Ukraine Conflict - Beware lest in your anxiety to avoid war you obtain a master

[BruceVC]

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2023-02-15-smoke-mirrors-naval-exercise-mosi-ii-is-a-potemkin-village/

Tomorrow the SA navy is doing a naval training exercise with Russia and China for 10 days. Its been heavily  criticized for numerous reasons and its disgraceful. The local  media has been banned from being able to  report  on it at the actual event, but obviously not reporting on it,  which is not surprising considering Russia are  China are  involved. Last year SA trained with the US and the media coverage was encouraged and allowed

The link discusses some interesting Russian equipment that will be showcased 

[xzar_monty]

Russia has a lot of so-called friends in Africa.

[BruceVC]

16 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Russia has a lot of so-called friends in Africa.

Its a huge disappointment to see some African countries staying neutral or supporting Russia. Considering the decades of outrage around Colonialism and how the African Union charter is opposed to invasions, military coups and respects sovereignty ( both Mali and Burkina Faso are led by military coups and they been suspended from the AU  and both are "pro-Russia " with Wagner group operating in these countries)

But  this is another example of why the AU is just a talkshop and doesnt lead to real transformation, its inconsistent to its own values and what it says it stands for 

 

[xzar_monty]

15 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

But  this is another example of why the AU is just a talkshop and doesnt lead to real transformation, its inconsistent to its own values and what it says it stands for

Well, it's not as if the EU or the UN don't have similar problems. In fact, I think it would be interesting to go through the histories of major international organizations such as these and determine which of them has done the best / worst, and, more generally, simply make comparisons between their ideals and realities.

Mind you, I am not being cynical, and I am not saying that "it's all the same rubbish" or anything like that. It's just that talk is extremely cheap, and sometimes international treaties are cheap as well.

[BruceVC]

15 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

Well, it's not as if the EU or the UN don't have similar problems. In fact, I think it would be interesting to go through the histories of major international organizations such as these and determine which of them has done the best / worst, and, more generally, simply make comparisons between their ideals and realities.

Mind you, I am not being cynical, and I am not saying that "it's all the same rubbish" or anything like that. It's just that talk is extremely cheap, and sometimes international treaties are cheap as well.

I hear you but there are massive structural differences between the UN, EU or AU. You cant compare the UN to the EU or the AU because the latter represent blocks of different countries that are bound by common laws that are suppose to be about enforcing shared and agreed  societal, political  and economic outcomes  that unite and benefit all member countries

The EU has its problems but it works, its the worlds most successful economic union and you see this by the desire for mass immigration to the EU for a better quality of life. But the EU does mostly enforce and follow its own rules even if they unpopular to some member states

The AU was founded in 2002 and it has  a manifesto\charter  that  members states are supposed to adhere to so  we can achieve the real transformation of the entire continent. But they made an unintentional and egregious mistake when they created the AU in 2002, they allowed all African countries to automatically join with no vetting or changes expected  to dictatorships or  governments that were not Democracies like Libya, Sudan or  Zimbabwe. The AU charter has points in  it that include "

• To promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good governance.
• To promote and protect human and peoples' rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and other relevant human rights instruments.
• To promote co-operation in all fields of human activity to raise the living standards of African people

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Union

But obviously if sitting at a table with certain countries, like I mentioned, and they dont  practice these things in the slightest then that union is going fail and it  just becomes a talkshop

But the EU is not a talkshop, the ECB, the Euro and the EU courts are real and expect member states to follow its rules. Thats why the EU works, the Europeans realized it has to enforceable and practiced to succeed considering its different countries 

 

 

[xzar_monty]

38 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

The EU has its problems but it works, its the worlds most successful economic union and you see this by the desire for mass immigration to the EU for a better quality of life.

There's a lot in your post that I could comment upon, but I'll restrict myself to just this one claim.

I don't think your logic here is particularly good, nor is your argument convincing. In fact, I think you're a bit confused about what is important and what is not. If you first look at where the mass immigration is coming from, and if you then look at the countries that are in the EU, you will notice that we are essentally talking about movement from countries with severe difficulties into countries that tend to be reasonably old(*), stable and democratic. It is not the EU as an entity that is the determining factor here, although it's probably not meaningless, either. In other words, if the EU didn't exist, we'd see pretty much the same kind of desire for immigration because the countries that happen to constitute the EU are also countries that are so much better off than the places the immigration is coming from. No value judgement here, only some considerations concerning stability, economy, and so on.

As for whether the EU works or not, we'd first have to determine the conditions under which we would make that claim and then see whether the EU does in fact fulfill them. That's a complicated question.

(*) Not all of them are, of course.

[BruceVC]

6 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

There's a lot in your post that I could comment upon, but I'll restrict myself to just this one claim.

I don't think your logic here is particularly good, nor is your argument convincing. In fact, I think you're a bit confused about what is important and what is not. If you first look at where the mass immigration is coming from, and if you then look at the countries that are in the EU, you will notice that we are essentally talking about movement from countries with severe difficulties into countries that tend to be reasonably old(*), stable and democratic. It is not the EU as an entity that is the determining factor here, although it's probably not meaningless, either. In other words, if the EU didn't exist, we'd see pretty much the same kind of desire for immigration because the countries that happen to constitute the EU are also countries that are so much better off than the places the immigration is coming from. No value judgement here, only some considerations concerning stability, economy, and so on.

As for whether the EU works or not, we'd first have to determine the conditions under which we would make that claim and then see whether the EU does in fact fulfill them. That's a complicated question.

(*) Not all of them are, of course.

My point wasnt about immigration, it was that the EU compared to the AU works because its not a talkshop. And if you dont consider the EU to be working  union thats also fine. Thats not the original point I was making which is why the AU is a failure, it doesnt enforce its own rules. I provided you with a link that highlights what the AU is supposed to stand for. 

We wont see the real transformation of Africa if the  body that enforces its joint rules allows certain  countries to completely ignore these rules 

My logic and argument is consistent and easy to confirm because I follow the progress and failures of the AU. And you   can use mass immigration from countries as a sign of success of a government. There are lots of African countries where the governments provide services, jobs and a future to their citizens and you dont see the same levels of immigration. So " severe difficulties " means in the year 2023 bad leadership which creates the main reason for immigration and then this goes back to the AU and its purpose 

[Mamoulian War]

Vladislav Surkov, former First Deputy Head of the Russian Presidential Administration, has said that he worked on the Minsk agreements based on the idea that they should not be fulfilled.

https://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/news/2023/02/16/963213-surkov-zayavil-rasschitival-vipolnenie-minskih-soglashenii
 

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/02/16/7389604/
 

What a complete “surprise” the Minsk agreement were for Russia just a fluke right from the beginning

 

[bugarup]

Aaaand yet another defenestration in russia, this time of war-related official.

[xzar_monty]

Wow. It continues to be astonishing and somewhat depressing, especially when you consider that there simply don't appear to be any calls from the inside for a radical change in how the country is managed.

[Malcador]

5 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Its a huge disappointment to see some African countries staying neutral or supporting Russia. Considering the decades of outrage around Colonialism and how the African Union charter is opposed to invasions, military coups and respects sovereignty ( both Mali and Burkina Faso are led by military coups and they been suspended from the AU  and both are "pro-Russia " with Wagner group operating in these countries)

But  this is another example of why the AU is just a talkshop and doesnt lead to real transformation, its inconsistent to its own values and what it says it stands for 

 

How much control should the AU have over each country's stance on an issue, though ?

[BruceVC]

15 minutes ago, Malcador said:

How much control should the AU have over each country's stance on an issue, though ?

Good question and a valid one 

The AU if it was consistent with its manifesto should make an official  statement and condemn the invasion of Ukraine because its a sovereign country. Individual African countries did condemn the invasion but not the AU

All Im asking for is consistency with what we say we stand for. But both Mali and Burkina Faso have been suspended from the AU because of the coups so the AU has no influence in there government decisions 

 

 

 

[xzar_monty]

We recently had some discussion about Austria being something of a centre for spying and other dubious activities. Its recent announcement may accord with its legislation, but it's hard to see it as anything other than a somewhat despicable act of cowardice, or worse.

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2023/02/14/austria-ukrainian-soldiers-leopard/

 

@BruceVC: The whole condemnation business is something of a mess. It's probably better for other countries to condemn things like the Ukrainian war than not condemn them, but let us not forget than the condemnation means and achieves essentially nothing. The problem is if someone fools himself into thinking that it does.

Edited February 16, 2023 by xzar_monty

[Malcador]

Indeed, your laws should be changed when inconvenient for some countries.  RoK and Switzerland are cowards as well, I guess ?

[BruceVC]

12 minutes ago, Malcador said:

Indeed, your laws should be changed when inconvenient for some countries.  RoK and Switzerland are cowards as well, I guess ?

Haven't you heard, Switzerland is deploying its military to Ukraine. They always get involved in wars and geopolitical events 

@xzar_monty Yes I agree, condemnation or support for this war isnt going to change anything. Its just the principle of the statement that matters to me 

[xzar_monty]

Interesting presentation concerning global GDP and its division into various factions around the war in Ukraine:

 

Countries with a generally Western view of things: 10% of total GDP.

Countries that are actively on Ukraine's side: 59% of total GDP.

Countries that are actively on Russia's side: 2% of total GDP.

Countries whose stance is generally favorable to Russia: 20% of total GDP.

Neutral countries: 9% of total GDP.

 

These calculations from a local weekly, with information based on data by CNN, The Economist, The Guardian, HRW, ISW, Kiel Institute for the World Economy, The World Bank, The New York Times, NPR, Rating Group, Reuters, The UN.

Edited February 16, 2023 by xzar_monty

[Malcador]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Haven't you heard, Switzerland is deploying its military to Ukraine.

Nope.  Would get people to love them again, been watching people spewing bile at them as the cannon ammo is make or break...for some reason.

[Mamoulian War]

Slovakia has passed in the parliament the resolution to recognize Russia as state sponsor of terrorism.

[HoonDing]

I believe Crimea should become a neutral demilitarized zone. Return it to Mongolia.

[Malcador]

19 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

Interesting presentation concerning global GDP and its division into various factions around the war in Ukraine:

 

Countries with a generally Western view of things: 10% of total GDP.

Countries that are actively on Ukraine's side: 59% of total GDP.

Countries that are actively on Russia's side: 2% of total GDP.

Countries whose stance is generally favorable to Russia: 20% of total GDP.

Neutral countries: 9% of total GDP.

 

These calculations from a local weekly, with information based on data by CNN, The Economist, The Guardian, HRW, ISW, Kiel Institute for the World Economy, The World Bank, The New York Times, NPR, Rating Group, Reuters, The UN.

Seems odd to separate the top two. And to think you called me cynical for saying poor countries don't matter, heh.

[kanisatha]

Hey @Sarex, what's your take on the claims that current anti-government protests in Serbia are being orchestrated by FSB and Wagner operatives inside Serbia, and that Serbia (and Moldova) are the next fronts between Russia and the West? I'm very curious about the general public views on this story inside Serbia.

[pmp10]

UK won't provide Eurofighters for Ukraine until the war is over.
But they do plan to provide 'Long range' weapons.

I wonder what they have in mind since Harpoons were delivered already.

[Sarex]

On 2/17/2023 at 5:15 PM, kanisatha said:

Hey @Sarex, what's your take on the claims that current anti-government protests in Serbia are being orchestrated by FSB and Wagner operatives inside Serbia, and that Serbia (and Moldova) are the next fronts between Russia and the West? I'm very curious about the general public views on this story inside Serbia.

Not much of a protest, the most dangerous thing was the guy with a sniper. No mentions of it being orchestrated by Russia.

[Mamoulian War]

This one popped up today on my YT recommendations and it was on of the most savage pieces, which describes some shortcomings of RuAF in communication on frontline, I’ve watched this year.

 

[BruceVC]

5 hours ago, Mamoulian War said:

This one popped up today on my YT recommendations and it was on of the most savage pieces, which describes some shortcomings of RuAF in communication on frontline, I’ve watched this year.

 

Thats a really interesting video, its amazing how much Russian SM usage has helped the Ukrainians