadors, arming Ukraine, etc.). And clearly see how Ukraine is much important to Europe than Iraq (although that ended up fucking up everyone)

For me, it is the difference in symbolic action that is shocking. Simply, either all conflicts are treated the same, to be roundly condemned by the international community, and sporting and arts boycotted, or nothing at all.

That sounds simplistic, and it is. However, when the reactions are vastly different, it does signal a difference in the value of the victims. Yemen has been a n ongoing war for years, and Saudi and it's allies (US UKh were rarely condemned for it. This is surprisingly openly discussed in the way Ukrainian refugees are discussed as "like us" in the media. It even manifests in the I'll treatment of African Ukrainian refugees on the borders.

Generally speaking, I think it is extremely wrong to boycott cultural and sporting efforts. The absurdity of this situation manifested on the cancellation of UK Russian ballets (in which many of the dancers were not even Russian) and the banning of the Russian Paralympics team (contradicting every charter on the human rights of the disabled in the world). Imagine the level of pettiness that it takes to stop a disabled person from competing for something they were probably told to do for their entire life. What next, burning Tolstoy books?

This showcases a difference in treatment not only of victims, but of Russians themselves, which Europeans have historically viewed as an interior and backwards race.

On the war itself, I reject the Western framing of it. Simply let, I don't think it would have happened if the US committed to not including Ukraine in NATO (like they did before, but when have the US kept it's word) and the Ukraine government stuck to the Minsk accords (which it is documented as flagrantly contradicting). This was a non-nuclear (hopefully it remains that way) Cuban middle crisis in which the US didn't back down, and basically invited Russia to fuck itself with war.

It should be noted that Ukraine's policy of arming it's own citizens, basically turning them into human shields, would have been roundly condemned by European nations in any other situation. But they are probably happy now that they are being sacrificed to bring down Putin.

Finally, I think that the financial sanctions will only strengthen Putin, and that the Sporting and Cultural boycotts will advance his "us vs them" mentality. I wonder if the West are too stupid to see that, or if the US loves having a boogeyman to advance all their weapon sales. My money is on the latter since Islamic terrorism is.out of fashion.

Myesyats wrote:Essentially even Ukraine is reduced to a pawn in the big game that the elites play but it definitely has much more meaning politically than war in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East for that matter. It's a harsh reality

Nope, not really. The only difference between the Iraq war and the Ukrainian one is the name of the invader. The US can do anything they want with no repercussion, because all of their allies will shut their mouths and will continue to turn a blind eye to whatever atrocity the US/allies do. That's the harsh reality.

More than one million Iraqis have died because the world's number #1 bully decided along with their allies to invade a country under false pretenses. One freaking million.

They did enough irreparable damage to deserve a lifetime of sanctions. Yet nothing happened to them. It really helps when you're the judge, jury and executioner.

The Ukraine conflict is given more importance because the one pulling the trigger is not the US or one of its allies.

Think of them as a club. A private club comprised of sadistic, vile members.

As a member of that club, you can bomb Iraq and Afghanistan back to the stone age with no sanctions. You can watch Israel ethnically cleanse an entire population while committing the worst crimes against humanity imaginable in the process and none of them will raise a finger. But if god forbid Israel is touched by a sad missile, all hell breaks lose.

You can fuck Iraq, fuck Libya, fuck Syria and fuck Afghanistan with no sanctions. But if you so much as lay a finger on Ukraine, they'lljump in because the invader this time is not them, it's their arch enemy.

That's the harsh reality my friend.

To me Ukraine is exactly like Iraq, a country that did nothing yet it found itself fighting a war. Except for one thing: Iraq was standing alone.

You guys speak from the heart and i agree with you on a moral standpoint.

I just think the situation should be seen for what it is.

The balance of power lies within Nato's hands. America and Europe is supposedly the pillar of civilization that must be protected at all cost. Nato members don't intervene in USA's interests in places such as Irak because they don't care about them nor their neighbors. The risk to anger USA is not worth it. Yet they retaliate severely when Putin starts a war close to their territory. And it's not because ukrainians lives are worth more, they are worth equally nothing, if Ukraine was a muslim country the boycott would be the same. It's because Putin must be stopped now, the goal here is to prevent a cold war II

In the precise case of an european country being invaded by Russia, no sanctions would be seen as weakness and tolerance, an incentive for Putin to keep going further west.

If Putin invaded let's say Kazakhstan instead, there would be no sanctions, nobody would talk at all. Such country is not close enough to the balance of power which is the territories of Nato.

Saddam Hussein was a murderer, the USA are murderers, Israel are murderers, Palestine defend themselves, Yemen and Syria are ravaged by the war. All sad facts but none of that is a threat to world peace as long there is no escalation... that's why each mind their own business

Warrior wrote:You guys speak from the heart and i agree with you on a moral standpoint.

I just think the situation should be seen for what it is.

The balance of power lies within Nato's hands. America and Europe is supposedly the pillar of civilization that must be protected at all cost. Nato members don't intervene in USA's interests in places such as Irak because they don't care about them nor their neighbors. The risk to anger USA is not worth it. Yet they retaliate severely when Putin starts a war close to their territory. And it's not because ukrainians lives are worth more, they are worth equally nothing, if Ukraine was a muslim country the boycott would be the same. It's because Putin must be stopped now, the goal here is to prevent a cold war II

In the precise case of an european country being invaded by Russia, no sanctions would be seen as weakness and tolerance, an incentive for Putin to keep going further west.

If Putin invaded let's say Kazakhstan instead, there would be no sanctions, nobody would talk at all. Such country is not close enough to the balance of power which is the territories of Nato.

Saddam Hussein was a murderer, the USA are murderers, Israel are murderers, Palestine defend themselves, Yemen and Syria are ravaged by the war. All sad facts but none of that is a threat to world peace as long there is no escalation... that's why each mind their own business

From a point of viewnof escalation, I agree that Ukraine could potentially lead to a wider war. Which is exactly why not shouldn't be part of NATO and Becky a neutral zone.

The West trying to get Ukraine join NATO and basically have a border beret NATO and Russia partially provoked the war.

Also, it should be noted that the USSR and Russia both offered to join NATO and we're refused, thereby proving that it exit as a hostile anti-Russia bloc.

The Demon of Carthage wrote:

Myesyats wrote:Essentially even Ukraine is reduced to a pawn in the big game that the elites play but it definitely has much more meaning politically than war in Syria or anywhere in the Middle East for that matter. It's a harsh reality

Nope, not really. The only difference between the Iraq war and the Ukrainian one is the name of the invader. The US can do anything they want with no repercussion, because all of their allies will shut their mouths and will continue to turn a blind eye to whatever atrocity the US/allies do. That's the harsh reality.

More than one million Iraqis have died because the world's number #1 bully decided along with their allies to invade a country under false pretenses. One freaking million.

They did enough irreparable damage to deserve a lifetime of sanctions. Yet nothing happened to them. It really helps when you're the judge, jury and executioner.

The Ukraine conflict is given more importance because the one pulling the trigger is not the US or one of its allies.

Think of them as a club. A private club comprised of sadistic, vile members.

As a member of that club, you can bomb Iraq and Afghanistan back to the stone age with no sanctions. You can watch Israel ethnically cleanse an entire population while committing the worst crimes against humanity imaginable in the process and none of them will raise a finger. But if god forbid Israel is touched by a sad missile, all hell breaks lose.

You can fuck Iraq, fuck Libya, fuck Syria and fuck Afghanistan with no sanctions. But if you so much as lay a finger on Ukraine, they'lljump in because the invader this time is not them, it's their arch enemy.

That's the harsh reality my friend.

To me Ukraine is exactly like Iraq, a country that did nothing yet it found itself fighting a war. Except for one thing: Iraq was standing alone.

I cant say I disagree but my point was one of balance of power as @Warrior mentioned. The Ukraine war may lead to a bigger war which directly threatens NATO whereas that doesn't happen in a Iraq type situation.

Fire breaks out at Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant located in Zaporizhzhya. Ukraine’s foreign minister is now confirming reports of the fire at the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, warning an explosion could have devastating consequences.

— Velina Tchakarova (@vtchakarova) March 4, 2022

Another video from the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. 2/https://t.co/e2ZSJJfSFU pic.twitter.com/gSf9vHfShC

— Rob Lee (@RALee85) March 4, 2022

Differences between Irak and Ukraine:

-  One's in Europe.  The other is in the Middle East.  Saddam Hussein was disrupting the oil business; so none of the neighbors were all that upset to see him go.
-  The US isn't located next to Irak.  There was no worry of US making land grabs.  It was purely a war to maintain the flow of black oil.
-  Irak was a brutal dictatorship.  No doubt about that.  It wasn't a democracy.  So you weren't overthrowing a democratically elected government.
-  Irak was the one making threats to its neighbors and the West.  Not the other way around.  Ukraine never threatened anyone.

Etc.

So although both invasions are illegitimate, the reasons are very different.

Lord Spencer wrote:

Warrior wrote:You guys speak from the heart and i agree with you on a moral standpoint.

I just think the situation should be seen for what it is.

The balance of power lies within Nato's hands. America and Europe is supposedly the pillar of civilization that must be protected at all cost. Nato members don't intervene in USA's interests in places such as Irak because they don't care about them nor their neighbors. The risk to anger USA is not worth it. Yet they retaliate severely when Putin starts a war close to their territory. And it's not because ukrainians lives are worth more, they are worth equally nothing, if Ukraine was a muslim country the boycott would be the same. It's because Putin must be stopped now, the goal here is to prevent a cold war II

In the precise case of an european country being invaded by Russia, no sanctions would be seen as weakness and tolerance, an incentive for Putin to keep going further west.

If Putin invaded let's say Kazakhstan instead, there would be no sanctions, nobody would talk at all. Such country is not close enough to the balance of power which is the territories of Nato.

Saddam Hussein was a murderer, the USA are murderers, Israel are murderers, Palestine defend themselves, Yemen and Syria are ravaged by the war. All sad facts but none of that is a threat to world peace as long there is no escalation... that's why each mind their own business

From a point of viewnof escalation, I agree that Ukraine could potentially lead to a wider war. Which is exactly why not shouldn't be part of NATO and Becky a neutral zone.

The West trying to get Ukraine join NATO and basically have a border beret NATO and Russia partially provoked the war.

Also, it should be noted that the USSR and Russia both offered to join NATO and we're refused, thereby proving that it exit as a hostile anti-Russia bloc.

The west didnt try to get Ukraine to join NATO.

It was not going to happen. They aren't even eligible to join NATO and some of the members had flat out refused to entertain the conversation.

Ukraine is a sovereign country, if they want to join to join NATO or eu they are free to want that. Russia cannot hold them hostage out of imperialistic desires.

I think saying that nato prompted this war really misses the mark.

This is Putin trying to stop Ukraine from existing as a country. He sees Ukraine's sovereignty as a "historical mistake" and a country that Russia created. He says it clearly enough.

Blaming any of this on NATO is a lazy and dumb analysis. NATO is a defensive alliance that lies dormant unless a member is attacked. NATO was never, ever going to attack Russia. Ukraine wasn't even close to gaining NATO membership; indeed they didn't even meet the criteria. Putin knew all this. Blaming NATO is just convenient for his domestic propaganda - sad that it works on other people, too, apparently.

For the sake of argument, let's physically swap the places of Europe and USA. So, now the states from Florida down south to Maine up north share a land border with Russia. Would anyone argue that "well, these states are otherwise part of the USA, but when it comes to military and security, they have to be on their own, not part of the wider armed forces of the USA, to keep Russia happy." ? Obviously no one would argue that. So why do people argue that for independent European nations?

If Putin can't handle that countries at his borders form defensive alliances to maximize their security, that is 100% Putin's problem and 100% of this war in Ukraine is on Putin. Anything else is appeasement and it doesn't work on dictators. Didn't work on Hitler, doesn't work on Putin.

Indian right wing media at its best,

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/india/mcadams-times-now-rahul-shivshankar-ukraine-b2028323.html

Lucifer wrote:Indian right wing media at its best,

https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/india/mcadams-times-now-rahul-shivshankar-ukraine-b2028323.html

We are jokers lmao glad people are seeing on an international level. Teja Mai hu, Mark idhar Hai moment

Lord Spencer wrote:For me, it is the difference in symbolic action that is shocking. Simply, either all conflicts are treated the same, to be roundly condemned by the international community, and sporting and arts boycotted, or nothing at all.

That sounds simplistic, and it is. However, when the reactions are vastly different, it does signal a difference in the value of the victims. Yemen has been a n ongoing war for years, and Saudi and it's allies (US UKh were rarely condemned for it. This is surprisingly openly discussed in the way Ukrainian refugees are discussed as "like us" in the media. It even manifests in the I'll treatment of African Ukrainian refugees on the borders.

I think you're on to something here. Clearly the fact that Ukrainians are "like us" is a big factor here. I just don't think it's the only factor, or even the most important one. The escalation & threat of WW3, the distance to Europe, etc that all matters too, and for a big international reaction like this I think it matters more than just the fact that they're "like us".

One thing we haven't mentioned is that Iraq was in the pre-smart phone era, and now we are getting live updates from the ground from thousands of sources. I think this matters too when eliciting empathy from other countries. When the US abandoned Afghanistan we did see a huge amount of empathy towards them, their women and so on, and it was largely because we could see it happening rather than having hazy concept of it. I wonder how the world would react to the Iraq war now if we could see how it impacted ordinary Iraqis.

Lord Spencer wrote:I broadly agree on all political actions (sanctions, pulling ambassadors, arming Ukraine, etc.). And clearly see how Ukraine is much important to Europe than Iraq (although that ended up fucking up everyone)

Generally speaking, I think it is extremely wrong to boycott cultural and sporting efforts. The absurdity of this situation manifested on the cancellation of UK Russian ballets (in which many of the dancers were not even Russian) and the banning of the Russian Paralympics team (contradicting every charter on the human rights of the disabled in the world). Imagine the level of pettiness that it takes to stop a disabled person from competing for something they were probably told to do for their entire life. What next, burning Tolstoy books?

This showcases a difference in treatment not only of victims, but of Russians themselves, which Europeans have historically viewed as an interior and backwards race.

In this we're in complete agreement.

Lord Spencer wrote:On the war itself, I reject the Western framing of it. Simply let, I don't think it would have happened if the US committed to not including Ukraine in NATO (like they did before, but when have the US kept it's word) and the Ukraine government stuck to the Minsk accords (which it is documented as flagrantly contradicting). This was a non-nuclear (hopefully it remains that way) Cuban middle crisis in which the US didn't back down, and basically invited Russia to fuck itself with war.

It should be noted that Ukraine's policy of arming it's own citizens, basically turning them into human shields, would have been roundly condemned by European nations in any other situation. But they are probably happy now that they are being sacrificed to bring down Putin.

Finally, I think that the financial sanctions will only strengthen Putin, and that the Sporting and Cultural boycotts will advance his "us vs them" mentality. I wonder if the West are too stupid to see that, or if the US loves having a boogeyman to advance all their weapon sales. My money is on the latter since Islamic terrorism is.out of fashion.

I already talked about this at length in previous posts, but honestly I don't think it holds water, and it defers to Ukraine being a no-country only useful as a buffer state rather than it's own country with it's own wants and needs, I refuse to see it through that lens.

Myesyats wrote:

Art Morte wrote:Apparently the BBC News website has been getting millions more visits from Russia. I wonder how long until Putin orders a blockade of foreign news websites?

I've seen reports Putin is blocking Youtube in russia so people cant watch what actually happens so my guess is not that long

Yeah, they blocked Facebook, Twitter and BBC (they had a Russian service) today. It's very much propaganda for starters, main and dessert in Russia now.

Spence they already are taking away the study of Dostoevsky in some western universities and get ready for this...took Disney's Anastasia off some streaming channels

Yes that and your Ukraine Facebook profile pics will stop Putin.

Well deserved for Dostoevsky that's what you get for approving this war....

A famous dish where i'm from is called poutine (english lads would love this gastronomy)

Some french guy liked it so much he opened a poutine restaurant in France and now he receives death threats people are dumb

For real? Quebecians are a special breed

Poutine is overrated btw, never got the hype.
Great drunk food tho