The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5596
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by Sertorio » Tue Sep 07, 2021 7:41 am

(...) The struggle to stay on the diplomatic radar has become a familiar one. On Monday, Ukraine held an attention-seeking summit on Crimea, illegally annexed by Vladimir Putin in March 2014. The European Union, with which Ukraine signed an association agreement months later, imposed sanctions, and refuses to recognise the territory as part of Russia. At the summit, the European council president, Charles Michel, promised that the EU would continue to “stand tall” against such violations of international law. But in truth, the Russian annexation is a fait accompli that no one now expects to be reversed. Sending late apologies, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel failed to appear at the event. (...)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... insecurity
If Crimea's reunification with Russia is a "fait accompli" that no one now expects to be reversed, what is the use of keeping sanctions on Russia? And for how long? Five years? Twenty years? One hundred years? No matter how long sanctions are kept, Crimea will not go back to the Ukraine, so what's the purpose?...

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Probably DCA, YYJ, or DOM
Contact:

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by SteveFoerster » Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am

Sertorio wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 7:41 am
(...) The struggle to stay on the diplomatic radar has become a familiar one. On Monday, Ukraine held an attention-seeking summit on Crimea, illegally annexed by Vladimir Putin in March 2014. The European Union, with which Ukraine signed an association agreement months later, imposed sanctions, and refuses to recognise the territory as part of Russia. At the summit, the European council president, Charles Michel, promised that the EU would continue to “stand tall” against such violations of international law. But in truth, the Russian annexation is a fait accompli that no one now expects to be reversed. Sending late apologies, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel failed to appear at the event. (...)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... insecurity
If Crimea's reunification with Russia is a "fait accompli" that no one now expects to be reversed, what is the use of keeping sanctions on Russia? And for how long? Five years? Twenty years? One hundred years? No matter how long sanctions are kept, Crimea will not go back to the Ukraine, so what's the purpose?...
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: https://newworld.ac

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 5596
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by Sertorio » Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:45 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am
Sertorio wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 7:41 am
(...) The struggle to stay on the diplomatic radar has become a familiar one. On Monday, Ukraine held an attention-seeking summit on Crimea, illegally annexed by Vladimir Putin in March 2014. The European Union, with which Ukraine signed an association agreement months later, imposed sanctions, and refuses to recognise the territory as part of Russia. At the summit, the European council president, Charles Michel, promised that the EU would continue to “stand tall” against such violations of international law. But in truth, the Russian annexation is a fait accompli that no one now expects to be reversed. Sending late apologies, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel failed to appear at the event. (...)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... insecurity
If Crimea's reunification with Russia is a "fait accompli" that no one now expects to be reversed, what is the use of keeping sanctions on Russia? And for how long? Five years? Twenty years? One hundred years? No matter how long sanctions are kept, Crimea will not go back to the Ukraine, so what's the purpose?...
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
The result will be the same: zero!...

neverfail
Posts: 7293
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by neverfail » Tue Sep 07, 2021 4:37 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
Steve, do you believe that US sanctions on Cuba should be lifted then?

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Probably DCA, YYJ, or DOM
Contact:

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by SteveFoerster » Tue Sep 07, 2021 6:12 pm

neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 4:37 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
Steve, do you believe that US sanctions on Cuba should be lifted then?
Yes. Prohibiting Americans from traveling and trading where they wish is an awfully hypocritical way of opposing tyranny abroad.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: https://newworld.ac

neverfail
Posts: 7293
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by neverfail » Tue Sep 07, 2021 8:43 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 6:12 pm
neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 4:37 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
Steve, do you believe that US sanctions on Cuba should be lifted then?
Yes. Prohibiting Americans from traveling and trading where they wish is an awfully hypocritical way of opposing tyranny abroad

.Does that include in foreign countries that have banned Americans from trading and travelling within their domain?

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Probably DCA, YYJ, or DOM
Contact:

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by SteveFoerster » Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:08 am

neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 8:43 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 6:12 pm
neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 4:37 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
Steve, do you believe that US sanctions on Cuba should be lifted then?
Yes. Prohibiting Americans from traveling and trading where they wish is an awfully hypocritical way of opposing tyranny abroad.
Does that include in foreign countries that have banned Americans from trading and travelling within their domain?[/color]
Of course. Just because someone else does the wrong thing doesn't mean you have to do the same wrong thing.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: https://newworld.ac

neverfail
Posts: 7293
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by neverfail » Wed Sep 08, 2021 3:45 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:08 am
neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 8:43 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 6:12 pm
neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 4:37 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
Steve, do you believe that US sanctions on Cuba should be lifted then?
Yes. Prohibiting Americans from traveling and trading where they wish is an awfully hypocritical way of opposing tyranny abroad.
Does that include in foreign countries that have banned Americans from trading and travelling within their domain?[/color]
Of course. Just because someone else does the wrong thing doesn't mean you have to do the same wrong thing.
Who made the silly suggestion that banning entry to people of a designated foreign nationality is always a bad thing?

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Probably DCA, YYJ, or DOM
Contact:

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by SteveFoerster » Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:23 pm

neverfail wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 3:45 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:08 am
neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 8:43 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 6:12 pm
neverfail wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 4:37 pm
SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 10:36 am
The ill-advised embargo of Cuba stems from a refusal to admit that such sanctions usually don't work very well. I wonder whether this is similar, although my understanding is that sanctions in this case are targeted to Putin and his cronies rather than Russia as a whole.
Steve, do you believe that US sanctions on Cuba should be lifted then?
Yes. Prohibiting Americans from traveling and trading where they wish is an awfully hypocritical way of opposing tyranny abroad.
Does that include in foreign countries that have banned Americans from trading and travelling within their domain?[/color]
Of course. Just because someone else does the wrong thing doesn't mean you have to do the same wrong thing.
Who made the silly suggestion that banning entry to people of a designated foreign nationality is always a bad thing?
What's silly is limiting individual freedom -- both that of those seeking entry and those in the country who want to hire or otherwise associate with them -- by imposing such overbroad restrictions.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: https://newworld.ac

neverfail
Posts: 7293
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: The Guardian's view on Ukraine

Post by neverfail » Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:42 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:23 pm
What's silly is limiting individual freedom --
You do that in America routinely anyway - in the case of dangerous criminals and the mentally deranged. Same everywhere.

There are people on this plane whose "individual freedom" you need to restrict for the safety and health of society at large.

Even the United States is not so insanely infatuated with this "right to freedom" nonsense as to be entirely in denial about that.

Now, what about a spy working on behalf of an enemy foreign power. Do you believe that he should be allowed unlimited freedom to steal your country's state secrets?

Frankly, I think that this notion that Americans have a divine right to go where they like and do what they like is both myopic and arrogant.

Post Reply