Russian Troop Movements Reported Near Ukraine

But of course it underlines your point and supports your argument that it legitimises Moscow's and Beijing's illiberal and coercive activities.
Actually, it serves to undermine our frequent assertions that because *insert principle here* we must act, and reinforces instead that our actions or lack thereof are a choice rather than an absolute.

We have countless opportunities to uphold the principles we're deploying here but didn't. We currently don't in a great many cases, too. That's not a principle at all.
 
ANd Vlad turns up the temperature - but then again who can blame him

Putin hits back as NATO warns Moscow against attacking Ukraine​

 
ANd Vlad turns up the temperature - but then again who can blame him

Putin hits back as NATO warns Moscow against attacking Ukraine​

Not a very sophisticated take from me but the 'NATO meets to discuss...' type stories reinforce the impression that, if Russia was to attack Ukraine, NATO and particularly the EU would have lots of meetings, some of them 'urgent' meetings because things are jolly serious, while Russia would actually be acting. I hope that's an incorrect impression on my part.
Even the wording of that story suggests weakness - 'met to discuss... motives for massing troops on Ukraine's border'. It is a short list of motives after all.
 
Not a very sophisticated take from me but the 'NATO meets to discuss...' type stories reinforce the impression that, if Russia was to attack Ukraine, NATO and particularly the EU would have lots of meetings, some of them 'urgent' meetings because things are jolly serious, while Russia would actually be acting. I hope that's an incorrect impression on my part.
Even the wording of that story suggests weakness - 'met to discuss... motives for massing troops on Ukraine's border'. It is a short list of motives after all.
An alternative view being, that it was a serious and very detailed "team briefing", so everyone knew and understood their roles, when the whistle blows ;) .
 

Fedaykin

War Hero
The little green, this time Russians, are about to make their appearance.

Putin has, unfortunately correctly, judged that with the US crippled by a senile and demented President unable to act, he has a window of opportunity to act.
What do you mean, that senile demented fool Trump is not President of the United States anymore?!
 
ANd Vlad turns up the temperature - but then again who can blame him

Putin hits back as NATO warns Moscow against attacking Ukraine​

Hmmm......

Here, as usual, is Moscow framing the issue in its own terms and claiming it is acting defensively:
President Vladimir Putin countered that Russia would be forced to act if U.S.-led NATO placed missiles in Ukraine that could strike Moscow within minutes.

...........

Putin went further than previously in spelling out Russia's "red lines" on Ukraine, saying it would have to respond if NATO deployed advanced missile systems on its neighbour's soil.

"If some kind of strike systems appear on the territory of Ukraine, the flight time to Moscow will be 7-10 minutes, and five minutes in the case of a hypersonic weapon being deployed. Just imagine," the Kremlin leader said.

"What are we to do in such a scenario? We will have to then create something similar in relation to those who threaten us in that way. And we can do that now," he said, pointing to Russia's recent testing of a hypersonic weapon he said could fly at nine times the speed of sound.

NATO is not threatening Moscow (city).
NATO is not threatening Russian territorial integrity (as per internationally recognised borders).

NATO is stating that further Russian aggression against Ukraine (as separate sovereign state) will meet with countermeasures.

It is the Kremlin which is threatening a neighbouring country and amassing forces into an invasion stance.
 
Fairplay, you may have a shit hand, but you keep trying to play it
The only hand I'm playing is the same one that gets plucked from our sleeves when it helps us get what we want.

It's called reductio ad absurdum - disproving an absolute statement by proving it results in an absurd or inconsistent outcome when applied absolutely.

It seems we've reached the conclusion that it's perfectly OK to overthrow democratic governments provided the motives and the overthrowers are to our liking. That rather makes a mockery of subsequent statements on the sanctity of the democratic process.
 
Fairplay, you may have a shit hand, but you keep trying to play it
The only hand I'm playing is the same one that gets plucked from our sleeves when it helps us get what we want.

It's called reductio ad absurdum - disproving an absolute statement by proving it results in an absurd or inconsistent outcome when applied absolutely.

It seems we've reached the conclusion that it's perfectly OK to overthrow democratic governments provided the motives and the overthrowers are to our liking. That rather makes a mockery of subsequent statements on the sanctity of the democratic process.
QED ............ :)
 
QED ............ :)
Your approach to consistency is well noted. You consistently believe that Russia is always evil regardless and that Poland is blameless regardless of who she invades.

It's a virtue of a sort, I suppose.
 
It seems we've reached the conclusion that it's perfectly OK to overthrow democratic governments provided the motives and the overthrowers are to our liking.

I don't think we're saying overthrowing democratic governments is OK per se since democratic governments who rule by democratically agreed laws and norms are likely to be accepted by the 'populace', even if not liked by all. But there is a right to protest against and, if due to no other option, rebelling and removing governments and their leaders that have 'gone rogue' to the point where it's against the interests, wellbeing, aspirations, mandates or whatever of the nation. I think it's a principle or idea that's been around since forever.

The rub is, after the revolution or rebellion the new government could be worse than the one it replaced. Yes, I'm referring to you, Lenin, and your frikkin fellow revolutionaries. Grrr. And the likes of other revolutionary types ranging from starry eyed romantics to cynical power grabbers.

That rather makes a mockery of subsequent statements on the sanctity of the democratic process.

Not really. The democratic process is to be respected, and that includes those who've been elected.
 
Your approach to consistency is well noted. You consistently believe that Russia is always evil regardless and that Poland is blameless regardless of who she invades.

It's a virtue of a sort, I suppose.
Your distorted simplistic interpretation of what I write.

I have never opinionated that "Russia is evil" or "Poland is blameless" just recounted historical facts and outlined a thesis as to why Muscovite Russia behaves the way it does.
 
.......... The democratic process is to be respected, and that includes (by) those who've been elected.

My bold insertion.
 

Latest Threads

Top