comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Vladimikel Artutin - committing war crimes against football since 2019 (U18355)
posted 40 seconds ago
“Making it out like Russia’s actions are just another piece of the pie in terms of rising e every costs is embarrassing.”
Those are your words Winston and it’s clear you are saying they are the main reason for price jumps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, a thumbs up from the guy who completely fabricated what I’d said and now wants to argue because he can’t admit he’s wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How did i fabricate what you said? You said it, the evidence is right there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You asked me if I think this is ALL down to Russia.
I never said or implied anything of the sort.
So yes, it is all there, and you’re an idiot.
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
It's not right.
We cannot stand by and watch Russia invade a neighbouring democratic country, because it wants to.
----------------------
I'm not sure "we" have any right to lecture another country on invasions and military violence, frankly, given that the UK is only 2nd after the US in global affairs for doing this very thing (as well as overthrowing/undermining democratic or independent governments & installing/supporting brutal human rights abusing regimes). I'm not convinced that ploughing more money & weapons into the conflict is the best option, though I accept there are no 'good' options, either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what comes from relying heavily on the lens of critiquing Western imperialism. I totally understand that after decades of struggling to get society to care about monstrous foreign policy around the world, it must be galling to witness the immediate consensus around opposition to Russian actions. On an emotional level, it must be hard to escape disgust at the hypocrisy. But this disgust can lead to ethical confusion and inconsistency as well, leading to the failure to support (other than through platitudes) *someone else's* victims of imperialism and genocide.
Having grown up protesting against and ashamed of my own country's colonial past and ongoing imperial adventures, I feel deeply disappointed by the equivocation and inadequacy of the response of the 'anti-imperialist Left' to Ukraine. To be blunt, it has F.A. to do with 'lecturing' anyone, and framing it in that way betrays how Anglo-centric the perspective is.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Vladimikel Artutin - committing war crimes against football since 2019 (U18355)
posted 30 minutes ago
Red Russian, I don’t see how stronger Western intervention during the Crimea crisis would have led to things being as they are today. No Russia wouldn’t have happily provided us with gas (you would assume). However a defeated Russia and overthrown government could have become a powerful ally of the West, akin to Japan for example.
What instead has happened is we have allowed a deranged man to grow his ego to the point we are where we are today (and there is nothing to suggest he will stop at Ukraine if they eventually take it).
Morally, I know it is wrong to allow a genocide take place, but would he be at this stage today if the West had intervened militarily? Or had we not intervened at all, no is my guess. That also doesn’t detract that while we are financially sanctioning Russia, genocide is still taking place. On top of that, financial sanctions have done next to nothing, the Rouble after initially tanking is now the strongest it’s been in nearly 10 years.
As for you last point, that’s complete BS. I’ve never once defended Putin or Russia and never will.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, you're making no sense. Let's forget about the errors the West made before the invasion, since we're talking about what we should do today.
If the UK government dropped all economic sanctions against Russia, would Russia promptly turn on the taps and let the wholesale gas prices drop? If it did so, would Russia's ability to sustain a long-term military campaign against Ukraine be strengthened or weakened?
Your stance is no more practically valid than it is ethically.
As for my last paragraph, I wasn't implying direct support for Putin on your part, but your ambivalence about whether to resist him is recorded multiple times in this thread. I guess my point, which is aside from the key argument, is that referencing Putin in your username feels very jarring to me. A bit like having Hitler in your name while the invasion of Poland and subsequent purges were going on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RR, just a small correction to a post you made earlier.
10,000 dead so far in Ukraine since invasion.
100,000 dead in Bosnia from 1992-95.
So this Russian invasion is not the worst since WW2.
People forget Srebrinica. Amongst other atrocities during that time.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
A windfall tax is not a solution to the longer term problem that exists here.
It makes people feel good, granted, but it’s an overly simplistic answer to a complicated problem.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 2 minutes ago
Governments need to stop supplying war money and actually reduce the costs at home. Simple.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah pull the ladder up Jack.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
A windfall tax is not a solution to the longer term problem that exists here.
It makes people feel good, granted, but it’s an overly simplistic answer to a complicated problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Need long term plans for sure, but short term solutions asap for the coming winter and next year.
comment by FFS Mike. (U1170)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
A windfall tax is not a solution to the longer term problem that exists here.
It makes people feel good, granted, but it’s an overly simplistic answer to a complicated problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Need long term plans for sure, but short term solutions asap for the coming winter and next year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course.
I was referring to the suggestion that the matter is ‘done’ with a windfall tax.
Sorry, for everyone else.
Windfall tax. Done (For the immediate crisis.Obviously)
The government won’t reduce costs because it will reduce profits for their paymasters.
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 10 seconds ago
The government won’t reduce costs because it will reduce profits for their paymasters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You just know that the grant will just mean they put costs up £400
comment by Robbing Hoody - Legacy Fan (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
Sorry, for everyone else.
Windfall tax. Done (For the immediate crisis.Obviously)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe try reading the article properly and you wouldn’t need to clarify your simplistic posts when people correct you.
Also love how there’s an immediate crisis… what then, the next crisis, a month later?
Delusional.
America and Britain will prolong this war by providing short range missiles ( they are not providing long range missiles) and eventually bankrupt Europe and Ukraine. It takes another 200 years for Ukraine to repay all the debts to the West even if the war ends TODAY..
The media is giving out news from only one side that is Ukraine...
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 6 minutes ago
RR, just a small correction to a post you made earlier.
10,000 dead so far in Ukraine since invasion.
100,000 dead in Bosnia from 1992-95.
So this Russian invasion is not the worst since WW2.
People forget Srebrinica. Amongst other atrocities during that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right to point out the Bosnian war, and I certainly don't want to play that down or get into a 'which is worse' discussion. The obscenity of the Russian invasion and atrocities don't depend on how the death tolls compare.
That said, I'm convinced that the actual death toll in Ukraine is far higher than 10,000. Ukrainian government figures estimate 28,000 civilians, but in still occupied territories it's hard to document these things. In the earliest days of the invasion my Ukrainian friends were telling me that acquaintances were reporting people getting executed in the streets of places I'd never heard of. It was several weeks before we heard about Bucha, and the anecdotal stories I heard, which were horribly similar to Bucha, derived from regions further east.
If I understand correctly, the figure of 100,000 deaths in the Bosnian war includes military casualties and (do correct me if I'm wrong) people on both sides of the conflict. I think if we compare like-for-like the numbers will look much closer and, I'm terribly sad to say, the death toll in Ukraine will continue to grow for some time.
comment by Robbing Hoody - Legacy Fan (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 10 seconds ago
The government won’t reduce costs because it will reduce profits for their paymasters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You just know that the grant will just mean they put costs up £400
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Corbyn.
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 6 minutes ago
RR, just a small correction to a post you made earlier.
10,000 dead so far in Ukraine since invasion.
100,000 dead in Bosnia from 1992-95.
So this Russian invasion is not the worst since WW2.
People forget Srebrinica. Amongst other atrocities during that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right to point out the Bosnian war, and I certainly don't want to play that down or get into a 'which is worse' discussion. The obscenity of the Russian invasion and atrocities don't depend on how the death tolls compare.
That said, I'm convinced that the actual death toll in Ukraine is far higher than 10,000. Ukrainian government figures estimate 28,000 civilians, but in still occupied territories it's hard to document these things. In the earliest days of the invasion my Ukrainian friends were telling me that acquaintances were reporting people getting executed in the streets of places I'd never heard of. It was several weeks before we heard about Bucha, and the anecdotal stories I heard, which were horribly similar to Bucha, derived from regions further east.
If I understand correctly, the figure of 100,000 deaths in the Bosnian war includes military casualties and (do correct me if I'm wrong) people on both sides of the conflict. I think if we compare like-for-like the numbers will look much closer and, I'm terribly sad to say, the death toll in Ukraine will continue to grow for some time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
80% of the dead were Bozniaks. Maybe because they were mostly Moslems it's not considered quite as bad.
I don’t like Mick Lynch anymore. Caaaant
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
It's not right.
We cannot stand by and watch Russia invade a neighbouring democratic country, because it wants to.
----------------------
I'm not sure "we" have any right to lecture another country on invasions and military violence, frankly, given that the UK is only 2nd after the US in global affairs for doing this very thing (as well as overthrowing/undermining democratic or independent governments & installing/supporting brutal human rights abusing regimes). I'm not convinced that ploughing more money & weapons into the conflict is the best option, though I accept there are no 'good' options, either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what comes from relying heavily on the lens of critiquing Western imperialism. I totally understand that after decades of struggling to get society to care about monstrous foreign policy around the world, it must be galling to witness the immediate consensus around opposition to Russian actions. On an emotional level, it must be hard to escape disgust at the hypocrisy. But this disgust can lead to ethical confusion and inconsistency as well, leading to the failure to support (other than through platitudes) *someone else's* victims of imperialism and genocide.
Having grown up protesting against and ashamed of my own country's colonial past and ongoing imperial adventures, I feel deeply disappointed by the equivocation and inadequacy of the response of the 'anti-imperialist Left' to Ukraine. To be blunt, it has F.A. to do with 'lecturing' anyone, and framing it in that way betrays how Anglo-centric the perspective is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There's no ethical confusion on my part. We're responsible for the predicted consequences of our own actions, and those are the ones that we can do *the most* about, practically, and should therefore be our *primary* focus. Small children understand this. We can't do something about everything, so we have to make choices, albeit uncomfortable ones. So again, no confusion or inconsistency on my part. And yes, the hypocrisy is insufferable. Indulge that hypocrisy if you wish... I won't be joining in.
The above would be true if our own governments were complicit in killing and displacing "only" dozens of people, rather than the reality of tens of millions.
I'm also curious... What do you actually want or expect UK citizens to do about someone else's crimes for which we are not complicit (although there's lines of argument to be had that challenge that assertion in this particular case, but I'll leave that aside) beyond platitudes? What would actually constitute 'adequate'? Waving more blue & yellow flags? Uncritically throwing the word 'genocide' around a little more?
To me much of what you've written looks like projection. The "anti-imperialist left", as you frame it (I don't like vague & overarching group classifications), are the ones adhering to at least a modicum of moral consistency - a consistency that makes people uncomfortable because it challenges their own assumptions. It's interesting that you have the wherewithal to identify the hypocrisy in the global response to Russia's invasion but then vaguely accuse "the left" of being ethically confused and inadequate without actually specifying what the criteria they're expected to meet is or should be. To be blunt, you sound confused.
80% of the dead were Bozniaks. Maybe because they were mostly Moslems it's not considered quite as bad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's certainly not my position.
As far as I'm aware, half or more of the Bosniak casualties were military, not civilian. So my point is that you're comparing an estimate of 10,000 civilian Ukrainian deaths (itself less than half the current estimate) with a figure that aggregates civilian and military deaths on both sides. As per the estimates of the Hague Tribunal and the Sarajevo Research & Documentation Centre (given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War#Casualties), Bosnians killed in the war represent somewhere between 61% and 68% of that total figure of around a hundred thousand deaths. Bosnian civilian casualties are estimated at between 25,000 and 31,000 thousand, which is a similar magnitude to the current Ukrainian estimate of 28,000 civilian deaths. One grim point of comparison is that this total has been reached in six months, while the Bosnian war took place over three years, which tells us that the daily bloodshed is alarmingly high in Ukraine.
Once again, the last thing I want to do is downplay the scale of the calamity and evil of the genocide of Bosniaks. Both the Bosnian genocide and the Russian attack on Ukraine are abominations - abominable for the same reasons. I've noticed that many Bosnian survivors have been talking about the resonances they detect when watching the news from Ukraine. All of them sympathise deeply with the plight of Ukrainians. Meanwhile, the nationalist right in Serbia is supporting Russia.
Berbaking
I feel pretty clear about what I believe and will try to summarise. Oppressed people should be given with whatever practical support we are able to provide. Fascism, and other forms of authoritarianism, should be vigorously opposed. And (slightly tangentially to the other points) there is a current, existential threat from a new form of oligarchy, which has abandoned the strategy of wielding influence through the mechanisms of liberal democracy.
Consistent with these beliefs, I would defend the following positions:
- Opposition to all the imperial adventures of Western powers and deep scepticism toward 'liberal interventionism'.
- Support for groups and peoples who have been subjugated by our country directly, by our regional allies, and by our geopolitical adversaries. Including practical support to aid their resistance where possible.
- So I'm firmly opposed to military exports to e.g. Saudi Arabia and Israel and support providing military aid to Ukraine.
- I'm well aware that liberal democracy has been easily co-opted by oligarchic and imperial forces since its onset, but I see it as essential that we save it from the onslaught of a populism backed by plutocrats, and then reform the democratic state to devolve far greater power and levers of accountability to the populace than ever before. I believe that unless the spectrum of left and democratic centre of politics works together (as it failed to in Germany in the early 1930s), then our chances of preventing the new form of authoritarian oligarchy from seizing power don't look good. As I said above, this is a bit tangential to the Russia-Ukraine context, but I raise it because I fear that the same sense of alienation from liberal democratic establishment that fuels some anti-anti-Russia sentiment on the Left also feeds an ambivalence in some parts of the Left toward defending liberal democracy from Trumpism / Putinism. The far right is actively targeting the left for recruitment. Left-wing podcasters are inviting far-right guests, and vice versa. We've all come across plenty of people on the Left who shrug about Trumpism on the basis that there's not much substantive difference - they're all capitalists. I'm not projecting any of this onto you, Berbaking, just saying it's a phenomenon that scares the hell out of me.
As for the 'anti-imperialist left', I'll be more specific. I'm referring to groups such as the Stop the War Coalition and individuals in that orbit. I don't see a great deal of moral consistency, as you put it, and behind its talk of peace a dearth of practical proposals. It is not consistent in its application of intellectual caution - approaching Russia and its statements with more good faith than it should, while decrying Western 'warmongering' in Ukraine when our intelligence services were pointing out the preparation of a giant invasion force. Yes, Corbyn and others have denounced Putin, along with muddying the waters about the complex causes of the conflict in a way they never would when speaking of UK, USA or Israeli imperial aggression. But what are the practical steps they advocate? They advocate peace, by means of 1) negotiating with the enemy that pursuing an ongoing invasion, which it is explicitly telling its people aims to obliterate Ukraine as a state, and 2) by ceasing to provide Ukraine with the means to defend itself. I respect pacifism as an intellectually coherent viewpoint. If there are those who advocate non-resistance and do so universally, that's fine. It's not my understanding that this is the majority view of the STW coalition. These are the people I am referring to, not "the Left" in amorphous terms, and I hope I have explained why I find their position woefully lacking in terms of practical ethics.
If you see confusion or inconsistencies in my own moral reasoning, feel free to point them out. We all have our blind spots and we should all be ready to acknowledge them.
I find the anti-imperial left to be the most morally inconsistent.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 hours, 15 minutes ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Vladimikel Artutin - committing war crimes against football since 2019 (U18355)
posted 40 seconds ago
“Making it out like Russia’s actions are just another piece of the pie in terms of rising e every costs is embarrassing.”
Those are your words Winston and it’s clear you are saying they are the main reason for price jumps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, a thumbs up from the guy who completely fabricated what I’d said and now wants to argue because he can’t admit he’s wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How did i fabricate what you said? You said it, the evidence is right there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You asked me if I think this is ALL down to Russia.
I never said or implied anything of the sort.
So yes, it is all there, and you’re an idiot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re certainly implying that it’s the driving factor, but all you’re doing is swallowing the government rhetoric. You’ve got to be incredibly naive to think this wouldn’t have happened if Russia hadn’t invaded.
Sign in if you want to comment
Energy Crisis
Page 4 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 26/8/22
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Vladimikel Artutin - committing war crimes against football since 2019 (U18355)
posted 40 seconds ago
“Making it out like Russia’s actions are just another piece of the pie in terms of rising e every costs is embarrassing.”
Those are your words Winston and it’s clear you are saying they are the main reason for price jumps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, a thumbs up from the guy who completely fabricated what I’d said and now wants to argue because he can’t admit he’s wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How did i fabricate what you said? You said it, the evidence is right there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You asked me if I think this is ALL down to Russia.
I never said or implied anything of the sort.
So yes, it is all there, and you’re an idiot.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
It's not right.
We cannot stand by and watch Russia invade a neighbouring democratic country, because it wants to.
----------------------
I'm not sure "we" have any right to lecture another country on invasions and military violence, frankly, given that the UK is only 2nd after the US in global affairs for doing this very thing (as well as overthrowing/undermining democratic or independent governments & installing/supporting brutal human rights abusing regimes). I'm not convinced that ploughing more money & weapons into the conflict is the best option, though I accept there are no 'good' options, either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what comes from relying heavily on the lens of critiquing Western imperialism. I totally understand that after decades of struggling to get society to care about monstrous foreign policy around the world, it must be galling to witness the immediate consensus around opposition to Russian actions. On an emotional level, it must be hard to escape disgust at the hypocrisy. But this disgust can lead to ethical confusion and inconsistency as well, leading to the failure to support (other than through platitudes) *someone else's* victims of imperialism and genocide.
Having grown up protesting against and ashamed of my own country's colonial past and ongoing imperial adventures, I feel deeply disappointed by the equivocation and inadequacy of the response of the 'anti-imperialist Left' to Ukraine. To be blunt, it has F.A. to do with 'lecturing' anyone, and framing it in that way betrays how Anglo-centric the perspective is.
posted on 26/8/22
Windfall tax. Done.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Vladimikel Artutin - committing war crimes against football since 2019 (U18355)
posted 30 minutes ago
Red Russian, I don’t see how stronger Western intervention during the Crimea crisis would have led to things being as they are today. No Russia wouldn’t have happily provided us with gas (you would assume). However a defeated Russia and overthrown government could have become a powerful ally of the West, akin to Japan for example.
What instead has happened is we have allowed a deranged man to grow his ego to the point we are where we are today (and there is nothing to suggest he will stop at Ukraine if they eventually take it).
Morally, I know it is wrong to allow a genocide take place, but would he be at this stage today if the West had intervened militarily? Or had we not intervened at all, no is my guess. That also doesn’t detract that while we are financially sanctioning Russia, genocide is still taking place. On top of that, financial sanctions have done next to nothing, the Rouble after initially tanking is now the strongest it’s been in nearly 10 years.
As for you last point, that’s complete BS. I’ve never once defended Putin or Russia and never will.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, you're making no sense. Let's forget about the errors the West made before the invasion, since we're talking about what we should do today.
If the UK government dropped all economic sanctions against Russia, would Russia promptly turn on the taps and let the wholesale gas prices drop? If it did so, would Russia's ability to sustain a long-term military campaign against Ukraine be strengthened or weakened?
Your stance is no more practically valid than it is ethically.
As for my last paragraph, I wasn't implying direct support for Putin on your part, but your ambivalence about whether to resist him is recorded multiple times in this thread. I guess my point, which is aside from the key argument, is that referencing Putin in your username feels very jarring to me. A bit like having Hitler in your name while the invasion of Poland and subsequent purges were going on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RR, just a small correction to a post you made earlier.
10,000 dead so far in Ukraine since invasion.
100,000 dead in Bosnia from 1992-95.
So this Russian invasion is not the worst since WW2.
People forget Srebrinica. Amongst other atrocities during that time.
posted on 26/8/22
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/8/22
A windfall tax is not a solution to the longer term problem that exists here.
It makes people feel good, granted, but it’s an overly simplistic answer to a complicated problem.
posted on 26/8/22
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/8/22
comment by United we win (U19958)
posted 2 minutes ago
Governments need to stop supplying war money and actually reduce the costs at home. Simple.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah pull the ladder up Jack.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
A windfall tax is not a solution to the longer term problem that exists here.
It makes people feel good, granted, but it’s an overly simplistic answer to a complicated problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Need long term plans for sure, but short term solutions asap for the coming winter and next year.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by FFS Mike. (U1170)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
A windfall tax is not a solution to the longer term problem that exists here.
It makes people feel good, granted, but it’s an overly simplistic answer to a complicated problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Need long term plans for sure, but short term solutions asap for the coming winter and next year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course.
I was referring to the suggestion that the matter is ‘done’ with a windfall tax.
posted on 26/8/22
Sorry, for everyone else.
Windfall tax. Done (For the immediate crisis.Obviously)
posted on 26/8/22
The government won’t reduce costs because it will reduce profits for their paymasters.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 10 seconds ago
The government won’t reduce costs because it will reduce profits for their paymasters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You just know that the grant will just mean they put costs up £400
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Robbing Hoody - Legacy Fan (U6374)
posted 1 minute ago
Sorry, for everyone else.
Windfall tax. Done (For the immediate crisis.Obviously)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe try reading the article properly and you wouldn’t need to clarify your simplistic posts when people correct you.
posted on 26/8/22
Also love how there’s an immediate crisis… what then, the next crisis, a month later?
Delusional.
posted on 26/8/22
America and Britain will prolong this war by providing short range missiles ( they are not providing long range missiles) and eventually bankrupt Europe and Ukraine. It takes another 200 years for Ukraine to repay all the debts to the West even if the war ends TODAY..
The media is giving out news from only one side that is Ukraine...
posted on 26/8/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 6 minutes ago
RR, just a small correction to a post you made earlier.
10,000 dead so far in Ukraine since invasion.
100,000 dead in Bosnia from 1992-95.
So this Russian invasion is not the worst since WW2.
People forget Srebrinica. Amongst other atrocities during that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right to point out the Bosnian war, and I certainly don't want to play that down or get into a 'which is worse' discussion. The obscenity of the Russian invasion and atrocities don't depend on how the death tolls compare.
That said, I'm convinced that the actual death toll in Ukraine is far higher than 10,000. Ukrainian government figures estimate 28,000 civilians, but in still occupied territories it's hard to document these things. In the earliest days of the invasion my Ukrainian friends were telling me that acquaintances were reporting people getting executed in the streets of places I'd never heard of. It was several weeks before we heard about Bucha, and the anecdotal stories I heard, which were horribly similar to Bucha, derived from regions further east.
If I understand correctly, the figure of 100,000 deaths in the Bosnian war includes military casualties and (do correct me if I'm wrong) people on both sides of the conflict. I think if we compare like-for-like the numbers will look much closer and, I'm terribly sad to say, the death toll in Ukraine will continue to grow for some time.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Robbing Hoody - Legacy Fan (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Darren The King Fletcher (U10026)
posted 10 seconds ago
The government won’t reduce costs because it will reduce profits for their paymasters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You just know that the grant will just mean they put costs up £400
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah but Corbyn.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 6 minutes ago
RR, just a small correction to a post you made earlier.
10,000 dead so far in Ukraine since invasion.
100,000 dead in Bosnia from 1992-95.
So this Russian invasion is not the worst since WW2.
People forget Srebrinica. Amongst other atrocities during that time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're right to point out the Bosnian war, and I certainly don't want to play that down or get into a 'which is worse' discussion. The obscenity of the Russian invasion and atrocities don't depend on how the death tolls compare.
That said, I'm convinced that the actual death toll in Ukraine is far higher than 10,000. Ukrainian government figures estimate 28,000 civilians, but in still occupied territories it's hard to document these things. In the earliest days of the invasion my Ukrainian friends were telling me that acquaintances were reporting people getting executed in the streets of places I'd never heard of. It was several weeks before we heard about Bucha, and the anecdotal stories I heard, which were horribly similar to Bucha, derived from regions further east.
If I understand correctly, the figure of 100,000 deaths in the Bosnian war includes military casualties and (do correct me if I'm wrong) people on both sides of the conflict. I think if we compare like-for-like the numbers will look much closer and, I'm terribly sad to say, the death toll in Ukraine will continue to grow for some time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
80% of the dead were Bozniaks. Maybe because they were mostly Moslems it's not considered quite as bad.
posted on 26/8/22
I don’t like Mick Lynch anymore. Caaaant
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by BerbaKing11 (U6256)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 13 minutes ago
It's not right.
We cannot stand by and watch Russia invade a neighbouring democratic country, because it wants to.
----------------------
I'm not sure "we" have any right to lecture another country on invasions and military violence, frankly, given that the UK is only 2nd after the US in global affairs for doing this very thing (as well as overthrowing/undermining democratic or independent governments & installing/supporting brutal human rights abusing regimes). I'm not convinced that ploughing more money & weapons into the conflict is the best option, though I accept there are no 'good' options, either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what comes from relying heavily on the lens of critiquing Western imperialism. I totally understand that after decades of struggling to get society to care about monstrous foreign policy around the world, it must be galling to witness the immediate consensus around opposition to Russian actions. On an emotional level, it must be hard to escape disgust at the hypocrisy. But this disgust can lead to ethical confusion and inconsistency as well, leading to the failure to support (other than through platitudes) *someone else's* victims of imperialism and genocide.
Having grown up protesting against and ashamed of my own country's colonial past and ongoing imperial adventures, I feel deeply disappointed by the equivocation and inadequacy of the response of the 'anti-imperialist Left' to Ukraine. To be blunt, it has F.A. to do with 'lecturing' anyone, and framing it in that way betrays how Anglo-centric the perspective is.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There's no ethical confusion on my part. We're responsible for the predicted consequences of our own actions, and those are the ones that we can do *the most* about, practically, and should therefore be our *primary* focus. Small children understand this. We can't do something about everything, so we have to make choices, albeit uncomfortable ones. So again, no confusion or inconsistency on my part. And yes, the hypocrisy is insufferable. Indulge that hypocrisy if you wish... I won't be joining in.
The above would be true if our own governments were complicit in killing and displacing "only" dozens of people, rather than the reality of tens of millions.
I'm also curious... What do you actually want or expect UK citizens to do about someone else's crimes for which we are not complicit (although there's lines of argument to be had that challenge that assertion in this particular case, but I'll leave that aside) beyond platitudes? What would actually constitute 'adequate'? Waving more blue & yellow flags? Uncritically throwing the word 'genocide' around a little more?
To me much of what you've written looks like projection. The "anti-imperialist left", as you frame it (I don't like vague & overarching group classifications), are the ones adhering to at least a modicum of moral consistency - a consistency that makes people uncomfortable because it challenges their own assumptions. It's interesting that you have the wherewithal to identify the hypocrisy in the global response to Russia's invasion but then vaguely accuse "the left" of being ethically confused and inadequate without actually specifying what the criteria they're expected to meet is or should be. To be blunt, you sound confused.
posted on 26/8/22
80% of the dead were Bozniaks. Maybe because they were mostly Moslems it's not considered quite as bad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That's certainly not my position.
As far as I'm aware, half or more of the Bosniak casualties were military, not civilian. So my point is that you're comparing an estimate of 10,000 civilian Ukrainian deaths (itself less than half the current estimate) with a figure that aggregates civilian and military deaths on both sides. As per the estimates of the Hague Tribunal and the Sarajevo Research & Documentation Centre (given here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War#Casualties), Bosnians killed in the war represent somewhere between 61% and 68% of that total figure of around a hundred thousand deaths. Bosnian civilian casualties are estimated at between 25,000 and 31,000 thousand, which is a similar magnitude to the current Ukrainian estimate of 28,000 civilian deaths. One grim point of comparison is that this total has been reached in six months, while the Bosnian war took place over three years, which tells us that the daily bloodshed is alarmingly high in Ukraine.
Once again, the last thing I want to do is downplay the scale of the calamity and evil of the genocide of Bosniaks. Both the Bosnian genocide and the Russian attack on Ukraine are abominations - abominable for the same reasons. I've noticed that many Bosnian survivors have been talking about the resonances they detect when watching the news from Ukraine. All of them sympathise deeply with the plight of Ukrainians. Meanwhile, the nationalist right in Serbia is supporting Russia.
posted on 26/8/22
Berbaking
I feel pretty clear about what I believe and will try to summarise. Oppressed people should be given with whatever practical support we are able to provide. Fascism, and other forms of authoritarianism, should be vigorously opposed. And (slightly tangentially to the other points) there is a current, existential threat from a new form of oligarchy, which has abandoned the strategy of wielding influence through the mechanisms of liberal democracy.
Consistent with these beliefs, I would defend the following positions:
- Opposition to all the imperial adventures of Western powers and deep scepticism toward 'liberal interventionism'.
- Support for groups and peoples who have been subjugated by our country directly, by our regional allies, and by our geopolitical adversaries. Including practical support to aid their resistance where possible.
- So I'm firmly opposed to military exports to e.g. Saudi Arabia and Israel and support providing military aid to Ukraine.
- I'm well aware that liberal democracy has been easily co-opted by oligarchic and imperial forces since its onset, but I see it as essential that we save it from the onslaught of a populism backed by plutocrats, and then reform the democratic state to devolve far greater power and levers of accountability to the populace than ever before. I believe that unless the spectrum of left and democratic centre of politics works together (as it failed to in Germany in the early 1930s), then our chances of preventing the new form of authoritarian oligarchy from seizing power don't look good. As I said above, this is a bit tangential to the Russia-Ukraine context, but I raise it because I fear that the same sense of alienation from liberal democratic establishment that fuels some anti-anti-Russia sentiment on the Left also feeds an ambivalence in some parts of the Left toward defending liberal democracy from Trumpism / Putinism. The far right is actively targeting the left for recruitment. Left-wing podcasters are inviting far-right guests, and vice versa. We've all come across plenty of people on the Left who shrug about Trumpism on the basis that there's not much substantive difference - they're all capitalists. I'm not projecting any of this onto you, Berbaking, just saying it's a phenomenon that scares the hell out of me.
As for the 'anti-imperialist left', I'll be more specific. I'm referring to groups such as the Stop the War Coalition and individuals in that orbit. I don't see a great deal of moral consistency, as you put it, and behind its talk of peace a dearth of practical proposals. It is not consistent in its application of intellectual caution - approaching Russia and its statements with more good faith than it should, while decrying Western 'warmongering' in Ukraine when our intelligence services were pointing out the preparation of a giant invasion force. Yes, Corbyn and others have denounced Putin, along with muddying the waters about the complex causes of the conflict in a way they never would when speaking of UK, USA or Israeli imperial aggression. But what are the practical steps they advocate? They advocate peace, by means of 1) negotiating with the enemy that pursuing an ongoing invasion, which it is explicitly telling its people aims to obliterate Ukraine as a state, and 2) by ceasing to provide Ukraine with the means to defend itself. I respect pacifism as an intellectually coherent viewpoint. If there are those who advocate non-resistance and do so universally, that's fine. It's not my understanding that this is the majority view of the STW coalition. These are the people I am referring to, not "the Left" in amorphous terms, and I hope I have explained why I find their position woefully lacking in terms of practical ethics.
If you see confusion or inconsistencies in my own moral reasoning, feel free to point them out. We all have our blind spots and we should all be ready to acknowledge them.
posted on 26/8/22
I find the anti-imperial left to be the most morally inconsistent.
posted on 26/8/22
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 hours, 15 minutes ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Vladimikel Artutin - committing war crimes against football since 2019 (U18355)
posted 40 seconds ago
“Making it out like Russia’s actions are just another piece of the pie in terms of rising e every costs is embarrassing.”
Those are your words Winston and it’s clear you are saying they are the main reason for price jumps.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, a thumbs up from the guy who completely fabricated what I’d said and now wants to argue because he can’t admit he’s wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How did i fabricate what you said? You said it, the evidence is right there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You asked me if I think this is ALL down to Russia.
I never said or implied anything of the sort.
So yes, it is all there, and you’re an idiot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re certainly implying that it’s the driving factor, but all you’re doing is swallowing the government rhetoric. You’ve got to be incredibly naive to think this wouldn’t have happened if Russia hadn’t invaded.
Page 4 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10