What would be the reasoning not to approve?
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
Headlines Russia invades Ukraine
- Thread starter RaikouLover
- Start date
I don't really know much about it but from the news I saw it says Ghost of Kyiv is fake, Snake island soldiers shouting the word is fake and Zelensky is not allowed males 18-60 out of border even the foreign males I have mixed opinions towards urkraine rn but Russia did something real bad imo.
feel free to educate me if Im missing smtng or am wrong somewhere
feel free to educate me if Im missing smtng or am wrong somewhere
Russia are the masters of manipulation and fake news. The legions of Fox News pundits acting as his personal apologists this week is proof of that.
Obviously there will always be propaganda on both sides, but the information war is a war that (was also) started by Russia.
it's pretty amazing how Zelenskyy's gone from being this comedian and actor who played a President on TV became an honest-to-god modern-day Lincolneqsue figure for democracies around the world. It's like if Julia Louis Dreyfus became POTUS for real because of Veep and then became such an iconic leader that her very image defines politics in the future
There's a very formal application process and generally accession takes a decade or more. It seems unlikely to me that the EU would just throw that all out the window even in such an extraordinary circumstance. There's frankly no guarantee that Ukraine would be admitted even in ordinary circumstances. The EU has at best previously spoken positively about the "potential" of Ukraine joining "in the future"... by the 2030s or 40s.
Albania is one example of a country that applied a long time ago, in 2009, and still is in negotiations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlargement_of_the_European_Union
For its part, Ukraine was planning to apply in the next few years in order to finally join in the 2030s.
I also haven't seen much strong argumentation to the contrary, and it's pretty easy to argue especially from a moral standpoint that when you look at Russia bordering countries (and look, now Finland also more seriously talking about entering NATO), these sovereign countries have a right to declare their desires to be in NATO and it's really Russia that's pushing them to want it.
But I think that the "just defensive alliance" is tricky when we're talking about a country that's already partially taken over by Russia. Russia has broken so many treaties, and diplomatically/moral principle there would be more than an argument to use any of those treaties to define Ukraine's borders-- especially Budapest, where Russia explicitly signed off to respect Ukraine's borders in exchange for them getting rid of their nukes. If you were someone looking at this strictly from a consequentialist standpoint (ie. anything is permissible as long as you avoid nuclear war and the human extinction) then putting Ukraine into NATO as is could immediately be a big problem if you believe a full and direct war between NATO and Russia has to be avoided at all costs. NATO is a defensive alliance that says an attack on one is an attack on all. But if you already have invaded forces in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, places clearly defined as Ukrainian territory by any reasonable reading, and it's really really obvious who's in the wrong, who's the aggressor, and that Ukraine has a defensive problem--
Well then you don't need an invasion of NATO into Russia to start a war. You already have an invasion of Russia into a theoretically now-NATO country giving ever justification for defensive war.
In a theoretical Future where Russia has retreated out of Ukraine completely (including Crimea) then it's a pretty clear easy case to compare Ukraine to other Russia-bordering countries; though in terms of location and interests strategic and economic it's pretty clear why Ukraine is far more concerning to Russia than the others. I think the negotiations have to be careful, clear (in the back rooms where they're being made), and lean into nuance/material reality and not pure principal.
That said, for the time being, the most important things are morale and arms, so the best thing to give Ukraine is more prayers and weapons.
Go go The Ghost of Kiev*. Go, go, the people's Raytheon.
*It literally doesn't matter if the ghost or any war stories are fake-- all that matters is how they affect Ukrainian morale. thelegendsrevamped
I agree Russia did nothing good but **in my opinion** Zelensky is not the figure we're seeing but ye sending prayers to Ukraine is primary thing here
The alliance's historic mission was to defend European countries against the Soviet threat, and even though today's Russia represents a strategic challenge according to many European countries for multitple reasons, it is still not even close to the heels of NATO's spending on defense, so you could say it vastly outspends Russia, even the US spends more on defense than Russia and any other NATO country, so what's the actual threat here? You say it hasn't shown any inkling on offensive posturing towards an invasion of Russia yet it has been getting closer and closer to its borders and deploying missiles at Russia's doorstep, which is something that's been going on for years, not sure how's this a non-offensive posture, it's more of a provocative posture than anything else. Again, if it were the other way around and Russia placed its missiles on the US border between Canada and Mexico, it wouldn't make any difference either, or can you say that the US would not be concerned and feel threatened in such situation?.
It's important to note here that the convulsive political and social situation since 2014 has intensified Ukrainian nationalism led by forces mostly composed of far-right organizations, some of which have also consolidated as legal political parties. They are influenced by the fascist and Nazi tendencies that arose in Eastern Europe by the most conservative and reactionary sectors of society. Ironically enough, these people do not even hesitate to show their empathy and support towards Zelensky's government, mainly because of their anti-Russian sentiment. I even remember that not long ago the Ukrainian parliament declared a national day of commemoration for Stepan Bandera, someone who briefly joined forces with the Nazi occupation of Ukraine and whose supporters at the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, which he headed, committed countless war crimes against jews.
As for Ukraine's possible EU membership, countries that seek to join NATO must meet certain political, economic, and military goals. Given that there's a process and criteria to follow which Ukraine fails to accomplish, it is simply not going to happen, at least not for now.
I must admit on a personal level I have zero empathy or sympathy for Russia. I can understand feeling “threatened” if Mexico and Canada joined an adversarial alliance. However, there is still no justification to annex / invade Canadian province Ontario just because Southern Ontario has some geographical and cultural similarities to the United States. Russia’s position in the world is their own doing and the onus is on them to facilitate healthier diplomatic relations with their neighbors. I think people trying to empathize with megalomaniacal despot Putin’s way of thinking is beyond troubling.
Yes,im not supporting Russia I will never do that after soo innocents lost lives im saying that Ukraine is not as good as we're thinking racism is really high there if u didn't know also, id prefer the sympathy Ukraine is getting now referred to selective sympathy as things like syria and shit are nt getting it, wether getting the sympathy or not being decided by the west is humiliating I still support world peace doe and I dont support Russia as I alrdy said im kind of neutral.
https://imgur.com/a/JRDe9T1
^ Ik in a war propganda is common but international media suppressing one and promoting other leads to selective sympathy and false believes in public who dont know the truth even now there are some people who think ghost of Kiev is real
Last edited:
No, the Euromaidan was not led by Nazis. The idea that Nazis have any sort of real political influence is a narrative common to pro-Russian propaganda. Meanwhile Putin sends actual neo-Nazi mercenaries from Wagner Group to fight in Ukraine. If Ukraine was secretly run by Nazis, why is the President the grandson of a Holocaust survivor?
*puts on Russian propagandist hat* easy, to deflect criticismIf Ukraine was secretly run by Nazis, why is the President the grandson of a Holocaust survivor?
There certainly is a notable neo-nazi presence in Ukraine but it seems pretty laughable that people suggest it as a justification for invading
Don't know how I didn't see this thread, I was wondering why I didn't have any notifications from the general news thread
I mean, there's some stuff here that is correct but you're throwing so much into it that it kinda lacks nuance:
- NATO as a whole spends a ton more on defence than Russia does, correct. A large part of this though comes from one country - the US - who is obviously under no threat, but NATO's lack of funding isn't exactly a secret recently. Adding to that, the countries that you could argue are under a more severe threat of offensive action are the former Warsaw Pact members, which includes successor States of the Soviet Union in the baltic region. Those States spend a lot less on defence than Russia does, and evidently from an imperialist perspective Putin isn't keen on that playing field evening out. So yes, NATO spends a ton more as a whole, but that's precisely the point for those new members.
- Now, moving weapons closer to the border is something that requires a lot of specifics, but I'd just say first that there's a big difference between NATO the alliance of States and the foreign policy of States part of NATO. Judging by your examples, I assume you're talking about the US policy, which did make a ton of baffling decisions in power projection in the past few decades. But it's not a NATO issue, like the Cuban Missile Crisis wasn't. It was the Soviet Union and the US playing way too loose with something way too dangerous, and both agreeing to move back at the brink. Putin knows all of that, but it's obviously way more convenient to scapegoat NATO for his interests.
- Also, while weapons have been deployed in more States near Russia "for years", it bears repeating what has happened in those years. Georgia wanted to join NATO, Russia invades, splits the country, leaves behind a husk of a government that strangely has not mentioned NATO membership seriously since. Ukraine has a revolution to get closer to Europe and NATO, Russia takes out Crimea, arms separatists, plays coy about an invasion for years before finally pulling the trigger. Is it any real surprise that a defensive pact that includes former Soviet republics sees this and thinks, well uh geez maybe we should be ready for anything? To use your example, I'm Canadian but if uh we left direct political control of the US, saw it bang war rhetoric and laments our loss, yeah I'd be interested in getting someone's help too. Saying it's NATO as a whole, like the past two points, just doesn't encapsulate that issue for me.
- And I don't really like this point because it's a bit pedantic, but Russia has been sharing a border with NATO since... 1949, as Norway is a founding member of the alliance. Now that doesn't really mean a lot in itself because there's plenty of reasons why Russia's concern with Norway is minimal, but those concerns also make the NATO excuse very flimsy. It has no real imperalist interest in Norway, that's definitely not true in former Soviet Republics, so Putin's regime never actually brings it up.
NATO obviously has issues - the Kosovo War was a complete debacle for it - but there's completely legitimate reasons as to why weaker States that left the Soviet orbit are adamant about joining. There's also reasons why Russia doesn't want them to join, but I give way less credence into strong States desiring to keep their power projection. And this is really what the NATO question is about. It's not about the US vs Russia as a geopolitical rivalry, it's not even about NATO and the failings of the pact, it's about Ukraine vs Russia, or Baltic States vs Russia, or was about Georgia vs Russia. That's what matters, not great powers analysis that skirms over the insecurities of millions.
Last edited:
Ukraine's neo-Nazi presence isn't really substantially different from other countries, whereas Russia actually has neo-Nazis around the world either collaborating with their intelligence services or appearing in state propaganda. Its "denazification" involves sending mercenaries for a PMC run by a neo-Nazi into Kyiv to assassinate Ukraine's Jewish Prime Minister. It just doesn't make any sense to talk about JUST the presence of neo-Nazis in Ukraine when it's both clearly a regional issue and much worse in Russia.
Last edited:
This may be entirely pedantic but the visceral reaction to Nazis in Russia is not “they killed 6 million Jews in the holocaust” but rather “they killed 14 million Russians in the war total (and twice that if you include the whole USSR).” In fact under the heavily antisemitic Stalin, the official position of the state was largely holocaust denial.
In terms of how how Putin means for the statement to play domestically, the allegation that Ukraine is a Nazi regime has everything to do with persecution of ethnic Russians and nothing to do with Jews at all, so pointing out that Zelensky is Jewish is basically a non sequitur.
Russia is frankly no friend of Jews. Like pretty much any European country it has a long, sordid history from pogroms to the doctor’s plot. The protocols of the elders of Zion was written by a Russian agent. I could go on.
In terms of how how Putin means for the statement to play domestically, the allegation that Ukraine is a Nazi regime has everything to do with persecution of ethnic Russians and nothing to do with Jews at all, so pointing out that Zelensky is Jewish is basically a non sequitur.
Russia is frankly no friend of Jews. Like pretty much any European country it has a long, sordid history from pogroms to the doctor’s plot. The protocols of the elders of Zion was written by a Russian agent. I could go on.
I am seeing an alarming amount of Russian apologism online. However, it is cloaked in nuanced language. This seems like a cut and dry situation to me. Some examples:
“Ukraine is already oppressed by their own government”
“Putin is just replacing one corrupt government with another corrupt government”
“Putin has no choice. He has to invade Unkraine to stop NATO”
etc etc
Anyone else seeing similar sentiment?
My favorite was when Sergiy Kyslytsya literally said Putin should kill himself like Hitler did in front of the entire UN.
I remember when MH17 was shot down I got into an argument (big mistake) on the Pokémon online forums with a Russian user who totally denied Russia’s culpability, claimed it was a false flag by Ukrainian/American/European agents, etc. I wonder how those sorts of people are rationalizing this war, if they are at all. It’s sad to think that there are people who have convinced themselves that this war is good.
It’s difficult for me to read certain articles or go on Reddit and see people celebrating/talking up how “badass” people are. Not that there’s something wrong with that but for me it feels detached from the reality that people are now living. I personally can’t help but think about how a generation of people’s lives have been and will be totally changed by the trauma of war. I can’t help but feel a great sadness for the many young Ukrainian soldiers who feel they have no choice but to defend their homeland and for the Russian soldiers who are dying for their old and rich leaders who care little about their lives at all. What a waste of human potential and life, and for what?
I suppose the one possibly bright spot is that it is nice to see the collectivism being shown against the war. I hope that this sense of togetherness will not just bring about peace, but continue after the war in an effort to improve human lives everywhere. Wishful thinking probably, but maybe.
It’s difficult for me to read certain articles or go on Reddit and see people celebrating/talking up how “badass” people are. Not that there’s something wrong with that but for me it feels detached from the reality that people are now living. I personally can’t help but think about how a generation of people’s lives have been and will be totally changed by the trauma of war. I can’t help but feel a great sadness for the many young Ukrainian soldiers who feel they have no choice but to defend their homeland and for the Russian soldiers who are dying for their old and rich leaders who care little about their lives at all. What a waste of human potential and life, and for what?
I suppose the one possibly bright spot is that it is nice to see the collectivism being shown against the war. I hope that this sense of togetherness will not just bring about peace, but continue after the war in an effort to improve human lives everywhere. Wishful thinking probably, but maybe.
disclaimer: not attempting to justify the war in any shape or form and if that is how you read this post then please log off.
something that personally stands out to me as blatantly dangerous here is the move of several european countries outright threatening jailtime to anyone who dares support the russian government. both czechia & slovakia have implemented laws that see anyone that "supports war propaganda" gain up to a sentence of 3 or 25 whole years in prison respectively. in addition to this, latvia, a country ethnically ~25% russian has in the last 48 hours put similar laws into place, even installing a hotline people can call to report others. am i the only one who thinks this sets an incredibly dangerous precedent? to reiterate, i am again, not attempting to defend russian invasion here, but this is a dangerous overreach on a freedom citizens of these nations should be entitled to. today it's defending russia. next it could be palestine or whatever other state their government opposes. incredibly extreme measures that scare the fuck out of me.
sources:
https://spravy.rtvs.sk/2022/02/za-podporu-vojnovej-propagandy-hrozi-az-dozivotie/
https://www.pardrosibu.lv/2022/03/01/aicina-zinot-par-krievijas-agresijas-atbalstitajiem-latvija/
s:
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/05/01/ukr-m01.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cohen-ukraine-commentary-idUSKBN1GV2TY
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-sternenko-prison-release-/31283650.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-lgbt-idUSKBN2F414J
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/uk...e-becomes-increasingly-corrupt-authoritarian/
as a footnote: would be nice if western media focused this much on all the innocent lives lost in syria, iraq, yemen, etc. incredibly sad how much the us government can get away with if its atrocities aren't in the spotlight.
something that personally stands out to me as blatantly dangerous here is the move of several european countries outright threatening jailtime to anyone who dares support the russian government. both czechia & slovakia have implemented laws that see anyone that "supports war propaganda" gain up to a sentence of 3 or 25 whole years in prison respectively. in addition to this, latvia, a country ethnically ~25% russian has in the last 48 hours put similar laws into place, even installing a hotline people can call to report others. am i the only one who thinks this sets an incredibly dangerous precedent? to reiterate, i am again, not attempting to defend russian invasion here, but this is a dangerous overreach on a freedom citizens of these nations should be entitled to. today it's defending russia. next it could be palestine or whatever other state their government opposes. incredibly extreme measures that scare the fuck out of me.
sources:
https://spravy.rtvs.sk/2022/02/za-podporu-vojnovej-propagandy-hrozi-az-dozivotie/
https://www.pardrosibu.lv/2022/03/01/aicina-zinot-par-krievijas-agresijas-atbalstitajiem-latvija/
this is incredibly laughable btw, zelensky's increasingly corrupt government has for a while aligned itself with far-right groups, and in one case specifically appointed serhii sternenko, a well-known neo-nazi from the region that i encourage you to read into, to head of ukraine's security service. regardless of this very blatant example, ukraine does have a long standing extremely comparatively severe neo-nazi problem that shouldn't be minimised and this kind of whataboutism doesn't help anyone.
s:
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/05/01/ukr-m01.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cohen-ukraine-commentary-idUSKBN1GV2TY
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-sternenko-prison-release-/31283650.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-lgbt-idUSKBN2F414J
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/uk...e-becomes-increasingly-corrupt-authoritarian/
as a footnote: would be nice if western media focused this much on all the innocent lives lost in syria, iraq, yemen, etc. incredibly sad how much the us government can get away with if its atrocities aren't in the spotlight.
That doesn't sound great, but is it really surprising? Three countries that have historical reasons to actively fear Russian intervention doing this is depressing, but not entirely unexpected when a war that confirms a lot of the fears breaks out. With regards to Czechia, academics and government officials have been raising concerns about Moscow's activities for years now, the current climate just exacerbates this far more. Again, this isn't particularly great and Czechia has had some sketchy issues with regards to democracy recently iirc, but those are the times with what Putin just did honestly
Also not supporting Russia but did you know the same US which said Russia bad had bombed civilians in Iran and didnt leave anything behind.
We want world peace NOT selective sympathy
Internet culture war frontlinemen tend to think that if they can’t affect change on a political scale, then they‘ll sure as hell cross-pollinate references for laughs, clicks, and clout instead as if they’re supplementary… this might always elude logic and reason.
The word “but” in the middle of a sentence that conjoins two phrases generally nullifies the first phrase. We can support world peace without the both sidesism.