sinyug

> Saudis

> Israelis

Already ongoing. We know which sides everyone has picked.

> Indians

We have been targeted by Pakistan-based terrorists for forty years and tens of thousands of people have been murdered. No one bothered to do anything. Instead, Pakistan was promoted to a strategic ally after 9/11 because white people died.

We have fought two wars with China. It is a mortal enemy, nuclear power and occupies Indian territory. But when we conducted nuclear tests in 1998 to develop a deterrence, sanctions were imposed on us. When China killed 20 of our soldiers in 2020 - they were bludgeoned to death with barbwire-wrapped clubs - the advice from the world was to peacefully resolve the problem.

> Its about the contrast of men in track suits throwing rocks and climbing fences versus women with children.

He is openly talking about neighborhood help. All the media reports are full of "they look like us," "blue eyes" and "blond hair."

I am not passing moral judgment on his choices; cultural incompatibility will eventually lead to conflict. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy of demanding that the whole world join the "isolate Russia" project while simultaneously claiming that it is a neighborhood affair.

> In Austria, Chancellor Karl Nehammer stated that “of course we will take in refugees, if necessary”. Meanwhile, just last fall and in his then-role as interior minister, Nehammer was known as a hardliner against resettling Afghan refugees in Austria and as a politician who insisted on Austria’s right to forcibly deport rejected Afghan asylum seekers, even if that meant returning them to the Taliban. “It’s different in Ukraine than in countries like Afghanistan,” he told Austrian TV. “We’re talking about neighborhood help.”

But he wants the entire world to get involved in this "neighborhood war."

Black and brown countries should take note of this conflict very seriously. Western imperialism never died. The West is perfectly okay with black on black and brown on brown violence. It is only in the case of black/brown on white or white on white violence that they interfere with such ferocity.

> "What about Iraq and Afghanistan" is literally reasoning Vladimir Putin is using to invade Ukraine.

Why wouldn't he? The US provided him with a perfect template to justify his invasion.

People often forget that the consequences of current actions extend far into the future.

The current Ukraine-Russia conflict that will result in the re-militarization of Germany as well as the Chinese threat that led to the same thing happening in Japan will have similar consequences decades from now.[1]

[1] Why the US is no threat to China, but a remilitarised Japan, led by Shinzo Abe, may well be (https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/2118257...)

> "There's three internets now. There's China's, there's the internet of the European Union and the U.S., and then there's distorted internets in between," in countries like Russia, Watts said.

> "The idea of being a global company in the tech space is dead," he said. "They have to choose."

This was always going to happen.

Different countries have different cultural and legal systems as well as differing perceptions of national security. At some point, these things are going to clash without there being a technical work around.

> Yeah they should have said "special non-millitary operation" instead, right?

What I wrote: THEY keep using the term "war" when referring to THEIR actions against Russia.

If a British or French minister says that THEY are at war with Russia, how is Russia supposed to interpret that?

> impending doom that's hanging over our heads?

The conflict is localized to parts of Ukraine. There is no impending doom as long as NATO does not directly intervene. And I simply don't see Biden or Johnson sacrificing American and British cities for the sake of Ukraine.

To their credit, the US administration has been fairly calm given the circumstances. It is the European leaders that have been issuing belligerent statements and walking them back. They keep using the term "war" when referring to their actions against Russia.

> A pretty sound argument can be made

No, it cannot. The US and Europe accusing Russia of acting without provocation is like a serial killer with 600 dead girls buried in his basement complaining to the cops about his noisy neighbor.

> intolerance of another country's sovereignty,

2003. Iraq. Ukraine was a part of the "coalition of the willing" which invaded the sovereignty of another country.

> Other countries doing unreasonable things

Ukraine itself was part of the illegal invasion of Iraq.

> exclude every Russian from the world community.

Not the world community, only the West. Most of the world has no problems with Russia and Russians.

> Putin wanted this war

Yes.

> proactively

No. He could have done this any time he wanted over the last 8 years. So why now? I don't know what, but some thing has changed in the strategic calculus after the Trump administration went out. That is when he wrote about the historical unity of the Rus peoples. And everything else follows from there.

> there is only reaction from the other side.

They lit the fuse with the eastward expansion of NATO and the attempts to place ABMs close to Russia back in the 2000s. It is not as if Russia invaded some country in Africa or South America. It has invaded a neighbor, a former Soviet state for reasons of national security.

> Doesn't Russia has its own Nazi problem at the domestic level?

Every western country has some localized neo-nazi phenomenon. But I don't think any of them have official sanction or form part of that country's armed forces. This might be a first.

> It does not justify the invasion at this scale against a functioning democracy.

The only thing that matters here is Putin's words because he has the military power to back them. He says Russians have been murdered in large numbers. And there is some evidence that things like that happen.[1][2]

[1] Ukraine clashes: dozens dead after Odessa building fire (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/02/ukraine-dead-o...)

[2] 2014 Odessa clashes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Odessa_clashes)

> Russia should no longer be allowed to communicate with or influence the global community.

The West does not get to control who Asian and African countries can and cannot communicate with. It does not own the internet. If it claims that it has that right and that it will unilaterally enforce it, we are looking at a fundamental breakdown of international relations.

Imperialism by white powers will no longer be tolerated.

Who would have thunk that the US and Europe would be fighting on the side of actual Nazis in 2022 after spending a decade labeling every political opponent a nazi.

These people have no shame and no sense of morality and they weaponize those feelings within those that do.

> Russia is currently firing on innocent civilians in a sovereign country right now. Explain how what you just said is relevant to that.

According to a multi-decade policy followed by Western countries, that is not a crime.

> "get the rest later" never actually ever seems to happen when it comes to the US and EU.

This.

The neocon-influenced US addiction to spreading freedom and democracy to authoritarian countries has been almost universally deadly to their citizens. While these dictators are bad, it is the unfortunate truth that their brutality helps keep sectarian conflict in check. Look at every place that has had the US gift of democracy forcibly shoved down its throat.

> History will not look kindly on those who insisted on a neutral stance on the face of evil.

In that case, let us start with the war criminals in the US and Europe, and their enablers in the media, technology and think tank space, who illegally invaded Afghanistan and countries in the Middle East (and Africa) and unleashed a reign of terror for 20 years.

> Anyone claiming the need for such a "demonstration" is clearly irrational

Some would say that interfering in a territorial conflict between a nuclear power and its neighbor is an irrational act by itself.

> How?

It would be a demonstration of what would happen to Western population centers if the West crosses any red lines drawn by Putin. He is done with 25 years of poking and prodding and has already warned Sweden and Finland about severe consequences if they join NATO.

It doesn't have to be Stockholm. Any city in the region with 50,000 inhabitants or more delivers the same message: this is my backyard and you shall not interfere.

> no rational reason.

Nuking Paris/London is irrational. The thought process behind nuking Stockholm can be defended.

> But I am not convinced the Russian leadership is willing to risk being wrong about this.

The West has already deployed financial nukes. For Russia, there isn't that much left to lose anymore.

Putin may not directly target actual nuclear powers in Europe, but everyone else, including NATO members/allies, is fair game at the moment.

The real question is: what lines are the West unwilling to cross?

If Putin nukes Stockholm, are Britain and the US willing to sacrifice New York, Washington, Los Angeles and London in order to give him a bloody nose?

> We can decide by consensus.

I have to really appreciate how the US and China are getting every thing they want in this conflict without firing a single bullet:

* destroy crypto

* make Europeans dependent on American fuel supplies - cannot buy from Iran and Russia

* push Russia into China's arms

> This way we can perform >50% counter attack on terrorists?

Who is a terrorist?

In the Israel vs Palestine violence, which wallets will you block?

What about the Balochistan Liberation Army vs Pakistan?

Houthis in Yemen vs Saudi Arabia?

Tigray People's Liberation Front vs Ethiopia?

Are the Taliban terrorists or the de facto government in Afghanistan?

These things are not that simple. Every side has justifications for why it believes it is right and the other side wrong.

> 2014 invasion

Was in response to a US-supported coup against a president friendly to Russia. What are a US Ambassador and a US Assistant Secretary of State doing at a political protest in a foreign country?[1]

> U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland arrived on Wednesday morning at Independence Square in Kyiv and began speaking with protesters rallying in support for Ukraine's integration with the European Union, an Interfax correspondent reported from the scene.

> Nuland is treating protesters with cookies, biscuits and bread from a big package. She is being accompanied by U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. Demonstrators are cheering Nuland with joyful shouts, some are chanting "God bless you."

> Nuland also approached Interior Forces troops deployed at the square and also offered them cookies, which the soldiers accepted silently.

[1] U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Nuland arrives at opposition rally in Kyiv (https://web.archive.org/web/20220228205358/https://en.interf...)

> "The measures we are introducing, that large parts of the world are introducing, are to bring down the Putin regime," the spokesman, who speaks on condition of anonymity, told reporters.

> "We have introduced widespread sanctions, we aim to inflict financial pain on Putin and his regime to stymie the Russian war machine as it attempts to subjugate a democratic European country," he said.

> But pressed on the wider goals of the sanctions drive, the spokesman added: "We're not seeking anything in terms of regime change."

So, trying to bring down the Putin government is not "regime change."

> The Americans are happy to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian, and to sanction Russia to the last European with five Euros in his pocket. It bears the brunt of sanctions against Russia just like it has with sanctions on Iran.

This is what happens when a country doesn't have powerful, natural enemies around it. If Canada were China and Mexico were North Korea, the neocons in Washington would be changing their diapers so many time a day that they would not have time to plan ways of shedding blood on other continents.

After Serbia-Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and now Ukraine, I think the world should plead with the US to stop exporting "freedom and democracy" to their country. Henceforth, every leader who sees a foreign-funded color "revolution" in his country should treat it like the attempted coup that it is.

> Diplomacy has not worked

Inviting former parts of the Soviet Union to join NATO is not "diplomacy."[1]

The US should try this diplomacy with China: recognize Taiwan as an independent country, invite it to join NATO and see what the Chinese do.

[1] Blinken: Ukraine has all tools to move towards NATO membership (https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/blinken-ukraine-ha...)

> The difference is stark.

For led lighting, 20W (ceiling fittings) for every 100 sf in rooms with light walls provides a lot of illumination in my experience. Can double that for kitchens etc.

The Ukrainian representative to the UN actually threatened the safety of Indian students in a sneaky manner when India abstained during the UNSC vote.[1] Soon after, Ukrainian border guards beat them up.

Africans suffering a similar fate as well.[2]

Even the Chinese are worried about their citizens being attacked due to their nationality.[3]

[1] https://youtu.be/pGj7hg76Nbk?t=84

[2] Ukraine: Concerns mount as black people complain of racism while fleeing war zone (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ukraine-concerns-mount-...)

[3] Backlash in China over vulgar social media mocking of Ukraine conflict (https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3168587/ba...)