By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
For the cretins defending him, claiming that he is not a treacherous self serving arshole, then explain his nonsense about Nato and the EU being responsible for Russia attacking Ukraine.
Ukraine is a sovereign state and should be free to do as it pleases, with regard to who it aligns with. Was that not what the Russians told Farage to say ?
Note how the righties are defending Putin. Trump, Fox News and Farage jumping now their paymaster has cracked the whip.
This latter day William Joyce told us Russia would not attack the Ukraine. Nato is not the EU, but it does not stop this traitor from speaking as if they were..
Farages sort were interned during WW2, and the French gave them and their kind short shrift after the war, as we did with Joyce, and Italy did with Mussolini.
Am very left-leaning and often don't agree with what you post, but just wanted to say I completely agree with what you've posted on this thread - the STW statement effectively denied Ukraine's sovereign right to make it's own democratic decisions and defacto to exist as an independent democratic state - those MPs signing it should have been thrown out of the Labour movement, they shouldn't have been offered the chance to retract their support for Russian imperialism.
Attempts to blame NATO for the current situation (whether from the right or the left) bely a complete misunderstanding of recent history in Ukraine.
Would also recommend this brilliant documentary to anyone interested in recent Ukrainian history:
It’s not about denying a country’s “sovereign rights”. It’s about trying to make people understand that the context is a huge issue – regional, historical and indeed our obsession with militarising situations and fighting wars.
You may disagree with that perspective but you’re utterly misrepresenting the position if you think it’s about “support for Russian imperialism”.
Also, defending the Ukrainian people from attack is a different matter to what was being discussed by STW initially. These misrepresentations and conflations after the invasion are grossly unhelpful and even offensive.
It’s not about denying a country’s “sovereign rights”. It’s about trying to make people understand that the context is a huge issue – regional, historical and indeed our obsession with militarising situations and fighting wars.
You may disagree with that perspective but you’re utterly misrepresenting the position if you think it’s about “support for Russian imperialism”.
Also, defending the Ukrainian people from attack is a different matter to what was being discussed by STW initially. These misrepresentations and conflations after the invasion are grossly unhelpful and even offensive.
The statement said:
"It (the UK government) has also declared that Ukraine has a “sovereign right” to join NATO, when no such right exists to join it or any other military alliance."
The statement literally denied the Ukraine it's sovereign right to make it's own policy.
It’s not about denying a country’s “sovereign rights”. It’s about trying to make people understand that the context is a huge issue – regional, historical and indeed our obsession with militarising situations and fighting wars.
You may disagree with that perspective but you’re utterly misrepresenting the position if you think it’s about “support for Russian imperialism”.
Also, defending the Ukrainian people from attack is a different matter to what was being discussed by STW initially. These misrepresentations and conflations after the invasion are grossly unhelpful and even offensive.
The statement included 'It has also declared that Ukraine has a “sovereign right” to join NATO, when no such right exists to join it or any other military alliance'
Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell, Burgon and others put their name to that
Why doesn't Ukraine have a sovereign right to make a decision to join NATO or any military alliance it wants?
"It (the UK government) has also declared that Ukraine has a “sovereign right” to join NATO, when no such right exists to join it or any other military alliance."
The statement literally denied the Ukraine it's sovereign right to make it's own policy.
No, it’s saying that there’s no sovereign right that they be let in. The UK government is saying this is up to Ukraine when clearly it’s up to NATO and what should be the overall best for the region and everybody’s security.
No, it’s saying that there’s no sovereign right that they be let in. The UK government is saying this is up to Ukraine when clearly it’s up to NATO and what should be the overall best for the region and everybody’s security.
and what would you want nato to say to an independent democratic state which is afraid of russian expansionism and russian existentialist threats to it. why, in that scenario, would nato saying yes be the problem that you focus on? that's quite odd.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
No, it’s saying that there’s no sovereign right that they be let in. The UK government is saying this is up to Ukraine when clearly it’s up to NATO and what should be the overall best for the region and everybody’s security.
No it doesn't if it meant that it would have clearly state that, it states it has no such right when every Country has a right to join if it wants. There are certain rules etc to joining but another country like Russia determining if another country can join NATO is taking away the sovereign right of that country. STW were wrong and so were those people who put their name to it. They tried to cover it by removing their names a couple of days after
It’s not about denying a country’s “sovereign rights”. It’s about trying to make people understand that the context is a huge issue – regional, historical and indeed our obsession with militarising situations and fighting wars.
You may disagree with that perspective but you’re utterly misrepresenting the position if you think it’s about “support for Russian imperialism”.
Also, defending the Ukrainian people from attack is a different matter to what was being discussed by STW initially. These misrepresentations and conflations after the invasion are grossly unhelpful and even offensive.
Am very left-leaning and often don't agree with what you post, but just wanted to say I completely agree with what you've posted on this thread - the STW statement effectively denied Ukraine's sovereign right to make it's own democratic decisions and defacto to exist as an independent democratic state - those MPs signing it should have been thrown out of the Labour movement, they shouldn't have been offered the chance to retract their support for Russian imperialism.
Attempts to blame NATO for the current situation (whether from the right or the left) bely a complete misunderstanding of recent history in Ukraine.
Would also recommend this brilliant documentary to anyone interested in recent Ukrainian history:
No, it’s saying that there’s no sovereign right that they be let in. The UK government is saying this is up to Ukraine when clearly it’s up to NATO and what should be the overall best for the region and everybody’s security.
That's nonsensical - NATO members had already agreed that Ukraine could become a member state in 2008, and then again in 2021. Are you saying that those who signed the Stop the War coalition statement just didn't know this?
and what would you want nato to say to an independent democratic state which is afraid of russian expansionism and russian existentialist threats to it. why, in that scenario, would nato saying yes be the problem that you focus on? that's quite odd.
Depends entirely if you see NATO as a source of stability or instability around the world. I guess the point is that this can very much depend from situation to situation and people’s perspectives.
But I think it’s fair to say that they are expressly set up to be able to fight wars and not just defend. Which is anathema to a pacifist viewpoint.
That's nonsensical - NATO members had already agreed that Ukraine could become a member state in 2008, and then again in 2021. Are you saying that those who signed the Stop the War coalition statement just didn't know this?
But that’s what they’re talking about. There is no sovereign right to join, it’s dependent on NATO letting them in.
That’s the point they’re making against NATO. Not against Ukraine and their rights as a nation.
This bad-faith reading and subsequent misrepresentation isn’t a good look.
Depends entirely if you see NATO as a source of stability or instability around the world. I guess the point is that this can very much depend from situation to situation and people’s perspectives.
But I think it’s fair to say that they are expressly set up to be able to fight wars and not just defend. Which is anathema to a pacifist viewpoint.
so you just start from a presumption of equivalence - you can't back it up in the context of russian expansionism which is demonstrably very real. you can't seriously claim to be a pacifist as russian tanks roll across a democratic state - you're just anti-nato. what a hole to have dug.
[Post edited 1 Mar 2022 14:07]
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
Depends entirely if you see NATO as a source of stability or instability around the world. I guess the point is that this can very much depend from situation to situation and people’s perspectives.
But I think it’s fair to say that they are expressly set up to be able to fight wars and not just defend. Which is anathema to a pacifist viewpoint.
Well no NATO country is suffering with what Ukraine people are suffering with, and if they had been part of NATO they probably wouldn't be suffering with it now, so I would say a source of stability.
so you just start from a presumption of equivalence - you can't back it up in the context of russian expansionism which is demonstrably very real. you can't seriously claim to be a pacifist as russian tanks roll across a democratic state - you're just anti-nato. what a hole to have dug.
[Post edited 1 Mar 2022 14:07]
You’re just being wilfully obtuse now.
As I’ve repeatedly said, you don’t get pacifism, anti-war movements and their legitimate perspective. But mostly because you just don’t want to.
But that’s what they’re talking about. There is no sovereign right to join, it’s dependent on NATO letting them in.
That’s the point they’re making against NATO. Not against Ukraine and their rights as a nation.
This bad-faith reading and subsequent misrepresentation isn’t a good look.
The facts have irrevocably changed here - anyone desperately clinging on to the standard old FRFI/ant-NATO anti-US/anti-UK view of the world is going to become pretty irrelevant pretty quickly.
*And obviously I think you're statement is just complete b*llocks.
Well no NATO country is suffering with what Ukraine people are suffering with, and if they had been part of NATO they probably wouldn't be suffering with it now, so I would say a source of stability.
Good for you. I don’t think it’s quite that black and white.
But at heart at least we can both agree that it should be about reducing suffering. And no-one’s supporting Putin here.
This thread is littered with people who are against STW because they read stuff wrong – accidentally or entirely by design. And then magically they invent that as support for Putin or denying Ukraine its rights.
The facts have irrevocably changed here - anyone desperately clinging on to the standard old FRFI/ant-NATO anti-US/anti-UK view of the world is going to become pretty irrelevant pretty quickly.
*And obviously I think you're statement is just complete b*llocks.
Good for you. I don’t think it’s quite that black and white.
But at heart at least we can both agree that it should be about reducing suffering. And no-one’s supporting Putin here.
Not saying you are supporting Putin, but I would also disagree this war is anything to do with Ukraine joining NATO it's all about Putin has never forgiven them for moving way from Russia's control in 2014. As with any fascist it's been festering and he has simply used NATO as an excuse and the the fact STW have themselves focused on NATO is missing the point.
As I’ve repeatedly said, you don’t get pacifism, anti-war movements and their legitimate perspective. But mostly because you just don’t want to.
but both you are stop the war are entirely one-sided this. your whole framework is anti nato, anti-west and intended to excuse anyone who opposes them. the rest is just weasel words. it's juvenile.
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
Not saying you are supporting Putin, but I would also disagree this war is anything to do with Ukraine joining NATO it's all about Putin has never forgiven them for moving way from Russia's control in 2014. As with any fascist it's been festering and he has simply used NATO as an excuse and the the fact STW have themselves focused on NATO is missing the point.
But that’s not entirely true.
Just to be very clear I don’t think NATO justifies Putin’s invasion or any other posturing for that matter but it’s been a trigger repeatedly in the past (2008, 2014) and now it’s being mentioned again.
I think we can certainly have a discussion and there’s room for opinions re: NATO as a net cause of stability or instability and also how that can very much be seen case by case, whatever side you come down on.
but both you are stop the war are entirely one-sided this. your whole framework is anti nato, anti-west and intended to excuse anyone who opposes them. the rest is just weasel words. it's juvenile.
You’re just lying now.
I think there’s another way to handle things before war becomes the only solution. You disagree.
And I don’t excuse Putin. The irony is you probably agree with the logic and rationale of Putin’s approach much more than I do.
I think there’s another way to handle things before war becomes the only solution. You disagree.
And I don’t excuse Putin. The irony is you probably agree with the logic and rationale of Putin’s approach much more than I do.
in what way was this war the only solution? what should nato have done to avoid it?
And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
