The Russian Invasion of the Ukraine.

[jimbob]

Belerus is being sanctioned by the West and will soon join Russia as a pariah.

The struck out part is superfluous.

 

[jimbob]

Chelsea FC owner and Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich will sell club

Obviously the British government don't quite understand what "freezing" assets means.

 

[Oystein]

It's definitely a state that justifies this form of censorship (shutting down Russian propaganda outlets). Just as it justifies other attempts to blunt or cripple Russian capacity and willingness to wage war, such as economic sanctions, without committing to a military confrontation.

I even think it justifies secret warfare: cyberwarfare, sabotage, espionage, assassination, etc.

Being understandably reluctant to escalate to direct military confrontation doesn't mean you have to pretend there's not a war on, or that you can't or shouldn't do any number of other things to resist and deter your enemy.

What if I, a citizen of my country with all my constitutional rights intact, decided to re-blog the content of RT?
Could / should I be censored? Would that be legal?
What if I toed the Russian line without actually quoting Russian state media - could / should I be censored? Now? Are we this far?

---

Please note that I am not saying that I, personally, have a problem with shutting them down, I understand the reasons, and firmly root for Team Ukraine (I have had a soft spot for the country for more than a decade - in my wallet, I carry two coins with which I cannot pay: 1 Deutsche Mark, and 50 kopiyok; both for nostalgic reasons) and am happy to see Russian propaganda gone.

Just urging everyone to think about their reasons to want or agree with that, oppose or disagree with this. I think it is important that we, the "good" ones, strive to keep the laws and justice. Rule of Law is important, even (or especially) when a war is looming or happening next door. Let's not sink to their level.

 

[Michel H]

Putin's propaganda arm does a good job of telling us what Putin wants us to know? That's some first class rocket surgery you're doing, Michel.

If I want to know what Putin really wants (with some details), I like to be able to read it on a Russian information website, even if it tends to give the "official view", of the Russian government (but precisely this "official view" is interesting). I am not sure the BBC alone is the best source for knowing Putin's thinking.

Anyways, I found their reporting fairly neutral, sometimes seeming even more pro-Western than Western media.

The Nazis were trying to jam the BBC during WW2 as well.

 

[Arcade22]

This is getting bizarre tbh.

Olympic teams having to play neutral, Russian characters being removed from video games. Maybe we can leave Ivan Drago alone since he's Scandinavian.

I think there's marketing and licensing things behind this. It's not like they can use the real life football players in games without paying for it.

 

[Klimax]

Was.
And I am sure there are plenty of good arguments to rebuke this. And that you know this. (For starters, it's a WMD if its deployment has the purpose and chance of effecting mass destruction - which I doubt it had. Calling individual targeted killings "war" is bordering on Orwellian in my dictionary.)

I am talking however about the presence. Are ("are", not "were") we at war right now?

How about then Russians bombing Czech warehouses with weapons and ammunition. in Vrbětice.

Does the west keep sending in handheld missiles? Those Javelins sure seem quite effective against, well, any Russian ground vehicle. Not sure if their latest and greatest, the T-90 ,is vulnerable, but Russia doesn't have all that many of them. Handheld missile platforms are far cheaper to manufacture than any armored vehicle and "the west" has vastly more combined resources than Russia does.

According to Wiki one M72 LAW costs about 200USD...

 

[lobosrul5]

If I want to know what Putin really wants (with some details), I like to be able to read it on a Russian information website, even if it tends to give the "official view", of the Russian government (but precisely this "official view" is interesting). I am not sure the BBC alone is the best source for knowing Putin's thinking.

Anyways, I found their reporting fairly neutral, sometimes seeming even more pro-Western than Western media.

The Nazis were trying to jam the BBC during WW2 as well.

No. You are being informed what Putin wants the public to think is what he wants.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Maybe we can leave Ivan Drago alone since he's Scandinavian.

Didn't the last Creed movie retcon/clarify that Drago was Ukrainian? I know his son was specifically called Ukrainian the film.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Why are we still entertaining any sort of "No I totally believe the dictator will just stop if we just give him what he says he wants."

 

[theprestige]

Does the west keep sending in handheld missiles? Those Javelins sure seem quite effective against, well, any Russian ground vehicle. Not sure if their latest and greatest, the T-90 ,is vulnerable, but Russia doesn't have all that many of them. Handheld missile platforms are far cheaper to manufacture than any armored vehicle and "the west" has vastly more combined resources than Russia does.

My misgiving is that handheld missiles are light infantry, and light infantry is extremely vulnerable to armor and artillery and air power. Ambushing poorly-led tank platoons in onsie-twosie engagements isn't the same as holding the line against an actual mechanized assault.

Presumably Russia does have armored battalions with artillery support somewhere in its order of battle in Ukraine. Those will be going up against their Ukrainian counterparts. And if the Ukrainian counterparts break, those will eventually overrun the Ukrainian light infantry. Javelins are awesome, but they aren't magic.

Probably what Ukraine needs most right now is mechanized infantry formations, with artillery support and air cover, reconnaissance, and good command and control. Russia likewise. I think ultimately victory comes down to who has more and better of these things, and who can keep them going longer.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Why are we still entertaining any sort of "No I totally believe the dictator will just stop if we just give him what he says he wants."

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Unless Putin is taken out somehow, either externally or via some coup, odds are extremely good that hostilities in Ukraine will end in some negotiated peace deal in which Putin's demands will be considered.*

How much leverage he has in such a negotiation will depend on facts on the ground militarily and other such factors.

*Obvious caveat that there will be no negotiation if Russian military manages to successfully overthrow and install a puppet government, which still seems to be Putin's goal. Hopefully that is not the outcome.

 

[Oystein]

I was answering the question from an ethical point of view. Ethically I think it's an easy question to answer. Even if Germany is struggling to find the ethical answer politically expedient.



I can't say I'm impressed with the way politics is being done in Germany right now.



Russia is literally waging war in Ukraine right now. The only question for you is whether Germany will ally itself with Ukraine and give them meaningful support, or not.


Suppression of enemy propaganda outlets is always okay.


Sorry, I forget that English may not be your first language. By "insult" here I mean "blatant existential threat".



Russia has no basic right to unrestricted propaganda in support of its war efforts.


This is a legal and political issue that is embarrassing to Germany. It does not make the ethical question of whether to suppress Russian propaganda any more difficult to answer.

The ethical question is easy to answer: Yes, suppress that ****. Germany should not be struggling so much to establish the necessary legal basis to take that step.

Also I think the fact is that you are at war, you just don't want to admit it yet. Russia is certainly at war with you, even if they haven't yet confronted you directly.


Good for you. I hope you get it sorted out soon and take meaningful steps to suppress Russian propaganda in support of its war efforts.

Without a doubt, Germany was at war from 2001 onwards, with the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Please describe exactly the amount of censorship you demanded that Germany implement!
How much censorship did you demand in your country?

There was a good argument to be had that the invasion of Iraq was illegal.
Should Germany have shut out ALL US media outlets, or only those associated with the US government?

or are you saying that the question of whether or not to suppress opposition press is not, and absolutely should not ever, be a matter of law and rights and only of political opportunism?

(In am being difficult on purpose.
But I am in fact worried that considerations of what is actually legal are so confidently brushed aside. That is the hallmark of despotism.)

 

[Michel H]

No. You are being informed what Putin wants the public to think is what he wants.

Knowing what Putin wants us to believe, his official communication is interesting too. I have no reason to believe that RT journalists are doing a work which is significantly inferior to what Western media are doing.

Interesting that Gestapo-like techniques are apparently getting wide approval on this forum, this is rather revealing, I think.

 

[Oystein]

...Even if Germany is struggling to find the ethical answer politically expedient.
...
I hope you get it sorted out soon and take meaningful steps to suppress Russian propaganda in support of its war efforts.

You, like another poster earlier, seem to be under the strange delusion that I am Germany.

I am not.
Germany is a country. I am a natural person.

It is troubling and weird that I have to point this out repeatedly.

 

[theprestige]

What if I, a citizen of my country with all my constitutional rights intact, decided to re-blog the content of RT?

Ethically? I think it would be reasonable to arrest you and put you on trial for treason.

Could / should I be censored? Would that be legal?

That's a political and legal question your own government will have to answer.

What if I toed the Russian line without actually quoting Russian state media

I'm not going to play the five year old's game of "I'm not touching you!" with you.

- could / should I be censored? Now? Are we this far?

Legally and politically in Germany? That's for the Germans to decide amongst themselves. I think we're this far and it is my fervent wish that the German people and their government will figure it out sooner rather than later.

---

Please note that I am not saying that I, personally, have a problem with shutting them down, I understand the reasons, and firmly root for Team Ukraine (I have had a soft spot for the country for more than a decade - in my wallet, I carry two coins with which I cannot pay: 1 Deutsche Mark, and 50 kopiyok; both for nostalgic reasons) and am happy to see Russian propaganda gone.

Just urging everyone to think about their reasons to want or agree with that, oppose or disagree with this. I think it is important that we, the "good" ones, strive to keep the laws and justice. Rule of Law is important, even (or especially) when a war is looming or happening next door. Let's not sink to their level.

I'm not advocating sinking to their level. I'm saying that ethically, suppressing an enemy's propaganda arm is totally fine. If Germany has rules and laws that allow for these actions to be taken, then Germany should get off its ass, invoke those rules and laws, and do everything their constitution provides for opposing Russian aggression, consistent with military practicalities.

I'm sure that if there were sufficient political will in Germany, your government would be able to find a constitutional basis for shutting down RT, without having to formally declare war on Russia.

 

[dudalb]

Obviously the British government don't quite understand what "freezing" assets means.

THey have been well paid to do so.

 

[Jimbo07]

True to form, looks like Putin could just let his own citizens take it on the chin!

 

[dudalb]

Everybody here? Maybe. Everybody, everywhere? Those braying for blood? Maybe not. I think its too easy for folks to gloss over the nuclear threat. It's too easy to say, "Oh, they'll never launch." It's even too easy to say, "don't appease a dictator, they'll never stop." So speaking of knowing, do you think anybody here doesn't know that, either?

Nuclear weapons change the equation. It doesn't matter what we know. How likely is Putin to use nukes? What are the escalation angles, here? I bet there's a lot of game theory being worked right now.

You seem very unconcerned with the Ukrainians being slaughtered by Putin's SS.

As for baying for blood, yeah, I am baying for the blood of Putin and His Oligarch buddies, with the shedding being done by the Russian people.

 

[Oystein]

I think it's reasonable to draw the line by looking at the nations that are giving aid and comfort to each side. Every nation sending military aid to Ukraine right now is effectively at war with Russia, even if they won't admit it and even if Russia doesn't see an advantage in acknowledging it openly.

From its own stockpile, the German government will send 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 Stinger anti-aircraft defense systems to Ukraine. The government has also authorized the Netherlands to send Ukraine 400 rocket-propelled grenade launchers and told Estonia it ship over send nine howitzers.

https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-war-russia-germany-still-blocking-arms-supplies/​

Germany can't send weapons to front-line troops fighting against Russia and still pretend it's not in the war.

I see that this opinion has something going for it - but only in some colloquial meaning of the word "war".

When a country is at war, that generally implies state authorities can curb civil rights, restrict freedoms. Like YOUR freedoms.
Please list the freedoms YOU would accept your government taking away from you today, because your country is at war
Would you accept it if, say, your government censored YOU today - without at least your parliament deciding that you are, in legal fact and not merely colloqually, informally, at war?

 

[Hercules56]

Moscow has arrested children for bringing peace signs to the Ukraine embassy.

And with that, they have lost the war. At least the moral argument. They are done.

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/02/1083...VV9VgwwPWeuBx49kXcKZ3t1Y22uZcmqv8wp7J3JrxjJzo