Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Meanwhile, the Russians have been out and about today, admitting they’re interfering with the US election. It seems to me that doing all they can to come to the aid of those labelled ‘Putin apologist’ would be worth their effort …
|
Somewhat ironic considering it’s usually America subverting democracies they disagree with.
---------- Post added at 22:53 ---------- Previous post was at 22:48 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
It's when people make disingenuous calls for negotiations whilst trying to give Russia a stronger hand that are apologists. People like Corbyn or the Republicans want to stop arming Ukraine and force them to the table.
Negotiations on Ukraine's terms are fine.
|
Are they Ukraine”s terms or America’s terms?
Quote:
|
Alternatively, Russia leaves Ukraine. That's all they want, to not be invaded. This isn't some disputed land that has acted as a buffer between the states, it isn't a dispute over unclaimed land either. It's a sovereign nation being invaded by an imperialist state who are now losing and are getting its friends in the West to try and force Ukraine to stop.
|
Russia and ethnic Russians in Ukraine could legitimately argue they just want Ukraine/the US to hold up their end of the bargain from Minsk II - a topic raised in the podcast Pierre links to that is seldom (indeed, never) acknowledged in the “acceptable” western narrative.
---------- Post added at 23:01 ---------- Previous post was at 22:53 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
This, of course, is not representative of all the US. That said most of the US don’t know what Ukraine is or where it is. But they’re paying for it.
https://unherd.com/thepost/david-sac...o-nuclear-war/
Worth a listen, especially as it highlights the narrative that anyone suggesting peace via negotiation ( is there usually any other way?) is labelled a Putin apologist, when in the past they would just be a pacifist. |
I gave it a listen - more very good points raised than weak ones and correctly identifies many of the narratives deemed toxic in the west. It’s no longer acceptable to oppose war for the sake of war in this one.
One point I disagree with him on though is where he says America should look out for its own interests. The error here is assuming they aren’t - the military industrial complex in the US has them in a perpetual state of war operating to the same formula. Lucrative rebuilding contracts and rapid privatisation to extract as much wealth as possible from the country in question while propping up a puppet regime.
The internal conflict for the US is between the military industrial complex - which says the quiet bit out loud in the Washington Post article Hugh linked to yesterday in that regardless of domestic politics they have the votes on both sides of the aisle - and the wider American economy that loses out from high inflation and billions of overseas customers giving all their disposable income to energy companies so they don’t freeze to death. It’s no surprise it’s the tech industry ringing the alarm bells first.
If (or when) wider US economic interests win out Zelensky (or his successor) will be round the table quicker than you can say “Minsk Three”.