International Russia/Ukraine Megathread V15

[TheMoa]

Brazilian presidents tend to enjoy low levels of support since the commodity crash of 2014.



Lets compare the Latin America that is under "guided by America" (i guess you presume that its not a brutal dictatorship) and the one that isn't.

Say what you want about Brazil, Mexico or Argentina, they are still miles ahead in terms of development than Cuba or Venezuela

You would think it's because of "the commodity crash", but if you actually take a better look and study it you will discover that there was USA backed color revolution here, with a soft coup. Country is politically divided until today and USA is trying another regime change. My hope is for a better climate after 2030, since next year it'll be a shitshow for sure

 

[Rod1]

There's actually more complex developmental models on this topic and you'll be surprised by what you see.

Secondly, do you think that its fair that America sanctions certain countries to the point of children famishment under the pretext of being against non-democratic governments while having gigantic trade with theocracies and other dictatorships?

When you start to consider this, do you think that the divisions of the world are truly ideological disagreements or do you start to consider other motives and agendas at work?

America doesn't sanctions any Latin American country "to the point of children famishment" Cuban collapse is because like North Korea they stick to Marxism-Leninism.

Venezuela actually improved under sanctions because they gave up on socialism and introduced market reforms.

 

[Limbo Pete]

so anytime someone brings up these kind of things, I think it's unfair of you to just immediately call it "bothsiding" or whatever dismissive tactic you're using.

They all tie into Ukraine/Russia specifically.

This is where the discussions of "root causes" comes in.

The pro-Russia perspective often comes in the form of presenting the West as an imperialistic agglomeration attempting to extend its hegemony and Russia's aggressive decisions as a reaction to suffocating pressure.

Anytime you use the "stop bothsiding this" arguing devices, it can seem like you're disingenuously trying to box in particular issues to present things only as you want them to be considered.

But there you go lol
A voluntary and mutually beneficial alliance, economic or otherwise, isn't "suffocating pressure"; Russia is a mob state shithole, and that's why Ukraine wants democratic reforms and closer economic integration with the EU. Former Soviet satellites don't _want_ to go back. It was fucking awful. And instead of cooperation, Putin -who only understands power as a zero sum game- sees low hanging fruit at risk of being lifted beyond his reach.

 

[ChessJitsu]

Why would you think that I.... think that? Where does that question even come from?
There's this continually sort of narrative/framing/whatever which comes up again and again here. People, not just the San Marino types but also more polished and less vitriolic bothesiders, act like the US doesn't have a "right" or is being "hypocritical" in helping Ukraine stand up for itself. A sort of "you don't get to be the good guys" rhetoric. We invaded Iraq, so we shouldn't help Ukraine, etc. The whole shtick is childish imo, and revealing of those that care more about carving a "neutral" position where they can safely lecture everybody. Meanwhile, back in the really real world, helping Ukraine is the right thing to do. They need our help badly and we should be giving it way more effort.

It's not necessarily a neutral position just because it's nuanced.

If you can't resolve the hypocrisy and contradictions of your side, you're just wrong and misguided. It's as simple as that.

You can't resolve it, you don't have an answer.

You're like DPP last night against Khamzat calling Khamzat a blanket.

 

[Rod1]

You would think it's because of "the commodity crash", but if you actually take a better look and study it you will discover that there was USA backed color revolution here, with a soft coup. Country is politically divided until today and USA is trying another regime change. My hope is for a better climate after 2030, since next year it'll be a shitshow for sure

Country is actually quite united in their dislike of government, hardcore Lula and Bolsonaro supporters are a minority.

 

[Limbo Pete]

It's not necessarily a neutral position just because it's nuanced.

If you can't resolve the hypocrisy and contradictions your side, you're just wrong and misguided. It's as simple as that.

But it's not hypocrisy to want to do the right thing, especially not with a long history of doing the wrong thing lol
The issue here is a refusal to see helping Ukraine as the right thing, which is of course what Putin wants

 

[ChessJitsu]

But it's not hypocrisy to want to do the right thing, especially not with a long history of doing the wrong thing lol

so is "doing the wrong thing" just history or does it not continue to present itself today in the rest of the world?

You think America & the rest of the West is playing the superhero role in Gaza, Saudi Arabia, Africa?

That just sounds silly.

 

[Limbo Pete]

so is "doing the wrong thing" just history or does it not continue to present itself today in the rest of the world?

You think America & the rest of the West is playing the superhero role in Gaza, Saudi Arabia, Africa?

That just sounds silly.

Superhero? That kind of language is more revealing than perhaps you realize lol
The rhetorical trap of course is, like I've said, a sort of "you don't have a right to do the right thing" tactic
You do realize it's obvious, yes?

 

[TheMoa]

Country is actually quite united in their dislike of government, hardcore Lula and Bolsonaro supporters are a minority.

Minority in what terms? Both of them have a solid 30% base. The rest isnt hardcore but get stuck on the left/right BS when actually both have neoliberal economic policies.
The "dislike of government" is a continuous state because after the coup the legislative they appropriated the vacuum in power, got some superpowers and rules for their own gains, they'll use the "anti- lula/bolsonaro" rhetoric to not let the government implement any agenda in both sides. The Executive is really constrained. . And I say this not supporting any of them, I was hoping to a 3rd option next year and then comes America polarizing everything again. And even with this dislike it looks like Lula will win again next year.. and that will be sad, dude will get on that Biden/Trump cognitive downfall.

 

[ChessJitsu]

Country is actually quite united in their dislike of government, hardcore Lula and Bolsonaro supporters are a minority.

I think corruption, lack of democracy & human rights, and poverty are inexorably connected- which is why i think the Western geopolitical agenda is fundamentally evil and dishonest to its populations in the rhetoric it uses for regime change and opposition to particular governments that it targets.

If you're unhappy with a country because it lacks democracy, and a poor country is less likely to develop the cultural ingredients and infrastructure to actually have a healthy democratic structure, why is sanctioning that country and surrounding it with neighbors who join exclusionary economic & military unions a sincere & meaningful way to make that country democratic?

That's not even going into the hypocrisy of those Western governments attempting to present that mask while simultaneously keeping dictatorships it favors afloat.

For anyone calling me neutral- my global perspective is that:

• economic development is more important than a democratic model (and actually necessary for true democracy)
• the West recognizes the above premise because the history of the East Asian 1st world prioritized economic development before true democracy was achieved (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, etc.). Even in Spain and Greece we saw that pattern.
• The fact that the West recognizes this connection and still propagandizes false pretexts to aggressively target certain 2nd/3rd world regimes and support others is proof that there's a particular hegemonic agenda being pursued that disregards human lives and actual concern for prosperity and a global turn away from poverty and inequality

 

[Rod1]

For anyone calling me neutral- my global perspective is that:

• economic development is more important than a democratic model (and actually necessary for true democracy)

Economic development in third world countries has been stronger under stable democracies rather than stable dictatorships

• the West recognizes the above premise because the history of the East Asian 1st world prioritized economic development before true democracy was achieved (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, etc.). Even in Spain and Greece we saw that pattern.

Its not as easy because you require a dictator that actually cares about its country rather than staying in power none of those countries were considered "developed" while under the dictatorship.

• The fact that the West recognizes this connection and still propagandizes false pretexts to aggressively target certain 2nd/3rd world regimes and support others is proof that there's a particular hegemonic agenda being pursued that disregards human lives and actual concern for prosperity and a global turn away from poverty and inequality

Which third world dictator that is actually improving its country is in the crosshairs of the West? give me one example

 

[Rod1]

Minority in what terms? Both of them have a solid 30% base. The rest isnt hardcore but get stuck on the left/right BS when actually both have neoliberal economic policies.
The "dislike of government" is a continuous state because after the coup the legislative they appropriated the vacuum in power, got some superpowers and rules for their own gains, they'll use the "anti- lula/bolsonaro" rhetoric to not let the government implement any agenda in both sides. The Executive is really constrained. . And I say this not supporting any of them, I was hoping to a 3rd option next year and then comes America polarizing everything again. And even with this dislike it looks like Lula will win again next year.. and that will be sad, dude will get on that Biden/Trump cognitive downfall.

Lula and Bolsonaro have shown that the hate is well deserved.

Most Brazilians don't give a shit about the social issues, they want a government whose economy is functional

 

[TheMoa]

Lula and Bolsonaro have shown that the hate is well deserved.

Most Brazilians don't give a shit about the social issues, they want a government whose economy is functional

yes, I agree. And who's always meddling here so the economy can't be functional?
BTW, I dont want to hijack the thread talking about brazilian politics

 

[AWilder]

As expected it was a one sided proposal that Witkoff misunderstood and that was reported before the meeting.

The only thing that changed is that Putin is open to non NATO US guarantees....

Essentially Ukraine must give up the remaining parts of Donetsk, Russia will freeze conflict along current lines in Zaporhizhia and Kherson and return little bits in Sumy and Kharkhiv.

It should be noted that in three years Russia has added less than 1% of additional Ukrainian lands yet expects Ukraine to just hand over about 1.5% of additional land. Make it make sense.

Outline emerges of Putin's offer to end his war in Ukraine

It was unclear whether the proposals were an opening gambit or a final offer.

www.reuters.com

Art of the deal

 

[Strychnine]

Russian driver went for the Tupolev drift but failed miserably.








The Russian General who was hit in the above strike.

 

[Rod1]

yes, I agree. And who's always meddling here so the economy can't be functional?
BTW, I dont want to hijack the thread talking about brazilian politics

The Dutch and their damn diseases

 

[Strychnine]

Better to surrender to the Ukrainians and live than to become sunflower fertilizer.

 

[Strychnine]

 

[ChessJitsu]

Economic development in third world countries has been stronger under stable democracies rather than stable dictatorships


Its not as easy because you require a dictator that actually cares about its country rather than staying in power none of those countries were considered "developed" while under the dictatorship.


Which third world dictator that is actually improving its country is in the crosshairs of the West? give me one example

1. So now you're making a distinction between "good dictatorships" and "bad dictatorships". When it comes to this, it's strictly a matter of US-favorable dictatorships and defiant ones.
2. There have been US sponsored dictators (and continue to be) that killed gays and ethnic minorities (source) and violently persecuted their opposition. I'll continue to converse with you point-by-point because you're actually pretty respectful, but I think it's wrong to say otherwise.
3. Chinese government lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and it's a geopolitical opponent of the West that gets constantly criticized for its lack of democracy and human rights violations while Western governments rarely make public statements about Saudi Arabia and other regimes.

 

[Rod1]

1. So now you're making a distinction between "good dictatorships" and "bad dictatorships". When it comes to this, it's strictly a matter of US-favorable dictatorships and defiant ones.

No, its a strictly matter of improving the living conditions of its citizens.

2. There have been US sponsored dictators (and continue to be) that killed gays and ethnic minorities (source) and violently persecuted their opposition. I'll continue to converse with you point-by-point because you're actually pretty respectful, but I think it's wrong to say otherwise.

US sponsored Hitler now?

3. Chinese government lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and it's a geopolitical opponent of the West that gets constantly criticized for its lack of democracy and human rights violations while Western governments rarely make public statements about Saudi Arabia and other regimes.

China isn't sanctioned by the US.