What is a Proxy War?

[CdnFox]

9 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Do you mean "Ukraine won't be interested in giving up their sliver of Russian territory"?

Either or. Ukraine won't be interested in giving it up for free, Russia won't be interested in losing it.

Quote

I can see Russia giving back some, but 80% is a ridiculous ask.

Maybe. Depends on what the entire package is. For the right deal giving 100% back would make sense. There's financial, military, geopolitical and other factors to be considered. Who knows what trump actually has in his brain to put forward

 

Quote

Knowing Trump this is layered in negotiating strategies; anchor the negotiations to the topic of Russia giving some land back, start with a ridiculous demand to end up at a conclusion that favours your own side, and also plant the seed in westerners - who are hostile towards Russia - that Ukraine could gain a lot of territory back from Russia bloodlessly, then dial it back towards reality.

I'm sure he'll have a strategy of some sort in mind that's for sure.  

 

Quote

I just don't see Putin giving up much at all. Ukraine is falling apart now, and 10K soldiers in nothing for NoKo. Their standing army was at 600,000 the last time I checked. 

They're not going to want to give all their soldiers to Russia, and it sounds like they're already taking heavy losses. . And it's just not effective. The language barriers are too significant, there's differences in tactics and training, it's just not practical. 

Quote

All I know for sure is that cities are flat, fields aren't being plowed, and that millions of people are dead or wounded. 

Without a doubt, it's been a horrible war. And although not as important as those issues we can't dismiss the other problems and suffering including the economic hardships it's causing in Russia and the effect of inflation on the world. Well nowhere near as tragic they still have a large humanitarian impact. War is bad.

Quote

 

I'm so sick of all the new wars, I can't even imagine what people went through over here when WWII was going on and people had friends and family members over there.

I'm really hoping that Trump can get sh1t handled in Israel and Ukraine. 

 

Ukraine and Russia will probably be the easier of the two. They're both pretty exhausted and the resolutions there are going to be a lot more cut and dry. Israel and what happens to Gaza and dealing with Iran's influence in all of that is going to be an order of magnitude more challenging

[User]

5 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

I 100.00% support the war against Ukraine. I think we established that a long time ago. 

Not really, at first yeah, then you tried to be dishonest and act like it was only from the Russian POV, and then you tried to throw around the term warmonger and act like those who support Ukraine defending themselves from the war you support make them the warmonger and not you. 

Glad you finally admit that you are in fact the warmonger. 

5 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

If the Ukrainians (and Americans) weren't dicks, then there wouldn't be a war.

No, there would not be a war if Russia did not start the war. 

So, here you are again... you just said you 100% support this war, if there was not one, there wouldn't be one. This is on Russia and you support it. 

 

[Five of swords]

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Who cares? France was part of what we know as the "Holy Roman Empire" scenario for more than a few decades. 

It's not even a crucial detail of the whole "3rd Reich" plan TBH. Hitler was basically harkening back to a time when there was one guy ruling over all that territory, which did include France for a long time, to normalize the idea of having one big happy empire again. His point is "what was normal before could be normal again". For 1,000 years. I.e., there was a 1st Reich, and a 2nd Reich, so it stands to reason that there could be a 3rd Reich. And the concept of France being part of a 3rd Reich wouldn't be completely unsupported in history, contrary to your odd assertion that Hitler would never want to hold France in his empire. 

There is nothing 'odd' about the assertion that Hitler would not want to hold france. Hitler only wanted germans in Germany. That is kinda one of the main points of his while political philosophy

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, User said:

Not really, at first yeah, then you tried to be dishonest and act like it was only from the Russian POV,

It IS from a Russian POV. I'm not threatened by NATO in Ukraine.

If they feel threatened, which they legitimately were, they have a right to act aggressively to defend themselves. Kennedy felt threatened by the nukes in Cuba, and he took similar action, just Russia opted not to allow the situation to come to blows. If Russia chose not to negotiate with the missiles there, the US was prepared to take direct acton. 

I never said that I wanted to see "Russians kill Ukrainians", that would be a bit macabre, I said that the war is 100% justified. Russia had no other choice. 

1 hour ago, Five of swords said:

There is nothing 'odd' about the assertion that Hitler would not want to hold france. Hitler only wanted germans in Germany. That is kinda one of the main points of his while political philosophy

So why did he invade Poland? Why did he get his soldiers to massacre Russians? What does that have to do with "only having Germans in Germany"?

[User]

14 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

It IS from a Russian POV. I'm not threatened by NATO in Ukraine.

You keep playing these dumb games, flip flopping back and forth. 

You don't have to be threatened personally to be here making an argument that you believe NATO is a threat... 

14 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

If they feel threatened, which they legitimately were, they have a right to act aggressively to defend themselves.

So, once again, YOU do believe NATO is a threat. You are here saying it was a legitimate feeling. 

14 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

I never said that I wanted to see "Russians kill Ukrainians", that would be a bit macabre, I said that the war is 100% justified. Russia had no other choice. 

OK, now you are playing even dumber. What happens in war? People die. Russia had plenty of choice, don't start a war. 

You have yet to ever explain what this threat is that justified this war. 

 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, User said:

You keep playing these dumb games, flip flopping back and forth. 

You don't have to be threatened personally to be here making an argument that you believe NATO is a threat... 

You're just too dumb to put 2 and 2 together. 

I don't want war, but I understand what causes it. 

When something causes a war, then the party who goes to war to remedy that cause is justified in doing so. 

Quote

So, once again, YOU do believe NATO is a threat. You are here saying it was a legitimate feeling. 

It is absolutely a threat. 

Quote

OK, now you are playing even dumber. What happens in war? People die. Russia had plenty of choice, don't start a war. 

You have yet to ever explain what this threat is that justified this war. 

Ukraine forced Russia to either wait for NATO to be parked on their doorstep or do something about it. They chose the latter. 

Biden and Zelenski had ample warning this was coming. They created the scenario where war was necessary, then they ran with it, hoping that there would be a lot of stupid people, like you, who would fail to realize what was actually happening.

[User]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

You're just too dumb to put 2 and 2 together. 

I don't want war, but I understand what causes it. 

When something causes a war, then the party who goes to war to remedy that cause is justified in doing so. 

You keep using deceitful language, I understand what you are doing just fine. 

Yes, you wanted war, you supported this war, you continue to do so. 

The cause of this war was Russia. Period. 

Let me know when you can actually put forth any kind of substantive argument for your claim that it was justified. 

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

It is absolutely a threat. 

How?

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Ukraine forced Russia to either wait for NATO to be parked on their doorstep or do something about it. They chose the latter. 

NATO is already on their doorstep. Explain why Russia had to do something. 

[WestCanMan]

2 minutes ago, User said:

You keep using deceitful language

That's literally all that you're doing here. 

1. You know that Ukraine was threatening to join NATO.
2. You know that Russia and NATO have been at odds for 80 years now. 
3. Yet you like to pretend that Russia should be comfortable with NATO in Ukraine, and you like pretend that NATO in Ukraine isn't a massive escalation from just "NATO in two small satellite countries". 

I'm done with you now, child. Find something intelligent to talk about or f-off. 

[User]

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

That's literally all that you're doing here. 

My positions are clear, you don't have to keep guessing at them because I change my language. 

5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You know that Ukraine was threatening to join NATO.

They were threatening to join NATO like I am threatening to go to McDonalds to lunch. 

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You know that Russia and NATO have been at odds for 80 years now. 

Funny how people don't like being ruled by an oppressive communist power and then when they break away they don't like Russia continuing to meddle in controlling them and threatening them. Yeah, that tends to put people at odds. 
 

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Yet you like to pretend that Russia should be comfortable with NATO in Ukraine, and you like pretend that NATO in Ukraine isn't a massive escalation from just "NATO in two small satellite countries". 

Comfort? You are on here arguing that Russis had to go to war. 

Why?
 

15 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I'm done with you now, child. Find something intelligent to talk about or f-off. 

Nah, you will just another thread espousing your surface level deep assertions you can't ever defend. 

Hey, you ever figure out where you made that prediction you claimed to have done? LOL

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, User said:

My positions are clear, you don't have to keep guessing at them because I change my language. 

They were threatening to join NATO like I am threatening to go to McDonalds to lunch. 

Funny how people don't like being ruled by an oppressive communist power and then when they break away they don't like Russia continuing to meddle in controlling them and threatening them. Yeah, that tends to put people at odds. 
 

Comfort? You are on here arguing that Russis had to go to war. 

Why?
 

Nah, you will just another thread espousing your surface level deep assertions you can't ever defend. 

Hey, you ever figure out where you made that prediction you claimed to have done? LOL

You're just losing credibility now, User.

It's one thing to disagree on something, but it's another to just play stupid and to lie constantly, which is what you're doing.

You know what NATO in Ukraine means to Russia, or you're just plain stupid. 

You know that Biden was publicly speaking about getting NATO into Ukraine ever since 2009 or you're stupid and ignorant. 

Your positions are crystal clear:

1. your head is in your ass
2. it's not coming out anytime soon, regardless of what information is made available to you. 

Edited November 15, 2024 by WestCanMan

[User]

50 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

It's one thing to disagree on something, but it's another to just play stupid and to lie constantly, which is what you're doing.

What is the lie?

50 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You know what NATO in Ukraine means to Russia, or you're just plain stupid. 

Yeah, of course I know what it means, what I don't know is what YOU are here saying is such a grave threat as to demand Russia invade and go to war. 

Yet again, you won't answer. 

51 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You know that Biden was publicly speaking about getting NATO into Ukraine ever since 2009 or you're stupid and ignorant. 

We were not arguing about what Biden has said about Ukraine joining NATO or not. 

Any other strawmen you want to beat down?

 

[Deluge]

On 11/10/2024 at 5:15 PM, DUI_Offender said:

The above topic is by definition, false and misleading.

 

Expert Comment: This is no proxy war - Russia really invaded Ukraine

In the year since, I have reviewed evidence for the Russian action, such as exists. With hindsight, what seemed like the ramblings of madmen, which appeared before the invasion, seem remarkably prescient. And they can now be perceived as predictors of the invasion – although absolutely not excuses for it.

Any ‘excuse’ for the Russian attack on Ukraine – because it felt threatened – should be viewed with the lens of history. That was the same reason given by Hitler, for the invasion of half of Europe

Any ‘excuse’ for the Russian attack on Ukraine – because it felt threatened – should be viewed with the lens of history. That was the same reason given by Hitler, for the invasion of half of Europe. He was only protecting the Germans in the Sudetenland. Austrians speak German, anyway. He was only defending against the Polish attack on the radio transmitter in Gleiwitz…

And the suggestion Ukraine should accept ‘terms’ – and Putin be allowed to walk away with a fifth of the country, having laid waste to cities with clear evidence of war crimes – can be viewed in the same way. Imagine, if the Allies had sued for peace in 1943, and agreed Hitler should be allowed to keep what he had conquered to 'stop the killing'.

Plus, Ukrainians will never accept to surrender and it is they who have the agency in this war; they decide. This is no proxy war, with NATO and the Soviets pitched against each other behind the scenes in the remote tropics as happened during the Cold War or as is currently happening in Yemen, where different Middle East factions fund the fighting done by others. This is a real war. Russia really invaded Ukraine and it really has bombed real civilians, real hospitals and real infrastructure. Between a third to half a million people have already been killed or maimed, in just 12 months. There is nothing proxy about it for either side.  

This is no proxy war, with NATO and the Soviets pitched against each other behind the scenes...This is a real war. Russia really invaded Ukraine and it really has bombed real civilians, real hospitals and real infrastructure

To return to the evidence, three months before the invasion, one of Putin’s longest-standing and closest advisers, Vladislav Surkov, former deputy prime minister, dark celebrity, sometime playwright and novelist, wrote a bizarre article which he published in an online current affairs magazine.   It was strange commentary on the second law of thermodynamics, as it applies to nation states. Essentially, Surkov, who has no current official role, used Physics to claim countries have to deal with internal ‘tensions’ through external ‘expansion’, like a gas escaping a closed chamber – ie through war. In doing so, they would transfer internal entropy – disorder and chaos - beyond the nation’s borders.

It seemed at the time to be mad ramblings. He repeated this, though, just nine days before the invasion in a further article, talking about how it was necessary to expand outwards, 'For Russia, constant expansion is not just one of the ideas, but the true existential of our historical existence. Russia will expand not because it is good, and not because it is bad, but because it is physics.'

Now, the ‘fog of war’ has actually made clear these comments were writing on the wall. Another clear indication of intent came from Putin himself, all the way back in 2016. When presenting a national prize for Geography [he is Chairman of the Russian Geographical Society], he asked one of the youngest award winners to say where Russia’s borders end. The young boy began to answer, when Putin interrupted him with a smile and said, ‘Russia’s borders never end.’

The audience was uncertain whether to laugh or applaud. It was safest to do the latter.

A third piece of evidence I have seen is a Russian post-invasion plan – Action plan: to create a system of control over economic and political processes in Ukraine – setting out a rough five page-long sketch of how it was going to happen. The strangest thing about the plan is how insubstantial and very basic it was. Both the Kremlin’s political and military plans have been proved horribly wrong, of course, since the invasion did not go according to plan and now something over 90% of the Russian army is in Ukraine. What is strange, though, is that it is all about controlling the territory and very little about assets. The invasion was not about seizing valuable resources or material gains. There are none left when the Russians reach them. It is more about ephemeral prestige, power, control, even more than a land grab. You do not bomb the largest steel mills to smithereens in order to obtain them. 

The invasion was not about seizing valuable resources or material gains. There are none left when the Russians reach them. It is more about ephemeral prestige, power, control...You do not bomb the largest steel mills to smithereens in order to obtain them

Some claim Russia was goaded into acting by the threat of NATO expansion. But Putin himself said in 2004 that 'Russia has no concerns about the expansion of NATO from the standpoint of ensuring security'. Russia, after all, has a massive nuclear arsenal and has no reason to fear any adversary. What is the purpose of nuclear weapons then? In addition, several countries bordering Russia, including Finland and the Baltic States are already entering the alliance, with not a murmur from Moscow.

Plus, with modern hi-tech weapons, no country needs actually to border another, for there to be a threat – as Britain has discovered from the threats of Russian TV pundits, who delight in telling us how London could be wiped out in ten minutes. 

So where does the war go from here? History tells us, you cannot appease a dictator. History also tells us Russia will not abide by an agreement. In 1994, Ukraine handed over its – third largest – nuclear weapons arsenal to Russia (as a long-term nuclear power) in exchange for security assurances from the US, the UK and…er Russia.

So where does the war go from here? History tells us, you cannot appease a dictator. History also tells us Russia will not abide by an agreement...Fake pacifists who call for Ukraine to...‘come to terms’ with Russia are, in effect, aiding and abetting the criminal invasion of a sovereign nation and suggesting war criminals go unpunished

Fake pacifists who call for Ukraine to sue for peace, or ‘come to terms’ with Russia, are in effect aiding and abetting the criminal invasion of a sovereign nation and suggesting war criminals go unpunished. But, even were that to happen, there would be no reason for Russia to obey any conditions laid down in a deal and the evidence suggests quite the opposite. After all, who will be there to force the Kremlin to live up to the letter of the law?

The war can end in two ways. Western weapons can allow Ukraine to threaten Russia’s continuing war effort to such an extent that Putin is replaced as the leader – effectively a coup. The alternative would be for Putin to declare ‘victory’ now, as it is, and step down quietly, leaving a new administration to negotiate peace.

 

source; https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-02-21-expert-comment-no-proxy-war-russia-really-invaded-ukraine

 

A proxy war would be something like a filthy pit viper, like Barack Obama, slithering into the politics of a foreign country, like Ukraine, and helping a complete scumbag, like Volodymyr Zelenskyy, replace a democratically elected leader. 

[Five of swords]

21 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

It IS from a Russian POV. I'm not threatened by NATO in Ukraine.

If they feel threatened, which they legitimately were, they have a right to act aggressively to defend themselves. Kennedy felt threatened by the nukes in Cuba, and he took similar action, just Russia opted not to allow the situation to come to blows. If Russia chose not to negotiate with the missiles there, the US was prepared to take direct acton. 

I never said that I wanted to see "Russians kill Ukrainians", that would be a bit macabre, I said that the war is 100% justified. Russia had no other choice. 

So why did he invade Poland? Why did he get his soldiers to massacre Russians? What does that have to do with "only having Germans in Germany"?

Because poland occupied danzig, a german city. Russia was already going to attack Germany and it was actually necessary for Hitler to try to take them out before they were ready.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Five of swords said:

Because poland occupied danzig, a german city. Russia was already going to attack Germany and it was actually necessary for Hitler to try to take them out before they were ready.

Kid, we've been over this before. All of that is patently insane

[Five of swords]

On 11/15/2024 at 6:14 PM, CdnFox said:

Kid, we've been over this before. All of that is patently insane

The only thing you proved to me when you tried to 'go over it' is that you are severely retarded.

[Nationalist]

On 11/14/2024 at 3:50 PM, User said:

No, there would not be a war if Russia did not start the war. 

Man...is this ever simplistic.

It's interesting that in political discussion, you are quite rational and able to analyze all the factors. But with this subject, you sound like robo-bot.

This war would not have happened except for 2 issues.

1. The prospect of Ukraine joining NATO. Who was responsible for that?

2. Ukraine's denial of the Russian language and culture existing in the eastern regions. Who was responsible for that?

Things are never black and white. You know that too. But on this subject, you act like Bush.

"Ur either with us, or agin us."

That sort of thinking lead to a tragedy and hatred of the USA that remains in the middle east to this day. It would be a "bad" idea to follow that line of thinking...

Wouldn't you say?

[WestCanMan]

11 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Man...is this ever simplistic.

It's interesting that in political discussion, you are quite rational and able to analyze all the factors. But with this subject, you sound like robo-bot.

This war would not have happened except for 2 issues.

1. The prospect of Ukraine joining NATO. Who was responsible for that?

2. Ukraine's denial of the Russian language and culture existing in the eastern regions. Who was responsible for that?

Things are never black and white. You know that too. But on this subject, you act like Bush.

"Ur either with us, or agin us."

That sort of thinking lead to a tragedy and hatred of the USA that remains in the middle east to this day. It would be a "bad" idea to follow that line of thinking...

Wouldn't you say?

He's just an id10t. You'll have better luck getting intelligent answers from a fencepost. 

[CdnFox]

59 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

The only thing you proved to me when you tried to 'go over it' is that you are severely retarded.

LOLOL  thats what you always say when you're losing an argument  

C'mon, you remember -  back when you didn't know there was an agreement in place to defend poland, and when you didn't know russia and france and england had been discussing with poland that russia would enter poland if there was  a german invasion, and how you thought that hilter was just minding his own business and was attacked randomly by england and france because they hate germans?  Remember that?

And i proved that you were dumb as fcuk and had no idea of the history or the agreements?   

I'm a little surprised you wanted to revisit that. You looked pretty dumb the first time, i doubt you'll look better now. 

[User]

20 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

This war would not have happened except for 2 issues.

1. The prospect of Ukraine joining NATO. Who was responsible for that?

2. Ukraine's denial of the Russian language and culture existing in the eastern regions. Who was responsible for that?

With anything that happens we can play an absurd game of only if this didn't happen. What you are doing is blaming the rape victim for going to the party. Man, if only she didn't go to that party, she never would have been raped. 

1. Joining NATO is not war. NATO has existed for decades, and countries, such as those bordering Russia, continue to join it. Putin/Russia are 100% responsible for their reaction to this, in starting a war with Ukraine if it was to prevent them from joining NATO. 

2. I don't care man, that has nothing to do with Russia being the one who started a war. 

 

46 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Things are never black and white. You know that too. But on this subject, you act like Bush.

"Ur either with us, or agin us."

Yet, here you are, defending this exact argument in favor of supporting Russia. That it was either Ukraine doesn't join NATO or war. 



 

35 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

He's just an id10t. You'll have better luck getting intelligent answers from a fencepost. 

And you are a coward who can't defend your bad arguments and ran away because I called you out on your bad prediction. 

 

[Nationalist]

33 minutes ago, User said:

With anything that happens we can play an absurd game of only if this didn't happen. What you are doing is blaming the rape victim for going to the party. Man, if only she didn't go to that party, she never would have been raped. 

1. Joining NATO is not war. NATO has existed for decades, and countries, such as those bordering Russia, continue to join it. Putin/Russia are 100% responsible for their reaction to this, in starting a war with Ukraine if it was to prevent them from joining NATO. 

2. I don't care man, that has nothing to do with Russia being the one who started a war. 

 

Yet, here you are, defending this exact argument in favor of supporting Russia. That it was either Ukraine doesn't join NATO or war. 

It's not absurd at all. These events precipitated the attack. Much like Brandon's policies, his mental decline and Kamala's failure to communicate, precipitated Trump's election win. Action...reaction. Cause...effect.

You can claim I "support" Russia all you like. That doesn't make it true though. 

What is true, is I prefer to view all sides of any issue and in this case...

You do not.

[User]

10 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

It's not absurd at all. These events precipitated the attack. Much like Brandon's policies, his mental decline and Kamala's failure to communicate, precipitated Trump's election win. Action...reaction. Cause...effect.

No, the argument you are making about something precipitating the attack is absurd. Hell, I microwaved my popcorn the day before Putin launched the full scale invasion... I guess my eating popcorn caused this. 

Like I said, you are here blaming the rape victim for her own rape because she went to a party. 

11 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

You can claim I "support" Russia all you like. That doesn't make it true though. 

You are here doing it right now. You are here supporting their war and justifying it. 

12 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

What is true, is I prefer to view all sides of any issue and in this case...

Taking Russia's side as you are doing is not viewing all sides, nor is my rejection of your support for Russia not viewing all sides. 

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, User said:

No, the argument you are making about something precipitating the attack is absurd. Hell, I microwaved my popcorn the day before Putin launched the full scale invasion... I guess my eating popcorn caused this. 

I do hope you know just how dumb this argument of yours is?

[User]

54 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I do hope you know just how dumb this argument of yours is?

Feel free to explain it if you can. 

[Nationalist]

24 minutes ago, User said:

Feel free to explain it if you can. 

Sure thing.

Microwaving popcorn has zero to do with either Ukraine or Russia. 

The precipitous events I mention, has direct effect on both.

Now you know.

You're welcome.

[User]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Sure thing.

Microwaving popcorn has zero to do with either Ukraine or Russia. 

The precipitous events I mention, has direct effect on both.

Now you know.

You're welcome.

Joining NATO has nothing to do with Russia having to go to war to stop it.