>

Ah yes, strong words always work.
Russian debate tactics are so circular and silly. I’ve encountered them a few times on this very site. It’s like talking to a brick wall, pretty pointless. They don’t make anything resembling a good point but they’ll talk in circles until your brain turns to goo if you let them. >


Invading Ukraine is wrong.

But what about when you went to Iraq?

That was wrong too but what does it have to do with invading Ukraine?

But what about your war crimes in Iraq?

War crimes are wrong no matter where they're committed. 

So you admit the West is guilty of war crimes in Iraq?

We're talking about Ukraine.

But what about your war crimes in Iraq? >

TLDR : whataboutism >

Whataboutism is not necessarily a fallacy, it can be a perfectly valid thing if used well. Russia just uses it wrong. 
For example: 
Russia: we are here to denazify Ukraine.
World: why? Are Nazis bad? 
Russia: yes. 
World: so what about Aleksey Milchakov and his "Rusich" batallion, who is explicitly a neo-nazi, to the point where he critiqued the administration of "LNR" for antifascism? Who explicitly condones and advocates for war crimes on his Telegram channel? >

Whataboutism is never logically sound.
It's a non-sequitur to the question at hand, shifting the topic of discussion away, and seeks to discredit the source of a claim rather than looking at the validity and soundness of the claim being made.
The statement "if X is bad then any case of X is bad" is sound but whataboutism is "you say x is bad but you have done x which is bad so let me do x which is bad". It's smooth-brain shit.
Hurts to hear but hypocrites can be right. Would you ignore a smoker who got lung cancer saying don't smoke? Or would you tell them that they have smoked so you deserve to as well? >

Whataboutism is perfectly sound when it points out at a hypocricy of a party that tries to get a moral leverage. It's not only "you do X, therefore I do too," but "you say you are against X but you're doing it yourself, therefore you are lying/have a hidden agenda." >

The idea that youre saying someone is holding a beleif incencerely has nothing to do with the soundness of that beleif.
Again it's attacking the source of a claim rather than the claim.
Lol is high-school logic really that hard for people? >


Lol is high-school logic really that hard for people?

Nice fallacy you have there. >

I said "you're wrong AND you're dumb"  not "you're wrong BAUCAUSE you're dumb".
I guess it must be hard >

Yet another fallacy. >


Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia accused Japan and Western countries of convening the meeting without any intention of thinking “systemically and impartially” about the rule of law.

Look at this. It's as if they're living on another planet. Crime of aggression, crime of genocide, 56,000 criminal acts charged against invaders... >

Russia seems oblivious to the fact that the outside world can hear their internal rhetoric and how contradictory it is to statements made for an international audience. >

They want to be able to a) do what they want; b) say what they want about it; and c) influence behaviour by what they choose to say about it.
If they want to annex a territory, they want to a) do it; b) not worry about being truthful about their intentions; and c) try to stall responses by other nations by confusing them with mixed signals.
If they were to say “we’re going to invade”, then they invade, and they admit they invaded because they wanted to annex territory, then the response from other nations would have been quicker and will be quicker next time, as there won’t be confusion in the populace about what those countries should commit to the problem.
They aren’t worried about looking foolish in the western press, where we expect talk to bear some relation to actions, given that’s a fundamental of democracy and re-election.
Putin doesn’t need to be re-elected, he just needs to keep certain domestic groups on his side, and playing games with other countries in their media helps him with those groups where trying to be truthful would limit his options. >

I kinda think that doesnt matter anymore. If they pull this shit again in another country the response will be even swifter. >

That’s what people thought after Georgia, and after Ukraine in 2014. Perhaps there will be a better response next time, but eventually the memory fades and the strategy works again. >

Russias only real saving grace was and is that people really don't want to go to war. They were willing to give him concessions under the impression that if they did, hs would fuck off and people could continue with their lives(aside from his victims, sadly).
At this point Putin made it clear he's both not going to stop, ever. Its also been made clearhowever that he overplayed his hand and that Russia as a country can be hurt, badly, by getting involved in this war.
The goal since this current phase of the conflict began has largely been to hurt the Russian milirary so badly it can never challenge anyone again and destabalize Russia so much it can't even THINK of trying this again for the forseeable future. >

As if Russia will listen to anyone at this point.  So long as Putin remain in power Russia will keep on adding more charges on war atrocity and crime against humanity. >

Thing is, it's not just Putin. The entire Russian government is like this. If they weren't, Putin would be dead already. Look at Navalny. That guy has more lives than a cat. Navalny is Putin's greatest competition. He's locked up and nearly dead. Putin has huge support in the government. His critics say he hasn't been brutal enough. Any replacement for Putin will have to go harder to prove they aren't weak. >

Or a replacement will have to push reform and create openness with the rest of the world to improve the quality of life for Russians, because otherwise their life will just become far, FAR worse. >

Radical nationalists are so well implemented in Russia that if, somehow, a "conciliatory" government came in power, they would probably be coup'd within weeks.
As of right now the two main factions are the pro-army (Shoigu, Gerasimov) and the pro-wagner/other nut jobs (Prighozhin but also Kadyrov and Strelkov) >

This is part of what bugs me.
Posited.  The invasion is not the work of just one man.  Russia is just completely fucked with no way back to being part of the world.
If that is true, and everyone seems to think it is, why do we allow them to continue to exist as a state? >

The answer is quite obvious: they have nukes >

The US and many other countries do, too. >

That’s why Russia allows them to exist too… >

In that case, I recommend settling this with conventional weapons >

You're oversimplifying the existence of Nuclear Weapons >

I don't see how Putin can back out and save face. He will have gained nothing for Russia. >

I don’t see how Russia can back out and save Putin. >

What's important is that this shows
 Japan is closed to Russia as a way to bypass the sanctions.
Closed with the full support of the Japanese government.
It moves Japan a step closer to being part of a world wide version of NATO. >


Japan is closed to Russia as a way to bypass the sanctions

Wasn't that always the case? Relations between the two countries has always been strained. And that's putting it lightly >

Not really. The region where Japan buys most of its Russian oil from is exempt from the oil price cap. >

Ok so tell that to the guy who says it's closed then lol. Sounds like the government has no power >

Yeah good point, I just replied to you because you asked the question >

Ok maybe I am confused though. Did they close the loophole now or does it remain open? There's such a vague discussion and you got the details lol >

Well yes that does make sense. I'm getting all my oil from Canada for the same reason >

Stfu Ruzzia. When have they ever cared about the “rule of law” lmao. Don’t urge them to do anything, tell them they’re going to continue to die in Ukraine till they collapse as a country. Than maybe they’ll understand they aren’t going to win. >

Putin is the last of the cold war bullies. >

Kissinger is still alive. >

Behind the Bastards did a great series on him.  One of the worst individuals to exist and it's cruel fate that he is still alive >

Technically living longer is a fate worse than death for the bastard. 
As he ages, he loses more of his physical abilities, eventually, he'll rely on having tubes and other stuff plugged into him just to do basic stuff like breathing and moving. And he'll feel every moment of it. His strength gradually drains till he is a husk of himself.
I do hope he is still mentally sound when he is physically wasted so he can suffer for his sins. >

Well you did make me feel a little better about the situation.  I hope it goes just as you say >

Russia will never leave Ukraine alone ever again.
People think Putin dying will be the end of it, I'm guessing it won't as the infrastructure of oppression will still be there.
Given that the KGB+oligarchs can work around the sanctions, and there's no real risk anyone will invade (because of empty nuclear threats) they have a platform to drag this out forever, and just have to wait until their mass-media control can get GOP back in control of the US so they stop funding Ukraine, and then they have won. >

I think it will go like this
Putin “has an unfortunate accident involving a window”
Russia pulls out of Ukraine
Russia holds “free and fair elections” where all but few candidates have unfortunate accidents. Someone wins unopposed.
20 years later, it’s the same guy, he’s internationally disliked, he needs a way to improve morale. Something like a quick and easy land grab war. >

If Ukraine finds a way to win this, they'll never let their guard down again. Not to mention push hard to join NATO/EU. Russia/Putin knows this too. This is their last chance before Ukraine becomes too powerful and connected to invade again. Which is also why they won't leave it alone. >

You know that person that is extremely dumb but thinks they're universes ahead everyone else?
Russia's discourse sound like that person is trying to convince everyone they have a 3 headed monkey as a pet. And they think "omg, everyone is so dumb they're gonna believe" >

And I’m sure it worked >

Unless Japan is backing it up with a few Gundams and a Mazinger, I don't think Russia is gonna care. >

That oughta do it. >

Next the UN will send them a very strong letter! >

Sarcasm here: “We speak from experience, occupying other countries didn’t work for us in the past.” >

China may Warn and Slam but have you ever seen them Urge? >

Japanese historic reasons to be nervous about Russian land grabs. >

Reminder when the Japanese cut off the head of the beast in The battle of Tsushima Strait >

In one ear and right out the other >

I bet Russia listens to them. >

I love how anti Russia Japan is. Heck yeah Japan. >

Bam! The war is over now. >

Whelp that should convince them >

You know its bad when the guy who got A bombed is telling you to stop >

Is this news? >

It bothers me when people say this and don't take into account the vast amount of people that would die in Japan if they were to invade those islands. >

Easy easy to stoke the flames of war from your home where it wont impact you.
Its fucking gross. >

These islands are quite literally an mismatch between de jure and de facto.
For Russia they are vital strategic pieces of land to avoid being blocked entrance to the pacific for their major ports in the east.
For Japan they are both strategic pieces of land (supported by US in their claim for boths benefit.) And an important source of legitimacy for their claims elsewhere.
None can give in, but the value is more in the freezing of the disagreement rather than it being ''fixed''.
Much like how Russia had an value in freezing their claims to Crimea, since an hostile and western supported Ukraine would make their national security situation similar to after it lost world war 1. 
Which meant Russia created an untenable situation by annexing Crimea, which they then calculated would cost them more as a frozen conflict, than if they tried to resolve it militarily.
And as we now see, and with all nations learning now, the use of military force. While efficient in limited engagements against inferior opponents, is not a viable long term strategy against an serious opponent with foreign support.
Hopefully this will have similar effect like Brexit made to Anti-EU parties in the EU. And frozen conflicts will to an greater extent be seen as unviable to be solved through military means... I say while Azerbaijian is wrecking havoc... to my defense they started before the Ukraine war.
However Russia deserves their rhetoric being used against them, by annexing another nations regions and claiming it as parts of it's own. Calling the Kuril isles temporarily occupied, or temporarily occupied Outer Manchuria, (Khabarovsk Krai, Primorsky Krai.) To really make a point that if they are arbitrary forming their lands borders, then the whole of it will no longer remain undisputed. >

Good speech, if you believe in Santa Claus, the only thing that will get Russia out of the Ukraine is the death or removal of Putin. >

Times up Russia. America needs to step up with air support. We pay all this money for fighter jets, time to use them on Russian soil. Ukraine needs our help and support. Start with fuel storage, factories, rail yards, bridges, highways, runways, shipyards, and utility companies. Finally knock out the propaganda news network. >


America needs to step up with air support.

Ukrainian fighter pilots are being trained in the US to fly the F-16's the US is donating >

so? how is this newsworthy >

This is an argument between Russia and Japan. Please expound upon want you think Chinese debate tactics are being employed >

oh thank god >

They need the third or what >

And just like at the League of Nations, no one gave a fuck. >

They should have just read the Wikipedia article for the battle of Tsushima and said “and we’ll fuckin’ do it again!” >

On a totally unrelated note, I wonder if Japan wants those islands.... >

Japan: come on Debo stall em out ( in their Smokey voice) >

Plot twist:  Russia listens. >

Russo-Japanese war part 2?
Everyone will be home in a week >

Why is Russia still in Ukraine when it can’t possibly win without nukes? >

Because it can possibly win.  Russia wins it's wars by attrition.  So long as they can force Russians to the front line they still have a chance to win.  While Ukraine probably has this one, we will need to see what it looks like in about 6 months. >

‘Don’t make us kick your ass again’.