South Africa Bans Arms Sales to Poland in Support of Russian Interests

[NarrowBandFtw]

As I said, I doubt it will succeed.

you can have doubt and still try, yet you prefer them to not try at all, just fight it out till the end?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

which is why you are the warmonger here

if you insist on conditions that will not be met you are prolonging the war

Russia is the warmonger. I didn't invade Ukraine. Russia did. You're delusional.

 

[BBSA]

you can have doubt and still try, yet you prefer them to not try at all, just fight it out till the end?

I have no problem if they talk.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Russia is the warmonger. I didn't invade Ukraine. Russia did. You're delusional.

supporting war makes you a warmonger

it doesn't matter if you support the "right" side

you support continued war, you are a warmonger, own it

 

[Cosmik Debris]

good grief, I've met amoeba with more sense than you

Ah, the resort to ad hominem and an attempt at diminishing an opponent's cognitive ability in order to manipulate the argument. Why do you resort to this?

yes by virtue of the fact that it is participating in the war it by default is fanning the flames
you can say the same for Ukraine

So defending yourself against an invasion is fanning the flames of war, not being the army invading the country? Both are fanning the flames of war according to you?

when it becomes more nuanced is when one would use the expression "fanning the flames of war" rather than "fighting directly in the war", that is where USA ranks number one

So the USA caused Russia to invade Ukraine then? Russia can't make it's own decisions?

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Ah, the resort to ad hominem and an attempt at diminishing an opponent's cognitive ability in order to manipulate the argument. Why do you resort to this?

wtf are you on about? calling stupid out for being stupid is not an attack, it is a statement of fact ... you don't like facts, we all know that, but the facts don't care about your feelings

So defending yourself against an invasion is fanning the flames of war, not being the army invading the country? Both are fanning the flames of war according to you?

already answered pages ago, perhaps read?

So the USA caused Russia to invade Ukraine then?

USA most definitely provoked it, you can provoke something without being the direct cause, you seem to struggle with that concept

 

[Wut]

From your link:

Over the past year, Russia has turned to trade in yuan in the wake of the Western sanctions on its exports, imports, and energy trade, as the Chinese currency has become Putin’s only alternative to reduce exposure to the U.S. dollar and the euro.

And your assertion of that transaction being in Yuan has been refuted already by this you lot keep ignoring and refuse to comment on:

The end of the dollar is all the rage. In a piece yesterday for UnHerd, macroeconomic analyst Philip Pilkington argued for the acceleration of the de-dollarisation of international trade based on the recent news that Brazil and China will trade in their own currencies.

There’s one problem: the two countries have announced this arrangement multiple times — in 2009, in 2013 and now again in 2023. If history is any indicator, this is a routine talking point by the Brazilian and Chinese leadership that has so far lacked any substantial financial follow-through. Another example was an LNG trade in yuan between the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) and the French company TotalEnergies. But, as energy expert Anas Alhaji points out, the actual source of the LNG is the United Arab Emirates, which was paid neither in euros nor yuan but in USD, making the French-Chinese transaction symbolic at best.

The dollar isn't going anywhere

The end of the dollar is all the rage. In a piece yesterday for UnHerd, macroeconomic analyst Philip Pilkington argued for the acceleration of the de-dollarisation of international trade based on the recent news that Brazil and China will trade in their own currencies. There’s one problem: the...

unherd.com

Maybe it's you that has the Yuan blinkers on?

Your mask is slipping there Cozzie...

Unherd - Bias and Credibility

RIGHT-CENTER BIAS These media sources are slight to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Germany itself didn't get to keep its own sovereign territory did it?
Peace negotiations involve compromise, do you realise how stupid it sounds when you lot pretend otherwise?

Not post WW2. Conquest and imperialism have been illegal since then. There would be peace if Russia had not first armed minority separatists and then invaded Ukraine in the first place. Compromise would then be completely unnecessary.

Russia is NOT going to just withdraw, unless it is resoundingly defeated (so yeah that ain't happening)

Wait. Afghanistan took 10 years as did Angola. Russia was resoundingly defeated there too.

if you want the war to end it means negotiating, which is compromise by both parties
if you don't support any compromise whatsoever you are against peace talks
if you are against peace talks you are prolonging the war

Why?

There would be no war had Russia not invaded Ukraine.
There would be no need for peace talks had Russia not invaded Ukraine.
So everybody should have peace talks because Russia is in the wrong?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

are you watching the mental gymnastics in the mirror?

I said actively fanning the flames, now go back to the naughty corner and think about what you tried to do

There would no flames had Russia not invaded Ukraine.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

There would be no war had Russia not invaded Ukraine.

Do you have a time machine and the political clout with Putin to go back to Feb 2022 and prevent that from happening? No? Then stop being stuck in the past and solve the problem we have today. There is a war, pointing out how there might not have been one is delusional, there is a war right now.

There would be no need for peace talks had Russia not invaded Ukraine.

More delusion, just because you are mentally stuck in the past thousands more should die?

So everybody should have peace talks because Russia is in the wrong?

Peace talks have never been about right or wrong, peace talks are about ending bloodshed, how is that difficult to grasp?

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

There would no flames had Russia not invaded Ukraine.

more delusion, get out of your time machine, it's not working

 

[Cosmik Debris]

1: you are literally quoting yourself, a clear sign of delusional behaviour
2: I said realistically, if you think it is realistic to expect Russia will just cease aggression then ... see #1 above

They realistically ended aggression in Afghanistan and Angola...

 

[Wut]

Afghanistan took 10 years as did Angola. Russia was resoundingly defeated there too.

What?! Think you mean the SADF withdrew or do we still control South West Africa?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

so you want the war to continue, including hundreds of thousands more deaths, until there is a victor?

that is your official position? no peace talks whatsoever, only the battlefield decides?

No, Russia is continuing the war. The moment they withdraw from Ukraine, the war stops. No victor nor peace talks required.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

They realistically ended aggression in Afghanistan and Angola...

a decade of further bloodshed, that is your proposal for ending the war

and yet you want to believe you are not a warmonger?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

one would think it is not that difficult to phrase it properly either, yet here we are

So, no answer then...

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

So, no answer then...

if someone asks for a "yes" or "no" answer yet the question starts with "who" then the only correct answer is to point out that it is logically impossible to answer "who" with either "yes" or "no"

perhaps all of that was too complex for you to grasp?

 

[Cosmik Debris]

peace talks is the most viable solution
pretty disgusting how nobody in your echo chamber even acknowledges that peace talks is an option

Why? The moment Russia leaves Ukraine the war ends. No need for peace talks at all.

your preferred options:
- Russia decides to magically leave on a cloud of fairy dust (completely unrealistic)
- someone has to win the war (realistic, but the most bloody option of all)

Russia arrived in Ukraine with an army. If it leaves the war is over. Nobody has to win it at all.

my preferred option:
- peace talks (realistic and the least bloody of all options)

Why? The moment Russia leaves Ukraine the war ends. No need for peace talks at all.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

so you've already decided to sacrifice thousands of lives just because you don't think it's worth trying?

Putin decided to sacrifice thousands of lives by invading Ukraine. Nobody else.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

you could just answer the question you know, unlike some others here, mine was an easy yes/no affair

so yes, you prefer the war be decided on the battlefield, not for lives to be saved with peace talks

Why? The moment Russia leaves Ukraine the war ends. No need for peace talks at all.