OpenRA

Punsho wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 11, 2022 9:01 pm

avonacolyte wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 11, 2022 3:09 pm

We don't need to - and I would say shouldn't - defend NATO and the way NATO powers have behaved, and continue to behave, in order to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It's a red herring, so to speak. The way America, in particular, behaves is little or no better than how Russia has recently started behaving; the point is that two wrongs don't make a right.

I don't think you can compare them like that, at all. (I mean Russia and NATO or Russia and America). It's completely dismissing the severity of Russia's actions. I can only assume that by "the way NATO powers have behaved, and continue to behave" you mean not participating the the conflict. If NATO decided to do such a thing, it's instant WW3. But thing is, NATO does not even have the power to do such an aggressive action. All member states need to agree to it. And afaik all are against NATO's direct inclusion in the war

avonacolyte wrote: ↑

Sat Mar 12, 2022 4:04 pm

No, I meant Iraq, Afghanistan, supplying weapons to Saudi, sending arms to Islamists causing carnage in Syria, elevating neo-nazis to massacre protestors and overthrow the elected government in Ukraine, CIA black sites, extraordinary renditions, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, NSA spying, countless CIA coups including most recently Bolivia, etc etc etc - all things that NATO powers, mainly America, have participated in which are at least as bad as (post-Soviet) Russia's recent venture into more explicitly murderous and imperialist interventions in other countries. I'm delighted that NATO is staying out of WWIII and pray it stays that way.

avonacolyte wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 14, 2022 12:00 am

The elected Ukraine govt was pro-Russian, yes, or at least not sufficiently pro-Western to sign a trade deal with the EU which would have tied it into the Western bloc. That government was overthrown in a US- and EU-backed putsch in 2014, at the forefront of which were neo-Nazi militias. It was replaced by a coalition of mafia types handpicked by the US State Department, who brought the neo-Nazi militias into the armed forces of Ukraine and deployed them against the loyalists in the East, whom Russia then helped. The neo-Nazi elements have undoubtedly committed atrocities in the Donbass, and also appear to have been responsible for the massacre of protestors and police at Maidan, which directly precipitated the fall of Yanukovych. That is what Putin is talking about when he talks about denazification. He is embellishing, trying to give the impression that Ukrainians as a whole are like that, or that the subsequently-elected government of Zelensky is Nazi or cryto-Nazi, which is false. Denazification, per se, is certainly a legitimate objective of the invasion forces, though - but I expect a large number of innocents and politically inconvenient persons will be swept up in the 'denazification' process, as is often the way. It's just a bad situation all round without any good guys, despite the Disneyfied media coverage in our media.

avonacolyte wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 14, 2022 5:39 pm

Pun, you need to realise 'our side' lies and manufactures consent too. Once you work that out, you'll eventually go down the same rabbit hole I did. It's disturbing and upsetting, but knowing the truth is better than being a programmed robot of the Western regime. This war hysteria they've whipped up, with its power to generate such absurdities as cancelling courses on Russian literature, performative pouring away of vodka, and demanding that Russia be renamed in OpenRA, should terrify everybody like it does me. It shows how little Western populations have progressed since the worst days of jingo imperialism. But we have nukes now, and probably the most decent and trustworthy person in charge of any nukes currently is Boris Johnson! So really, we're much worse off. We could be radioactive cinders tomorrow, and all for the sake of the Azov Battalion!