The Invasion of Ukraine, Russia Threatens Finland/Sweden

[Novo Rossiya]

No, but the same people who agree with critical race theory also agree with the stuff I mentioned.

So what is Critical Race Theory and what makes it anti-western then given that you’re an expert on it?

It doesn't matter what it is. The people who teach it agree with things like that, and therefore don't deserve to be allowed to teach anything.

[Vassenor]

So what is Critical Race Theory and what makes it anti-western then given that you’re an expert on it?

It doesn't matter what it is. The people who teach it agree with things like that, and therefore don't deserve to be allowed to teach anything.

So you’re throwing around meaningless buzzwords to cover for the lack of substance in an argument that was little more than a whataboutism to begin with. Got it.

[Infected Mushroom]

Isn’t this just Russia re-asserting itself in its historical sphere of influence?

I don’t take issue with it. Ukraine is more Russian than American/British.

[Vassenor]

Isn’t this just Russia re-asserting itself in its historical sphere of influence?

I don’t take issue with it. Ukraine is more Russian than American/British.

So Ukraine has no right to self determination?

[Nationalist Northumbria]

Isn’t this just Russia re-asserting itself in its historical sphere of influence?

I don’t take issue with it. Ukraine is more Russian than American/British.

So Ukraine has no right to self determination?

There is no right to self-determination, and as the absurdity that is '#KyivNotKiev' proves George Bush was right about Ukrainian independence.

[Novo Rossiya]

Isn’t this just Russia re-asserting itself in its historical sphere of influence?

I don’t take issue with it. Ukraine is more Russian than American/British.

So Ukraine has no right to self determination?

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

[Novus America]

So Ukraine has no right to self determination?

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Whataboutism is not a defense, it is an admission of guilt.
You did not even bother to answer the question!

It is interesting you are just openly flaunting the Russian hypocrisy on the matter though.

Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk are however different matters than Ukraine given Ukraine is an internationally recognized sovereign state, even officially recognized as such by Russia. Russia recognized Crimea as being part of Ukraine in the Budapest Memorandum and moreover STILL recognizes Luhansk and Donetsk as belonging to Ukraine.

State sovereignty and self determination are related but different and sometimes in conflict.

But the other three are not even recognized as having self determination rights by Russia! Russia has NOT recognized Donetsk or Luhansk and moreover has BANNED Crimea from now claiming self determination because even advocating self determination is illegal in Russia! (Under the anti secession laws).

So again Russia cannot claim any sort of moral high ground here whatsoever.

For the record I would actually be willing to recognize Russian rule over Crimea if Russia would hold a free and fair referendum, (the majority probably do support being part of Russia but it was not free or fair), stop criminalizing discussion of what it hypocritically claims as justification, respect Ukraine’s sovereignty (including the ability to join NATO if NATO accepts them just the same as Belarus can be part of CSTO), respect Ukraine’s transit rights in the Kerch Strait etc.

Luhansk and Donetsk are more complex as the 2/3rds of those under Ukrainian control show little to no interest in the “rebellion” which has been more an outside invasion and would have completely collapsed without Russian military forces. But I do not automatically deny them it, you have to look at each case on and individual basis as each case of claimed self determination is different.

[Vassenor]

So Ukraine has no right to self determination?

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Way to dodge the question. Or are you trying to say it’s only self determination if they self determine the way Russia wants?

[Novo Rossiya]

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Way to dodge the question. Or are you trying to say it’s only self determination if they self determine the way Russia wants?

Ukraine has a right to self-determination, but they can expect a response from Russia, if they continue their abrasive language and posturing.

[Novus America]

Way to dodge the question. Or are you trying to say it’s only self determination if they self determine the way Russia wants?

Ukraine has a right to self-determination, but they can expect a response from Russia, if they continue their abrasive language and posturing.

The vast majority of abrasive language is coming from Moscow, Ukraine is not claiming special privileges and rights which allow it to override Russia’s sovereignty within Russia’s recognized borders.

But Russia can sanction Ukraine if it likes, (as it has) and can criticize Ukraine based on disagreements over its foreign policy stances. But finding another country’s language abrasive is NOT adequate justification for launching a military attack.

Russia can respond, that is not the issue. The issue is the HOW. Being able to respond is different than have the ability to respond in any and all ways with no constraints.

If someone insults me I have a right to not do business with them, to insult them back. But not shoot them.

If Russia said “Ukraine can join NATO, but Russia will respond with economic sanctions” that is fine. Russia has the right to determine who it wants to trade with and for any reasons. What products leave and enter Russian territory and what businesses are conducted on its territory are Russia’s right to determine.

But Russia does not have a right to say “Ukraine cannot join NATO or we attack it”. There is an obvious difference.

[The North Polish Union]

Way to dodge the question. Or are you trying to say it’s only self determination if they self determine the way Russia wants?

Ukraine has a right to self-determination, but they can expect a response from Russia, if they continue their abrasive language and posturing.

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

[Vassenor]

Ukraine has a right to self-determination, but they can expect a response from Russia, if they continue their abrasive language and posturing.

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

Failing to dance to Russia’s tune when required to by Russia.

[Novo Rossiya]

Ukraine has a right to self-determination, but they can expect a response from Russia, if they continue their abrasive language and posturing.

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

The Ukrainians.

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

Failing to dance to Russia’s tune when required to by Russia.

No, they are just failing to respect Russia's protective zone.

[Novus America]

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

The Ukrainians.

Failing to dance to Russia’s tune when required to by Russia.

No, they are just failing to respect Russia's protective zone.

First of all moving the goal posts. Disagreeing with Russia’s extraordinary and legally baseless claims to control Ukraine’s foreign policy is not “using abrasive language”.

And why does only Russia get such a zone? On what basis in international law is said “zone” based? Ukraine borders Poland, why is it not just as much in Poland’s “zone”?
How does the declaration of such a zone (apparently covering all or at least most of Ukraine (it is not in any way legally defined) not blatantly violate Ukraine’s sovereignty?

[Dogmeat]

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

The Ukrainians.

Failing to dance to Russia’s tune when required to by Russia.

No, they are just failing to respect Russia's protective zone.

Yeah, how dare they not respect Russia's stupid pointless thing that other countries don't have or need.

[Punished UMN]

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Way to dodge the question. Or are you trying to say it’s only self determination if they self determine the way Russia wants?

Self-determination isn't really a right in international law, only sovereignty.

[Punished UMN]

Do Crimea, Donetsk or Lugansk have the right to self-determination?

Whataboutism is not a defense, it is an admission of guilt.
You did not even bother to answer the question!

It is interesting you are just openly flaunting the Russian hypocrisy on the matter though.

Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk are however different matters than Ukraine given Ukraine is an internationally recognized sovereign state, even officially recognized as such by Russia. Russia recognized Crimea as being part of Ukraine in the Budapest Memorandum and moreover STILL recognizes Luhansk and Donetsk as belonging to Ukraine.

State sovereignty and self determination are related but different and sometimes in conflict.

But the other three are not even recognized as having self determination rights by Russia! Russia has NOT recognized Donetsk or Luhansk and moreover has BANNED Crimea from now claiming self determination because even advocating self determination is illegal in Russia! (Under the anti secession laws).

So again Russia cannot claim any sort of moral high ground here whatsoever.

For the record I would actually be willing to recognize Russian rule over Crimea if Russia would hold a free and fair referendum, (the majority probably do support being part of Russia but it was not free or fair), stop criminalizing discussion of what it hypocritically claims as justification, respect Ukraine’s sovereignty (including the ability to join NATO if NATO accepts them just the same as Belarus can be part of CSTO), respect Ukraine’s transit rights in the Kerch Strait etc.

Luhansk and Donetsk are more complex as the 2/3rds of those under Ukrainian control show little to no interest in the “rebellion” which has been more an outside invasion and would have completely collapsed without Russian military forces. But I do not automatically deny them it, you have to look at each case on and individual basis as each case of claimed self determination is different.

Whataboutism isn't intended as a defense, this is a bad misunderstanding of it, the point of whataboutism is to make the case that criticism is being made in bad-faith. e.g. in the classic case, when Russia points out the US does the same thing it's criticizing Russia for, it is not a defense of Russia but it certainly cast doubts on American motive for making those criticisms.

[Genivaria]

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

The Ukrainians.

Failing to dance to Russia’s tune when required to by Russia.

No, they are just failing to respect Russia's protective zone.

I've declared your house to be inside my 'protective zone', vacate the premises and respect my sovereignty.

[Novus America]

Whataboutism is not a defense, it is an admission of guilt.
You did not even bother to answer the question!

It is interesting you are just openly flaunting the Russian hypocrisy on the matter though.

Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk are however different matters than Ukraine given Ukraine is an internationally recognized sovereign state, even officially recognized as such by Russia. Russia recognized Crimea as being part of Ukraine in the Budapest Memorandum and moreover STILL recognizes Luhansk and Donetsk as belonging to Ukraine.

State sovereignty and self determination are related but different and sometimes in conflict.

But the other three are not even recognized as having self determination rights by Russia! Russia has NOT recognized Donetsk or Luhansk and moreover has BANNED Crimea from now claiming self determination because even advocating self determination is illegal in Russia! (Under the anti secession laws).

So again Russia cannot claim any sort of moral high ground here whatsoever.

For the record I would actually be willing to recognize Russian rule over Crimea if Russia would hold a free and fair referendum, (the majority probably do support being part of Russia but it was not free or fair), stop criminalizing discussion of what it hypocritically claims as justification, respect Ukraine’s sovereignty (including the ability to join NATO if NATO accepts them just the same as Belarus can be part of CSTO), respect Ukraine’s transit rights in the Kerch Strait etc.

Luhansk and Donetsk are more complex as the 2/3rds of those under Ukrainian control show little to no interest in the “rebellion” which has been more an outside invasion and would have completely collapsed without Russian military forces. But I do not automatically deny them it, you have to look at each case on and individual basis as each case of claimed self determination is different.

Whataboutism isn't intended as a defense, this is a bad misunderstanding of it, the point of whataboutism is to make the case that criticism is being made in bad-faith. e.g. in the classic case, when Russia points out the US does the same thing it's criticizing Russia for, it is not a defense of Russia but it certainly cast doubts on American motive for making those criticisms.

But that is the point. I said it was not a defense. But therefore he did nothing to defend his position. I was simply pointing that out.
I fully understand whataboutism is used to muddy the waters, distract and deflect rather than offer a real defense.

But that is the issue. In no way does it actually justify the Russian position at all. The fact Russia and its apologists resort to it so much says a lot. Someone with a strong argument for their side need not resort to it.

When someone only offers whataboutism without even answering the question it is usually because their position is indefensible…

He did not even answer the question there. It is a really bad “argument” that is pretty desperate. If I accuse someone of committing a murder, and they say “you committed crimes too” it does not mean my accusation was wrong.

Moreover if you say “but you are bad for doing X too” by extension you have just admitted to wrong doing.

The West is absolutely hypocritical at times, nobody is disputing that. But that does not make it in the wrong on this particular issue.

[Novo Rossiya]

The Ukrainians.


No, they are just failing to respect Russia's protective zone.

I've declared your house to be inside my 'protective zone', vacate the premises and respect my sovereignty.

You are an anarchist, you have no zone.

[FNU]

Way to dodge the question. Or are you trying to say it’s only self determination if they self determine the way Russia wants?

Ukraine has a right to self-determination, but they can expect a response from Russia, if they continue their abrasive language and posturing.

"Abrasive language" such as these?

[Genivaria]

I've declared your house to be inside my 'protective zone', vacate the premises and respect my sovereignty.

You are an anarchist, you have no zone.

You understand this doesn't refute the point?

[Novo Rossiya]

Ukraine has a right to self-determination, but they can expect a response from Russia, if they continue their abrasive language and posturing.

"Abrasive language" such as these?

Hurling insults definitely doesn't help.

[Novus America]

Way to dodge the question. Or are you trying to say it’s only self determination if they self determine the way Russia wants?

Self-determination isn't really a right in international law, only sovereignty.

That is not really true. There is basis for self determination in contemporary international law, which is continually evolving, absolute sovereignty is has been curtailed as international law has evolved, although certainly it is fair to say the exact status of self determination in international law and how it can be reconciled with sovereignty is a matter of intense dispute.

It is important to note international law is not codified and is full of points of dispute. Still nothing in it supports Russia’s sphere or zone claims which violate both the concepts of sovereignty and self determination.

That being said if you do take the position of sovereignty overriding self determination it makes the Russian claims here even more indefensible.

[The North Polish Union]

Whose abraisive language and posturing?

The Ukrainians.

"Plz no take Krym" isn't really abrasive language and posturing

Failing to dance to Russia’s tune when required to by Russia.

No, they are just failing to respect Russia's protective zone.

What protective zone? When does Królewiec get to be part of Poland's protected zone?