"The West's complicity in the Ukraine war/ Proxy War" Topic

How are we supposed to believe your spin on things when you throw out such obvious falsehoods?
No deal had been hammered out in any detail.
To imply Israel and Turkey were actually working together is generous at most.
And as for your final statement:

Meh, from 2022 until a good part of 2023 Bennet kept to the same story that a peace deal was in process when the Biden admin in particular stopped it. You can watch this Feb 2023 interview yourself: YouTube link

I brought this up on the Blue Fez back then -- why would Biden want to block a peace deal? So sure, Bennet has since been hammered back into line by the Powers that Be, he is a politician after all, but that doesn't change that fact that he spoke on the for almost a year before recanting.

As for Turkey, I supplied the quote and the source.

Why are you so eager to perpetuate war in Europe with a nuclear power?

So, it seems your argument is: nuclear powers can get away with whatever they like, so long as they don't pick a fight with another nuclear power of course.

"Why are you so eager to perpetuate war in Europe with a nuclear power?"

Why are you so eager to support a nuclear power invading and attempt to conquer another country?

Tally Ho!

And to say "…a peace deal was in progress…" is ridiculous. Putin was more than happy to entertain envoys. Favorable optics naturally. Nothing substantial was ever on the table.

why would Biden want to block a peace deal?

I watched the video – Bennett specifically does not say that. He only says that each side had sent their drafts , no more: that is not a peace deal. Bennett says that he thought maybe there was a 50% chance of getting to a deal in the end, but the USA (and his own staff!) didn't agree there was this chance at all. And most importantly, it does not say that Biden 'stopped' a peace deal, he says that the European and US leaders stopped the collaborative approach with him (Bennett): there was nothing to stop the Ukrainian and Russian negotiators in Gomel reaching an agreement if they could. He also agrees that his whole approach may have been wrong; and most importantly that the massacres at Bucha rendered it impossible whatever happened.

So when people write stuff like 'Biden' stopped a peace deal or the 'proxy war' or 'the West's complicity' it is both factually wrong and really just a reflection of their domestic political positions – i.e. best to give a stiff ignoring.

After reading the "interesting" responses to the OP, I'm reminded of the old saw "It is better to remain silent and thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt".

But, be that as it may, I think the best response to the question posed in the OP is, as the great Marcus Tullius Cicero would ask, cui bono?

Funny, I was reminded of that old saw too- but it was the OP that reminded me of it.

'Cui bono?' is one of those questions frequently asked by those with an overdeveloped sense of the conspiratorial, or with an otherwise shaky grasp of world politics and history.

I'm sure you're afflicted by neither of those impediments. But government intentions (especially in democracies) are usually vaguer, and outcomes are more random and and unpredictable, in the real world than graduates of the 'Alex Jones institute of international affairs' would try to tell us. Records of the lead up, and indeed the culmination of, most major conflicts show that pretty clearly.

I'd recommend two very instructive televised lectures from the 1970s by the historian AJP Taylor- 'how wars begin' and 'how wars end'. They are pretty timeless in their descriptions of messy compromise and unintended consequence. You don't have to agree with all his politics (I don't), and some points like the train timetables in 1914 are challenged now, but you might find their general thrust interesting.

Why are you so eager to support a nuclear power invading and attempt to conquer another country?

Tally Ho!

I'm not eager to support a nuclear power attempting to conquer another country, but I am tired of seeing so many people beating their chests and waving the bloody shirt without offering any realistic paths towards victory -- you can't even define a realistic victory.

I'm reminded that my grandfather and many other people cheered as War with Germany! was announced in August of 1914. Put the Hun in his place! Let's Kick the Kaiser! So eager for war. My grandfather joined up as soon as he could, only to see all his friends die at 2nd Ypres, himself gassed and captured by the Germans.

Let's hope we don't all get what you wish for…

Thank you SBMinisguy for your posts and for enduring the implicit insults and allegations directed against you.

"Let's hope we don't all get what you wish for…"

So what is a realistic victory in your eyes, the Ukraine becoming a province of a new Soviet Union? Or do you have Intelligence that Spewtin will pull his troops back and leave the Ukraine alone?

Some of us have seen the horrors of war first hand and lost friends we served with. No one is cheering for war, we are defending the right of a country to protect it's independence against an aggressor.

Tally Ho!

Here is another interesting article that may support the opinions in the first post.

the article reports…

"Now, Merkel confirms that NATO wanted war from the start but needed time to prepare militarily—an assessment WSWS has long held.

Here is the article.
link

Strange there are other articles like this too.

Strange that really sad edge-lord tankies repeat the same rubbish they have been coming out with for the last 80 years? Honestly, this is sad and desperate stuff.

Angela Merkel: The Minsk agreement gave time for Ukraine to re-arm after Russia's imperialist invasions of 2014. It is a frozen conflict i.e. Russia is going to re-start this war.

WSWS: This means that NATO wanted war.

It is stupid. And it is a lie. And it is a really stupid lie. Merkel's meaning is clear: thankfully Ukraine had a chance to re-arm so that they weren't over-run in the next Russian invasion. And the 'World Socialists' meaning is clear: they are very upset that Ukraine has resisted Russia's imperialist invasion with some aid from NATO. They are true heirs of Stalin and Molotov. Well, they can cry harder.

I'm not sure the World Socialist Website is an unbiased source and the glossing over of the theft of Crimea as justified including that clearly bogus referendum doesn't help.

But…even if I accept the premise that the evil US was picking on poor virtuous Russia, stealing is stealing and doing so by a much bigger country is simply unconscionable in the 21st century.

The war would end tomorrow if Russia just gives back the stolen land.

The idea that preserving Putin's dignitas is a key element in any settlement seems little different to me than Neville Chamberlin caring about Hitler's political needs at Munich.

Has any nation state since the Iraq/Kuwait War flat out sought to steal territory from a neighbor other than Russia?

Here is another video It doesn't have the word "Socialist" on the page so it wont hurt you. There is a "trigger warning" though. Here is the warning (it not made by an all American Boy) You have been advised.

link

So what is a realistic victory in your eyes, the Ukraine becoming a province of a new Soviet Union? Or do you have Intelligence that Spewtin will pull his troops back and leave the Ukraine alone?

Already mentioned it here. Something nobody is fully happy with which includes:

1. Russia cedes claims on Eastern Ukraine and pulls out
2. Ukraine cedes claims to the Crimea
3. UN forces in both regions as a tripwire
4. Russia guarantees energy shipments to Ukraine at a below market rate, and the US drops energy industry embargos on Russian production
5. Nice sounding security arrangements we know Russia will violate -- which us why…
6. The US and NATO help Ukraine build a DMZ along their borders with Russia
7. Throw Russia a bone about no NATO expansion to Ukraine, but put Ukraine on a path to EU membership AND NATO countries also sign bilateral defense agreements that essentially mirror NATO
8. EU member states can also sponsor post war War Crimes investigations via the ICC, even though it's unenforceable.

Anyways, that's what I think

I don't understand why you keep on posting really obvious lies, Ned Ludd. The You Tuber reckoned that the Minsk II accords were betrayed because France and Germany then supplied weapons to Ukraine because they were supposed to take on the monitoring role; but there was nothing in Minsk II that prevented them from doing that, if they had done so…which in fact, the Youtuber admits at the beginning of the video, they hadn't in fact done it! Also the Youtuber claims that France and Germany are at war with Russia, and that Ukraine has been 'completely destroyed', which is obviously just more really stupid obvious lies. In any case, you will notice that in fact everyone apart from the Russians and their supporters were correct – Russia was lying and did in fact want to invade.
Of course, yet again, what we see is that in Minsk II the Ukrainians told the truth, and Russia lied: it didn't want independent Donbas, it just wanted to annex them as proved by their subsequent behaviour.

A nice plain SB, but not enough in it for Putin. Nobody will be happy except everybody but Putin. Not that I have an answer.

We've got Kremlin bots, trolls, shills, and also a few who are placing themselves in the role of what Lenin called 'useful idiots'. If you are one of the later- think about what being one might mean for the wider and longer-term interests of your country.

Appeasers and isolationists went down the wrong road in the the 1930s when the world needed to stand up to dictators- and some are going down the wrong road now. No blame, no shame- just take a moment to reflect.

Kremlin bots, trolls, shills Iv been called all these already on these boards as well as a moron. The best yet was been accused of been in league with putin himself and by implication planning the conflict in ukrain with putin.

All because I asked questions and posted info which is not much publicised in the western msm.

Wider and longer-term interests of your country don't lay in accepting propaganda, lies, double standards and hypocrisy by your governments.

Well there may be a reason this stuff is not posted on "msm". We can debate the fine points all we want, but it's entirely possible that the assertion is a misleading spin, not accurate.

"Wider and longer-term interests of your country don't lay in accepting propaganda, lies, double standards and hypocrisy!"

Yet here you are spewing out pro Spewtin propaganda, and the reason your "info" is not published is because it most often discredited single source/ circular reporting by the pro spewtin machine.

Tally Ho!

link

link

link

These are the type of posts that a lapped up on here. All propaganda no questions asked.

And then there are the mentally unbalanced who post crazed responses.

I think we can safely assume that the war is not going well or it would already be over. Beyond that, there is always propaganda and no way for us to fact check actual combat results the media gives us. But you can often tell who's lying on the international stage by their history of never admitting any mistakes.

@Tortorella – Yep, 100%. And that goes for both side in this war. If you only get your news from CNN, you will only a steady drumbeat of Ukrainian victories and advances. Oh, and they are still pushing the RussiaGate narrative which has been proven to be a total fabrication.

These are the type of posts that a lapped up on here. All propaganda no questions asked.

Oh wise Socrates, do tell us how you know all the statements in here are false, lying propaganda!

(Not just things that make you feel bad, because it talks about losses and failures of the Russian Imperials)

Again, you can't trust the Russians, Chinese, or Iran … That has been going on for decades …

"And then there are the mentally unbalanced who post crazed responses"

Not forgetting those who see intelligence that some never will, whilst some mentally unbalanced flounder around trying to feel good whilst they unquestionably post Russian propaganda,

Tally Ho!

I find the very idea that "NATO wants war" quite amusing.
Makes no sense from a western perspective.
Because it's obvious what NATO is – and more importantly – what it is not.
NATO is a loose association which is only really united on one defensive point.

Probably depends on perspective though.
Maybe this is less obvious to someone who is not a westerner.
If your leader is a dictator. Historically, the dictator of your country was effectively dictator of multiple countries.
Russia has one dictator takes decisions. If your country works that way then maybe it's an easy mistake to assume that's how NATO must work.

It isn't.

Not forgetting those who see intelligence that some never will, whilst some mentally unbalanced flounder around trying to feel good whilst they unquestionably post Russian propaganda,

So anything critical of the conduct of the war is pushing Russian propaganda? If I say I think this war is a bloody sh1tsh0w for all involved, with heavy losses on both sides that may be unsustainable on the current trajectory for Ukraine – is that Russian propaganda? How about saying I'm uncomfortable that billions of aid intended for Ukraine's war effort have been siphoned off through corruption?

"Oh wise Socrates, do tell us how you know all the statements in here are false, lying propaganda"!

All that I have learned is that I know nothing.

Masterful retort Ned Ludd!

Tally ho!

I seem to be knowing less and less. And now Socrates throws a cryptic blanket over it.