He was not elected for comedy, but because of the personality and promises. It's all about did they keep their promises. He failed to do so. Whose fault is that? — FreeEmotion
Ukraine's defenders are fighting for Helsinki. Putin has sent his troops in to impose a modern version of Yalta - which would kill off Ukraine's independence and leave it under Russian domination. — paraphrasing Timothy Garton Ash
Plus, Russia does have a parliament, Putin’s approval ratings went up after the annexation of Crimea and he’s still got the backing of the majority of voters. There is some opposition, but there are many who are 100% behind him on Ukraine. — Apollodorus
Ukraine is winning at least in the West the information war. It was totally different in the confusion of 2014. And it has to be said that a lot of things were different then. And you can see how much better Zelensky is in his role compared to the mayor of Kiev or the former president Poroshenko, who also is frequently interviewed by Western media.I will say that the quips about Zelensky being an ex-comedian somehow a bad thing is dumb and classist. I want more comedians, baristas, garbage people, dance teachers and brick layers in positions of power, as a general rule. If anything Zelensky's sense for the dramatic has been an absolute boon to Ukraine in this war, even if people are really so thick as to take it at sheer face value. But that's not Zelensky's fault. — StreetlightX
And when you never, ever utter anything negative or critical about someone, it tells who you are. — ssu
And Zelensky is also living proof that Ukrainians were totally and absolutely disgusted with their political class and it's corruption. — ssu
And Zelensky is also living proof that Ukrainians were totally and absolutely disgusted with their political class and it's corruption. — ssu
It is citizens that support war as a means of foreign policy that are morally wrong. Aggressive war, that is. — FreeEmotion
Yep. That accurately describes your position on NATO. — Apollodorus
NATO went into finding "a new mission" for itself with "peace-enforcement" and if the intervention to Bosnia was somehow tolerated by Russia, what was the end point was the Kosovo war. That broke the camel's back and you had the first direct confrontation between Russia. I think that was the time it all went south, so don't assume Russia would even want to be an ally of the US. NATO enlargement was one thing, but an active NATO not only confined to defending itself and having it's members not to fight each other, but active somewhere else was the issue (do note for example that the Gulf War wasn't a NATO mission). — ssu
And the last failure was George Bush promising something that simply couldn't be kept: that Ukraine and Georgia would become NATO members in some time. Like later. As Ukraine had, uh, a lot of problems.[/qutote]
— ssu
And as I discussed with @Isaac, yes, NATO made errors. Starting from thinking that Russia wouldn't return and that the times had changed since the Cold War and that if they in NATO saw themselves as being different from the Cold War version of the organization, leaders in the Kremlin wouldn't view them like that, but as the old NATO. Yet that's just one side of the issue. — ssu
I think that if Zelensky worked in Ukrainian media making films, there likely was an oligarch owning the media. Hence that part is the usual mudslinging as Ukrainians hate oligarchs: Just look at how our forum troll never forgets to repeat the name of the oligarch when mentioning Zelensky.Which is funny because before Zelensky got elevated to Western liberal Saint, he wasn't seen - even by the West - as a squeaky clean guy either. — StreetlightX
One shouldn't feed a troll, but anyway.BTW I still haven't seen you criticizing Turkey (a NATO member!) for invading Cyprus and Kurdish territories in Syria. — Apollodorus
I'll ask you again.
Do you condemn the annexations that Russia has done concerning Georgia and Ukraine?
Do you view them equivalent to what Turkey did? Both countries (Turkey and Russia) "came to the help" of their ethnic minorities, just with Russia going past the puppet state phase and made direct annexations.
You have accused me of double standards, which is false. I don't accept Chinese annexation of Tibet or Turkish actions, but seems that for you the above is extremely hard to do when it's Russia doing similar actions. But of course I could be wrong, but I wish you would reply to this and not brush it aside again. — ssu
IMO the best solution would be for Ukraine to be divided fairly between the two sister nations.
Russia should take everything east of the Dnieper, and maybe half of Kiev, and Zelensky (or Kolomoisky) can keep the rest. — Apollodorus
Always fun to watch liberals get hard-ons for authoritarianism when the going gets rough. — StreetlightX
It unfortunately looks to be a long, bloody war.During a war it's better to ditch democracy because it's sloppy and inefficient. Come back to it after the war is over.
The pundits are saying this is going to be a very long war, tho. — frank
Yes. Democracies can stay as democracies even during the war... but it will be tough. Martial laws are never nice or very democratic. I think that here common sense can prevail: common sense just what is covert action of the enemy and what is simply opposition. But leadership is needed as war brings up very nasty emotions.All the more reason to be critical of power, always, no matter what rock star status one might have. — StreetlightX
:)“I lost my key ... what should I do ...” It is common to lose a key in everyday life.
I was frustrated and panicked.
First of all, it is important to take a deep breath.
[...]
The United States Constitution is silent on the subject of political parties. The Founding Fathers did not originally intend for American politics to be partisan. In Federalist Papers No. 9 and No. 10, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, respectively, wrote specifically about the dangers of domestic political factions. In addition, the first President of the United States, George Washington, was not a member of any political party at the time of his election or throughout his tenure as president.[12] Furthermore, he hoped that political parties would not be formed, fearing conflict and stagnation, as outlined in his Farewell Address.
The notion of democracy has evolved over time considerably. The original form of democracy was a direct democracy. The most common form of democracy today is a representative democracy, where the people elect government officials to govern on their behalf such as in a parliamentary or presidential democracy.[2] — Wikipedia
Prevalent day-to-day decision making of democracies is the majority rule,[3][4] — Wikipedia
Some economists have criticized the efficiency of democracy, citing the premise of the irrational voter, or a voter who makes decisions without all of the facts or necessary information in order to make a truly informed decisionArrow's impossibility theorem suggests that democracy is logically incoherent.
On the other hand, Socrates believed that democracy without educated masses (educated in the broader sense of being knowledgeable and responsible) would only lead to populism being the criteria to become an elected leader and not competence.
The 20th-century Italian thinkers Vilfredo Pareto and Gaetano Mosca (independently) argued that democracy was illusory, and served only to mask the reality of elite rule. Indeed, they argued that elite oligarchy is the unbendable law of human nature, due largely to the apathy and division of the masses (as opposed to the drive, initiative and unity of the elites), and that democratic institutions would do no more than shift the exercise of power from oppression to manipulation
Plato argues that only Kallipolis, an aristocracy led by the unwilling philosopher-kings (the wisest men), is a just form of government.
More recently, democracy is criticised for not offering enough political stability. As governments are frequently elected on and off there tends to be frequent changes in the policies of democratic countries both domestically and internationally. Even if a political party maintains power, vociferous, headline-grabbing protests and harsh criticism from the popular media are often enough to force sudden, unexpected political change.
Biased media has been accused of causing political instability, resulting in the obstruction of democracy, rather than its promotion
Some democratic governments have experienced sudden state collapse and regime change to an undemocratic form of government. Domestic military coups or rebellions are the most common means by which democratic governments have been overthrown
Less democratic governments rely heavily on censorship, propaganda, and misinformation in order to stay in power, while independent sources of information are able to undermine their legitimacy
Emphasize unwavering commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, including Crimea and extending to its territorial waters in the face of ongoing Russian aggression, which threatens regional peace and stability and undermines the global rules-based order.
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 68/262 was adopted on 27 March 2014 by the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly in response to the Russian annexation of Crimea and entitled "territorial integrity of Ukraine". The nonbinding resolution, which was supported by 100 United Nations member states, affirmed the General Assembly's commitment to the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders and underscored the invalidity of the 2014 Crimean referendum. — Wikipedia
The United States intends to support Ukraine’s efforts to counter armed aggression, economic and energy disruptions, and malicious cyber activity by Russia, including by maintaining sanctions against or related to Russia and applying other relevant measures until restoration of the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. — U.S.-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership
This is what we've come down to. Presidents in war-torn countries winking to their people in support.
— baker
Hmm... I thought he'd been visiting hospitals ... — jorndoe
“According to [NYT reporter David] Sanger, who cannot have written his piece without high-level sources, the Biden administration “seeks to help Ukraine lock Russia in a quagmire without inciting a broader conflict with a nuclear-armed adversary or cutting off potential paths to de-escalation … CIA officers are helping to ensure that crates of weapons are delivered into the hands of vetted Ukrainian military units, according to American officials. But as of now, Mr. Biden and his staff do not see the utility of an expansive covert effort to use the spy agency to ferry in arms as the United States did in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union during the 1980s.”
...I have evidence from other sources to corroborate this. “The only end game now,” a senior administration official was heard to say at a private event earlier this month, “is the end of Putin regime. Until then, all the time Putin stays, [Russia] will be a pariah state that will never be welcomed back into the community of nations. China has made a huge error in thinking Putin will get away with it. Seeing Russia get cut off will not look like a good vector and they’ll have to re-evaluate the Sino-Russia axis. All this is to say that democracy and the West may well look back on this as a pivotal strengthening moment.”
I gather that senior British figures are talking in similar terms. There is a belief that “the U.K.’s No. 1 option is for the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin.” Again and again, I hear such language. It helps explain, among other things, the lack of any diplomatic effort by the U.S. to secure a cease-fire. It also explains the readiness of President Joe Biden to call Putin a war criminal.
I hope Ukraine and Russia can work out a peace deal soon and avoid this insane bloodshed. — Benkei
I won't bother with a Putin troll like you. — ssu
“According to [NYT reporter David] Sanger, who cannot have written his piece without high-level sources, the Biden administration “seeks to help Ukraine lock Russia in a quagmire without inciting a broader conflict with a nuclear-armed adversary or cutting off potential paths to de-escalation … CIA officers are helping to ensure that crates of weapons are delivered into the hands of vetted Ukrainian military units, according to American officials. But as of now, Mr. Biden and his staff do not see the utility of an expansive covert effort to use the spy agency to ferry in arms as the United States did in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union during the 1980s.” — StreetlightX
At least some of the fierce resistance by Ukrainian forces has its roots in a now shuttered covert CIA training program run from Ukraine’s eastern frontlines.
As part of the Ukraine-based training program, CIA paramilitaries taught their Ukrainian counterparts sniper techniques; how to operate U.S.-supplied Javelin anti-tank missiles and other equipment; how to evade digital tracking the Russians used to pinpoint the location of Ukrainian troops, which had left them vulnerable to attacks by artillery; how to use covert communications tools; and how to remain undetected in the war zone while also drawing out Russian and insurgent forces from their positions, among other skills, according to former officials.
After Russia’s 2014 incursion, the U.S. military also helped run a long-standing, publicly acknowledged training program for Ukrainian troops in the country’s western region, far from the frontlines. That program also included instruction in how to use Javelin anti-tank missiles and sniper training.
From the US and UK government, I'd expect no less. What's surprised me on this occasion was the ease with which social media has been wielded to further that agenda. It's scary just how readily such a powerful weapon can be put to such unilateral use. — Isaac
I hope Ukraine and Russia can work out a peace deal soon and avoid this insane bloodshed. — Benkei
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.