• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What practical solutions can "antiwar" proponents offer?

anatta said:
too late for that. just like the yellow ribbons before the Iraq invasion -either you support endless escalation
or you are some kind of Putin asset .such are the "choices
Click to expand...

Except you openly advocate for the pro-Putin position.
 
Fishking said:
That's a lie, and has been for a while. If you couldn't figure that out after Libya, then you'll never figure it out.
Click to expand...
SIDEBAR: Russia stayed out of the Libya regime change that turned Libya into a failed terrorist ridden state with open slave markets
 

A rather blatant lie.
 
OK...so you prefer war. Got it.
W_Heisenberg said:
Have you consulted with the countries neighboring Russia about your intent to give Russia de facto control over their economic, political, trade, and foreign policies?

That's a big ask.
Click to expand...
Apparently you read the words, but didn't care to understand them. Russia wouldn't "de facto" control them as the treaty specifically would be neutral, so you went with making shit up.

Face it, you don't care if war happens and you don't care about real diplomatic solutions.
 
anatta said:
SIDEBAR: Russia stayed out of the Libya regime change that turned Libya into a failed terrorist ridden state with open slave markets
Click to expand...
There is a Libya still? I don't think it can even be considered a country at this point.
 
The kicker is that they're pro-war because there's a Democratic president. They're partisan hacks, and cheerleaders for stupidity.
 
Antiwar said:
The kicker is that they're pro-war because there's a Democratic president. They're partisan hacks, and cheerleaders for stupidity.
Click to expand...

Except the Left has supported Ukraine for years. Trump was the one who tried to block Ukraine aid for his own political benefit.

Just another thing to add to the list of stuff you lie about.
 
Antiwar said:
"There's no peace process."

You should see a proctologist about that hacking cough.
Click to expand...
In this scenario, peace isn't a process. It's a binary. Russia is a hostile occupying force. They are the aggressor. They are the reason peace doesn't exist. They can return to peace at any time, just by walking away. Ukraine cannot create peace in this same fashion, they don't get to choose whether or not Russia continues their assault.

If you have alternatives, name one. You want peace talks? Name one thing that there is to talk about other than "are Russian soldiers still shooting Ukrainians?"
 
Well said.
 
What diplomatic solutions? Russia wants to take over a sovereign country and they're not taking no for an answer.
 
Fishking said:
There is a Libya still? I don't think it can even be considered a country at this point.
Click to expand...
There are periodic spasms of attempts towards a "unity "government. The war was the most high tech until Ukraine.
Outsiders like Turkey,Russia,Egypt and Qatar back the factions .the oil flows and is then interrupted

Libya used to have one of the highest standards of living in Africa -now it's a basket case
 
Fishking said:
OK...so you prefer war. Got it.
Click to expand...

We have no obligation to improve or maintain Russia's geopolitical interests.

None.

Russia, however, does have the obligation to not invade its neighbors. The reluctance of Russia's neighbors to do what Russia wants is not a legitimate justification for war. Case closed. End of story.

Our message to Putin if he doesn't like NATO expansion should be simply this: tough shit.

And if Putin is upset that countries like Ukraine want to form closer economic, political, legal, and military arrangements with other countries, maybe Putin should stop being asshole about everything and offer a better deal?

Fishking said:
Apparently you read the words, but didn't care to understand them. Russia wouldn't "de facto" control them as the treaty specifically would be neutral, so you went with making shit up.
Click to expand...

Has it occurred to you that these countries may not want to be neutral? And if Russia is the one deciding that these countries be neutral it's Russia that has a veto over the economic, political, military, and foreign policies of these various countries?

Fishking said:
Face it, you don't care if war happens and you don't care about real diplomatic solutions.
Click to expand...

What you describe as "real diplomatic solutions" is really nothing more than the appeasement of a dictator hell-bent on acquiring the territory of neighboring countries. And this doesn't stop with Ukraine just like it didn't stop Crimea. Putin will just keep pushing and pushing until he has rebuilt a system similar to what the Soviets had in place. We should work with Russia to resolve this situation, but Russia's current demands are totally unreasonable. I don't think we should surrender Ukraine to Putin's demands.

Peace on Russia's terms in this case means that we allow Ukraine to be conquered or controlled by Russia. Have you spoken when the Ukrainians about your plans to throw them to the wolves? Have you considered that maybe they don't want to be under Putin's thumb? Have you considered that maybe they want to maintain their territory and not give it up because Putin demands it?

You think to avoid war we should allow Ukraine to be conquered or controlled by Russia. But that does not sound reasonable to me.

What if Russia was trying to conquer or control our country? Would you advocate simply surrendering to Putin's demands?

Why would you ask that of the Ukrainians?
 
Last edited:

Not even close to being equivalent to Hitler.

Little different, in fact, than past US backed invasions like Iraq’s invasion of Iran or Indonesia’s invasion of East Timor.
 
Questerr said:
If Iraq wants those unarmed trainers out of their country, they can frog march them onto a plane at any point and there is nothing the US could do about it.
Click to expand...

There would be widespread screams for US bombs to be dropping on Baghdad within forty eight hours if they humiliated the US like that.
 
Questerr said:
Yes or no: do you support Ukraine surrendering to Russian demands?
Click to expand...
like i said you are stuck with 2 choices.vvPeace is a process, it starts with talks that might not even produce anything.
But like that move Analyze This is famous for saying -"it's a process"
 

Great post. Well written.
 
anatta said:
like i said you are stuck with 2 choices.vvPeace is a process, it starts with talks that might not even produce anything.
But like that move Analyze This is famous for saying -"it's a process"
Click to expand...
I will ask the same question the other guy refuses to answer:

What is there to talk about other than "Are Russian soldiers still shooting Ukrainians?"
 

Agreed.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Not even close to being equivalent to Hitler.

Little different, in fact, than past US backed invasions like Iraq’s invasion of Iran or Indonesia’s invasion of East Timor.
Click to expand...
No.
 
Deuce said:
I will ask the same question the other guy refuses to answer:

What is there to talk about other than "Are Russian soldiers still shooting Ukrainians?"
Click to expand...

I've answered similar questions several times. The people asking those questions are trolling, and they continue trolling.

You're for the war process.
 
W_Heisenberg said:
We have no obligation to improve or maintain Russia's geopolitical interests.
None.
Click to expand...
this is the same arrogance of NATO expansion/Ukraine militarization that got us to the brink of nuclear war with Russia
Your way of treating Russia as a non-legitimate security needs has been an utter failure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…