BREAKING: Ukraine to join NATO as Zelenskyy welcomes statement. End of Juchi Moscow ulus imperialism - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15177098
Igor Antunov wrote:I suppose you're referring to the conflict that started in 1988 while both Armenia and Azerbaijan were in the soviet union? Conflicts over territories that were present prior to membership into CSTO are not covered by the agreement. The disputed territory Armenia warred over with Azerbaijan is not in the defensive area.

All conflicts are rooted somewhere in the past and history so this makes csto useless.
#15177100
KurtFF8 wrote:I love how the right wing whines about "whataboutism" so much, yet does it the most.

How is it whataboutism to state that Marxist countries never had a high standard of living, don't care about democracy since they are mostly autocracies and don't care about liberalism in general since they see it only as rich oppressing the poor? So basically a communist has a very simplistic prism of looking at it due to the ideological component/flavours of liberalism being a done deal for them? Communist doesn't care about free elections, doesn't care if liberalism is autocratic, left or right, or that rule of law or international law should be respected. All of that is basically invention of liberal capitalism so de facto serves the rich. In a very simplistic explanation
#15177111
JohnRawls wrote:How is it whataboutism to state that Marxist countries never had a high standard of living, don't care about democracy since they are mostly autocracies and don't care about liberalism in general since they see it only as rich oppressing the poor? So basically a communist has a very simplistic prism of looking at it due to the ideological component/flavours of liberalism being a done deal for them? Communist doesn't care about free elections, doesn't care if liberalism is autocratic, left or right, or that rule of law or international law should be respected. All of that is basically invention of liberal capitalism so de facto serves the rich. In a very simplistic explanation


Autocratic rule follows directly from the idea that burgeouis democracy only serves the rich, because the people have to be brainwashed/stupid for that to be logically possible. An "enlightened vanguard" has to first reeducate the people in order to turn them into proper socialists. Of course in reality the "enlightened vanguard" always fails in doing so and the people have to be subjugated forever.
#15177115
JohnRawls wrote:Disputed territories is a legal term and occupied territories is a subcategory of that. It is not just about Crimea and Donbass but other borders and island questions also.

No "Disputed territories" term use only TV.ru and olgino paid trolls , UN and international law are clear on this
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 68/262 was adopted on March 27, 2014 by the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly in response to the Russian annexation of Crimea and entitled "Territorial integrity of Ukraine". The non-binding resolution, which was supported by 100 United Nations member states, affirmed the General Assembly's commitment to the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders and underscored the invalidity of the 2014 Crimean referendum.
#15177143
JohnRawls wrote:How is it whataboutism to state that Marxist countries never had a high standard of living, don't care about democracy since they are mostly autocracies and don't care about liberalism in general since they see it only as rich oppressing the poor? So basically a communist has a very simplistic prism of looking at it due to the ideological component/flavours of liberalism being a done deal for them? Communist doesn't care about free elections, doesn't care if liberalism is autocratic, left or right, or that rule of law or international law should be respected. All of that is basically invention of liberal capitalism so de facto serves the rich. In a very simplistic explanation


It has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I was talking about how NATO exists to secure the interests of the ruling classes of the respective countries and all you had was "Well Communists are bad!!"

Also yes, Communists not only don't care about liberalism being prominent in a ruling ideology, but are opponents of liberalism.
#15177145
lol @JohnRawls, NATO did nothing to protect Georgia in the same region you're talking about. They didn't intervene for the same reasons Russia didn't intervene in Armenia. Also Turkey is basically fascist and part of NATO and they were the ones spearheading the invasion of Armenia. Of course NATO has some sort of ideology, but like Kurt describes it's just a self serving one like Russia's. If they cared about the "sanctity of democracy" and "human rights" they wouldn't let Turkey continue to be a member, or at the very least tell them to stop their expansionist and anti-democratic policies. While you're right that the Cold War is over as far as I can tell their purpose continues to be broadly a counter to Russia.

As far as the standards of living goes - China has decreased poverty more than any other country in the world and the Soviet Union made Russia a super power. You can quibble about how Marxist those states were, but in that case your argument that "marxist countries" all suck has no foundation anyway.
#15177147
Red_Army wrote:lol @JohnRawls, NATO did nothing to protect Georgia in the same region you're talking about. They didn't intervene for the same reasons Russia didn't intervene in Armenia. Also Turkey is basically fascist and part of NATO and they were the ones spearheading the invasion of Armenia. Of course NATO has some sort of ideology, but like Kurt describes it's just a self serving one like Russia's. If they cared about the "sanctity of democracy" and "human rights" they wouldn't let Turkey continue to be a member, or at the very least tell them to stop their expansionist and anti-democratic policies. While you're right that the Cold War is over as far as I can tell their purpose continues to be broadly a counter to Russia.

As far as the standards of living goes - China has decreased poverty more than any other country in the world and the Soviet Union made Russia a super power. You can quibble about how Marxist those states were, but in that case your argument that "marxist countries" all suck has no foundation anyway.


Silly.

Turkey isn't fascist.

Quibble about how Marxist China is? China has more billionaires than the US, higher income inequality and a lower labor share of income. Pretty much the only thing left of Marxism in China is single-party rule.

This sums it up perfectly :lol:

Image
#15177179
Red_Army wrote:Again, if there is nothing "communist" about China, then you can't use it as an example of how communism sucks.

even Koba´s sovok in 1946 was not "communist", communism is an utopia only an idiot can believe that a country could be build purely on the das kapital book
#15177180
Juin wrote:Zelensky mispoke. And this is the second time. Following a phone conversation with Biden Ukraine mischaracterised Biden as supporting MAP for Ukraine.



NATO rejects Ukrainian president's 'confirmation' of entry into alliance


It would be interesting to know why Ukraine have been refused entry given I suspect they would be more than happy to fulfil ANY criteria Biden gave Zelensky. From the EU trade deal to military protection, Ukraine have been given rhetoric because anything else risks conflict with Moscow. We all know this and I would like to think Zelensky knows this also. So why are we pretending that Ukraine will ever get NATO membership? Perhaps Zelensky should consider a truce with Moscow in order to at least regain Donbass because Crimea is lost and that should just be accepted. They even got a UEFA rebuke for having it placed on their shirts with the rest of Ukraine FFS.
#15177254
KurtFF8 wrote:It has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I was talking about how NATO exists to secure the interests of the ruling classes of the respective countries and all you had was "Well Communists are bad!!"

Also yes, Communists not only don't care about liberalism being prominent in a ruling ideology, but are opponents of liberalism.


NATO exists to secure militarily the countries that are part of NATO. And it has done so historically very well considering no NATO members has ever had a war on its territory.

As for securing the interest of the ruling classes that is a Marxist take on things. That was my whole point that the ideological component that is relevant to a Marxist is very minor here compared to any flavour of liberal.
Last edited by JohnRawls on 17 Jun 2021 23:25, edited 1 time in total.
#15177255
Red_Army wrote:lol @JohnRawls, NATO did nothing to protect Georgia in the same region you're talking about. They didn't intervene for the same reasons Russia didn't intervene in Armenia. Also Turkey is basically fascist and part of NATO and they were the ones spearheading the invasion of Armenia. Of course NATO has some sort of ideology, but like Kurt describes it's just a self serving one like Russia's. If they cared about the "sanctity of democracy" and "human rights" they wouldn't let Turkey continue to be a member, or at the very least tell them to stop their expansionist and anti-democratic policies. While you're right that the Cold War is over as far as I can tell their purpose continues to be broadly a counter to Russia.

As far as the standards of living goes - China has decreased poverty more than any other country in the world and the Soviet Union made Russia a super power. You can quibble about how Marxist those states were, but in that case your argument that "marxist countries" all suck has no foundation anyway.


Armenia is a member of the treaty and a full member at that. Georgia is not a NATO member. I am not sure what your argument is here?
#15177280
Juin wrote:
Zelensky mispoke. And this is the second time. Following a phone conversation with Biden Ukraine mischaracterised Biden as supporting MAP for Ukraine.



NATO rejects Ukrainian president's 'confirmation' of entry into alliance




B0ycey wrote:It would be interesting to know why Ukraine have been refused entry given I suspect they would be more than happy to fulfil ANY criteria Biden gave Zelensky. From the EU trade deal to military protection, Ukraine have been given rhetoric because anything else risks conflict with Moscow. We all know this and I would like to think Zelensky knows this also. So why are we pretending that Ukraine will ever get NATO membership? Perhaps Zelensky should consider a truce with Moscow in order to at least regain Donbass because Crimea is lost and that should just be accepted. They even got a UEFA rebuke for having it placed on their shirts with the rest of Ukraine FFS.




Your observations are on the spot.

To a good extent it is really a where the rubber hits the road situation. Where a thesis or belief gets put to the test. It is exactly at Ukraine where a certain belief or thesis that arose following the fall of the Soviet Union is being put to the test. Clearly the thesis had no basis in reality; and much of the rhetoric one sees going on is simply attempts at masking the unpleasant reality.

With the fall of the Soviet Union, its rump, the present Russian Federation, went into what, for want of a better term, one can say a comatose state. It was consumed by its own internal political and economic situations. Its focus was inwards. But with its thousands of nukes, as well as that imperialistic streak in the Russian dna, it is obvious that Russia is easily a dangerous proposition. That was what was forgotten as EU/Nato expanded eastwards, closer and closer to the comatose bear.

And the creep eastwards was easy. Very easy. So easy that a nice fine thesis took hold in the EU and Nato. The thesis that it is the right of any nation to join the military alliance of its choice, provided of course that the alliance accepts its request. Ergo, Ukraine, as well as any of the ex Soviet Republics of Russia's near abroad, by that right that belongs to any sovereign nation, can and may join Nato provided they meet Nato's requirements.

That was always a dangerous proposition. It was feasible only as long as the bear was comatose. The moment the bear bestirred itself from its comatose state and took exception, bad things could happen. And bad things did happen in 2014. And the threat of more bad things happening have kept up.

That explains the farce going on at present.
Japan Sontaku again.

According to the Wiki entry, 'sontaku' is close to[…]

Did You Get Vaccinated?

:roll: Getting a vaccine, during a pandemic is ha[…]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-57984[…]

I am personally fearful of possible adverse effec[…]