• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Distractions from the War thread

Russia is in flagrant violation of the principles of the UN charter, of which it is a signatory.

If too few of the other members of the UN will not take the UN and the principles it is based on seriously – well the UN has a problem – the UN has a problem with relevance in light of Putin's latest actions – which is what I started out saying.

If the UN as a group of signatory nations will not take what it has signed seriously, but allow Russia to derail things, then who is supposed to take the UN seriously?
Forced change of borders sort of already happened before 2014, though. Did that mean the UN charter was violated then? (and in that case, Russia didn't agree with the change of borders).
A few countries currently also operate in Syria and Iraq, some of which are after border change - again, you don't view it as anti-UN. Sweden even wants one of those countries to allow it to enter nato :)
 
Russia signed up to the principles of the UN ones they're blatantly violating.

Whole sham referendum and nuclear threats thing.

Basically if they get away with it it's open season on any nation without nukes or whose neighbor that's stringer decides to take a bite.
Exactly.

It also hammers home the point that in order to be subjected to such treatment, pretty much every nations needs to go nuclear themselves if they only can.

The enormity of what Putin is trying here is of the magnitude that people don't seem to be quite grasp how radical a departure this is – if it is allowed to stand, and Putin actually gets away with it.
 
Forced change of borders sort of already happened before 2014, though. Did that mean the UN charter was violated then? (and in that case, Russia didn't agree with the change of borders).
A few countries currently also operate in Syria and Iraq, some of which are after border change - again, you don't view it as anti-UN. Sweden even wants one of those countries to allow it to enter nato :)
And Putin is happily jollying this process of degradation and breakdown along at speed.

You want this?
 
And Putin is happily jollying this process of degradation and breakdown along at speed.

You want this?
No. What I am stating is that (unless you are telling all that to someone who already believes it), it's just isn't an argument that can stand. "Russia does it", and others do it too, so either punish all or no one (or punish just Russia but don't expect this to be believably based on ethics).
 
No. What I am stating is that (unless you are telling all that to someone who already believes it), it's just isn't an argument that can stand. "Russia does it", and others do it too, so either punish all or no one (or punish just Russia but don't expect this to be believably based on ethics).
God... I spent a lot of time years ago being jeerad at by a bunch of Americans for pointing out what the US was doing under GWB et al. was directly harmful to the UN system. I've been saying for years that making exceptions is actively dangerous.

And what do you know, it all was. But instead of trying to shore things up – it might, if it actually cared – Russia is accelerating away from it at break-neck speed.

You have all your priorities about this ass-backwards.

Either Ukraine retakes it's lost territory, and the UN system and the principles it is based on can be salvaged – or Putin gets away with it, in which case the UN system is dead.

You can then argue that it was the US started the crumble, and what do you know, if that's how it ends, I will agree. But that makes no difference as to how we try to not all end in Putin's world right now.

I iterate – Putin's actions has made the UN irrelevant – whether the situation can be salvaged or not depends on whether Russia is defeated, or not. And that will be decided not through negotiations (certainly not in the UN), but on the battlefield. And it was Putin's Russia that put everyone in that situation.
 
It won't be "Putin's world" any more than before the war, Verbose. Besides, what US/allies did already made sure Russia ends up in a powerblock with China for the rest of time (or until the settlement of the next world war).
Russia was pushed away from Europe, indefinitely, which I doubt was Russia's own intention - but probably was the intention of some other powers. Sure, it did require an invasion and stealing land, but as you said it's not the first time that happened, so imo there's no point in pretending that "this time it was different", because it was more of the same greedy crap we have been seeing forever from those superpowers and their lapdogs.

(with that said, I think we can't really continue on this, better to allow more news in the thread again... :) )
 
Last edited:
It won't be "Putin's world" any more than before the war, Verbose. Besides, what US/allies did already made sure Russia ends up in a powerblock with China for the rest of time (or until the settlement of the next world war).
Russia was pushed away from Europe, indefinitely, which I doubt was Russia's own intention - but probably was the intention of some other powers. Sure, it did require an invasion and stealing land, but as you said it's not the first time that happened, so imo there's no point in pretending that "this time it was different", because it was more of the same greedy crap we have been seeing forever from those superpowers and their lapdogs.

Self inflicted. No one was gonna invade Russia they have nukes. Putin scored an own goal there.

If Putin gets away with it imagine a future Turkey armed with nukes pulks a similar stunt. "Boot Greece from NATO or else". Or even hardballs NATO to boot Greece without the nukes.

Similar scenario can play out where. China vs Vietnam or ano of it's neighbours, Korea's, Iran gets nukes, nuclear Arabia wanting historical lands back in Spain etc.

It's beat Putin hope he doesn't push button vs nuclear free for all eventually someone will push the button.

And if he does push button consequences are on him.
 
Kosovo was a bad idea, based on the notion that the UN system could legitimize exceptions. Berlin and Paris warned about, it London and Washington pushed ahead with it, getting the sceptic French and Germans governments to acquiesce.

If there is a take-away, it is that everyone has been listening FAR too much to what Washington and London has been saying for far too long. It's another version of the long shadow cast by WWII – just like the current Russian homicidal idiocy also is, if of a different timbre.

The US "coalition of the willing", never mind the total debacle that is the Guantanamo prisoner situation, was a disaster. Part of the reason Putin is peeing on the UN and its principles clearly is the spectacle of the US doing what it has been doing – turbo-charged by the Trump presidency, indicating that clearly the US is not a reliable guarantor of anything is otherwise professes.

But the US BS was in trying to make exceptions, to make them limited and with NO precedence status, putting expediency over principle. I have zero problem with how the US GWB government should be on trial for what it did. That's not the issue. What is the issue is it is impossible to limit these exceptions so that they will not have precedence status as soon as someone claims it – which is the whole Russia argument over Kosovo here. But that also means that if Putin argues that he can unilaterally declare parts of Ukraine Russian, and his "words are backed by nuclear weapons", then that ALSO is not a limited exception – that IS the principle.

Putin is deliberately doing something that will reduce the principles of the UN to at best dead letters. Now, someone like Kyr might want to argue that due to all of the above, it already IS dead letters anyway. I.e. he doesn't think there is anything in the UN system to salvage anyway. Others may disagree however.

And that still begs the question in what way we are better off with letting Russia get away with what Putin is trying here? Why would accepting this "exception" be a good thing, or even just necessary? Especially since it is NOT an exception, but a new rule, if Putin gets things his way.

And so the matter will not be decided in the UN, or through a negotiated solution, but on the battlefield.
 
(Simply put, the moment there is working defense against nuclear weapons, the UN will be dissolved anyway because world war will happen. No sense in pretending that great human diplomacy and democracy is what prevents world war. And I do fear we should really return to news, because as nice as those side-discussions are, there should be some news too :D )

Moderator Action: Not sure what the () are for, but I must remind you that you are not a moderator. Please report posts that are off topic and we will take necessary action. And, yes, this thread needs to get back on topic of news. leif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
(Simply put, the moment there is working defense against nuclear weapons, the UN will be dissolved anyway because world war will happen. No sense in pretending that great human diplomacy and democracy is what prevents world war. And I do fear we should really return to news, because as nice as those side-discussions are, there should be some news too :D )
Putin's Russia has no realistic sense of danger anymore. Detante, diplomacy and international law gets invested in because the actors recognize the dangers of not doing it. But Russia is currently just nuts in that regard.

I've been talking about the old lessons of containment and deterrence since the Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine. And as I recall you thought me a bad person for it...
 
Its purpose is to not allow the superpowers to be humiliated, since ultimately they have a veto.
I mean the three powers that actually meaningfully belong there.
One would know coming from countries that are constantly humiliated.
 
the UN was an American colonial project at a time they "alone" had the nukes . After passing some "laws" that would make sure all nuclear weapon developments would happen under UN and hence would be CIA and stuff control , the world would be made safe for American monetary domination of the entire globe , with European colonies opened for , uhmmm , Democracy . Russia ? An accident , with all those semi starving tank divisions . China ? Brought in to balance Russia with hordes of people , with Roosevelt firmly gloating in the memory of his opium running ancestors . England and France ? Will follow the line . Unhappy at how UN functions ? Good , why should ı care ? Still remember the 250 000 dead Albanians ; who are yet to be found after getting killed by Serbians . Who were evil or something , especially when they were protected by the entire West for the most of 1990s . Come find the ones you must destroy , my dear people of New World Order .

wanna remove veto powers from Russia ? They will surely happen , about 5 minutes of the loss of US possession of the same . Amerika Birleşik Devletleri precedes Rusya Federasyonu in Turkish , you know , just like that ...


edit: The rest of the argument


in the old days it would directly to the post , it now gives the whole page . Would writing it as .com/post-16343... solve the dilemna ?
 
Last edited:
Here's an interesting crinkle in sanction-avoidance:
It gets even better, those tanker-owners tend to also (due to stupid greek law and corruption) own most of the private tv channels and many newspapers, so on their channels/papers they accuse Putin non-stop, but still make a fortune out of moving his oil.
 
the UN was an American colonial project at a time they "alone" had the nukes .
No it wasn't. That's just a bad-faith take on it fashionable with some. If that was all it was, it would never have worked to the extent it did.

The grave-diggers of the kind of rule-based international politics, with agreed upon constraints and predictabilities, we have all come to rely on like to dismiss it as merely that though.
 
I'm not overestimating how many countries I think absolutely should sanction Russian, if the principles of the UN charter were really taken seriously at this point.

I am clearly also not overestimating how many will actually sanctions Russia as things stand. We all know that score.
It seems like you have just woken up to reality. UN principles are routinely ignored by powerful countries when it serves them. For instance, nothing stopped USA from invading Iraq.

Does that mean UN charters are useless though? Probably not, because at least we know those who violate those charters are wrong and there could be diplomatic pressure against those who violated. But of course, if the countries who flaunt the rules have the strongest militaries on the planet, there aren't much you can do anyway UN or not.
 
For instance, nothing stopped USA from invading Iraq.

Btw, Iraq was dictatorship. When attacking the dictatorship you can always say you are fighting only with dictator, not with the people.
But if you had honest elections in the country, it's hard to say it.
 
Moderator Action: Non war news posts moved from the war to a new home. You may continue this discussion here if you want.
 
Btw, Iraq was dictatorship. When attacking the dictatorship you can always say you are fighting only with dictator, not with the people.
But if you had honest elections in the country, it's hard to say it.
This opens the door for many countries in the world to be invaded. I should note that Russia used a similar excuse to invade Ukraine in 2014.
 
This opens the door for many countries in the world to be invaded. I should note that Russia used a similar excuse to invade Ukraine in 2014.

Sorry, what? Russia denied they did anything back there. It was confirmed a long time after.
 
Top Bottom