shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
This poll is for informational purposes only. Please, no wagering.
"Is the water wet or dry?"
"Well that depends on what you mean by wet..."
"And that's one vote for 'dry.'"
As of yet
I hate that Ukraine has allowed nationalists in fascist uniforms to roam around and serve in the military. But this invasion has turned this into a very black and white situation when it was once a bit grey.
Putin showing his courage by arresting kids in Moscow:https://www.huffpost.com/entry/russian-police-reportedly-arrest-jail-children-protesting-war-against-ukraine_n_621facd4e4b025227d664fb3
I am 90% supporting Ukraine in this war of aggression launched by Russia, but not 100%, because it seems to me Ukraine should have accepted that Crimea is Russian since 2014, and not imposed sanctions on Crimea.
Similarly, Ukraine should have, in my opinion, recognized the two independent republics of Donbass (Donetsk and Lugansk). Also, Ukraine should, even now, show some political flexibility on these issues (this is, of course, different from president Zelensky making frequent phone calls to his Western colleagues "please help us, please help us!").
In addition, in view of NATO crimes, I believe it is somewhat bad taste for Ukraine to try to join NATO, especially if this exasperates their powerful neighbor to the East, although one can understand that the Ukrainians are interested by a possible NATO protection.
So, although I side with attacked Ukraine, I also think that, to some extent, Ukraine brought the current catastrophe upon themselves by their actions.
I also think that banning Russian media outlets demonstrate some concerning fascist tendencies in the European Union (which is siding with Ukraine).
I think it happened at about the same time, and it was essentially meaningful (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum#Post-referendum_polls).How on Earth does any of that even partially justify a Russian invasion?
Suppose that a small region of Canada held a referendum and voted that they'd like to be part of the United States. Should the U.S.
a) say "we're flattered. Here's a list of real estate agents if you'd like to buy homes in the US, or
b) send US troops to take over a key governmental building and several other critical sites in that part of Canada and then announce that it was part of the U.S.
If the US did b), and Canada didn't say, "oh, that's cool," would the U.S. then be 10% justified in sending in troops to capture all of Canada?
Because as far as I can tell, that's EXACTLY what's happened Ukraine (except that the Crimean referendum came after Russia took it over).
How on Earth does any of that even partially justify a Russian invasion?
Suppose that a small region of Canada held a referendum and voted that they'd like to be part of the United States. Should the U.S.
a) say "we're flattered. Here's a list of real estate agents if you'd like to buy homes in the US, or
b) send US troops to take over a key governmental building and several other critical sites in that part of Canada and then announce that it was part of the U.S.
If the US did b), and Canada didn't say, "oh, that's cool," would the U.S. then be 10% justified in sending in troops to capture all of Canada?
Because as far as I can tell, that's EXACTLY what's happened Ukraine (except that the Crimean referendum came after Russia took it over).
...when you do all you can to make a powerful and ruthless neighbor angry, and try to destroy its economy
...
I think it happened at about the same time, and it was essentially meaningful (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum#Post-referendum_polls).
It is obvious that, when you do all you can to make a powerful and ruthless neighbor angry, and try to destroy its economy, you take some risks.
The Ukrainians knew very well what they could do to make Russia happy, but they chose a different path.