RCVS leaving X social media platform

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Cinzia Gandini — Sat, 15 Mar 2025 11:04:39 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246833#246833"]Yes, but there's no real need to be a verified organisation on Twitter[/quote]

There’s nothing safe on the internet in my opinion unless it’s encrypted end to end with two different keys, something that in Great Britain doesn’t exist anymore. I don’t understand it ether and like you I’m not trying to argue about it, it’s only a thought

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Arlo Guthrie — Sat, 15 Mar 2025 08:59:59 GMT

Yes, but there's no real need to be a verified organisation on Twitter, and the 10K per month is their premium 'service' (if you can call it that), and if the College had some burning desire to be verified, it could have opted for the $200 dollars per month service.

I'm not trying to make a case for the RCVS being on Twitter here, BTW!

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Cinzia Gandini — Fri, 14 Mar 2025 22:48:51 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246428#246428"]I did ask the College to elaborate[/quote]

It's also true that Twitter was free, X is charging to be a verified organisation up to 1000 USD per month

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

David Mills — Wed, 05 Mar 2025 12:00:17 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246787#246787"]I guess the philosophical question is: if you argue that 'what is fair' is somehow irrelevant, unimportant, whatever, then what are we left with? [/quote]

The argument itself isn't invalid or wrong, but it doesn't help practically at this point - this is a stalemate war which neither side will win, but both stand to lose further from. And I guess, it depends where people draw the line in the sand as to distributive ethics. If we continue to fund this war for years at our own cost, rising costs, poorer defence, services etc - then at what point should our own interests trump those of Ukraine? Would people really be happy with a further £100bn, greater national debt, higher taxes, more expensive goods and energy, for another 5 years simply because Putin is a morally repugnant twat? My view is that no, enough is enough, and regardless of the optics a resolution is required and that resolution cannot possibly please everyone. Putin's actions are abhorrent - though we may be able to see some justification - but how does this help in resolving anything?

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246787#246787"]If Trump had been President during WW2, I have a feeling I might be addressing you as Herr Mills.[/quote]

You have to remember that the US were reluctantly dragged into WW2 and may not have been were it not for the Japanese attack. Remember their refusal to provide even weapons (a far worse state than currently!) unless they were dragged across by horses into Canada?! American protectionism/isolationism isn't anything new, however bluntly and arrogantly it is currently played out by Trump. Let's not kid ourselves that the Middle East wars were moral crusades anymore than a shameless land grab for resources.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246787#246787"]What else can the populations of democracies do, except express their disapproval and hope to sway opinion?[/quote]

Whose opinion are "we" trying to sway? Putin? I think everyone is in agreement who is "right" or who is "wrong" in this but what does it matter? Do we think Putin is suddenly going to see the error of his ways? No. We still need to negotiate with him, however distasteful that may be, and reach some kind of lasting agreement that will give Russia more than they had before.

With my cynical hat on, as has been said by Gerry and Malcolm, this moral outrage is not borne out by the West's initial responses to this so its volume now dos feel somewhat confected. We were happy to receive Russian oil, gas, exports for many months, likely in the perverse hope that the war would be quick and final and we could pointlessly hand wring after the event, condemn Putin etc, but still keep buying their products. What this conflict has highlighted is that economic sanctions cannot stop or turn a war, which shows the West's straw man hope that they can reduce defence spending and carry out warfare electronically through banks and financial institutions to be nothing but a vanity.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Clive Ansell — Wed, 05 Mar 2025 11:03:38 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246787#246787"]My only hope is that behind the scenes, Trump is actually playing a blinder, which will become clear in the months ahead.[/quote]

Wouldn't hold your breath.

My brother lives in the US and works in international shipping, and in an email last night he said

"It's bat sh1t over here with work. new tariffs being announced/changed/denied everyday. Customs and border staff have either accepted 8 month pay redundancy deals or are working to rule. Adding weeks to the time taken, along with associated costs, to import shipping containers"

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Arlo Guthrie — Wed, 05 Mar 2025 08:56:40 GMT

Dinu Catilina and Roger Meacock thanks for those links, unfortunately my internet connection went down yesterday, and where I live, that puts me out of contact until I get to the pub (from where I am now typing). But I will watch them when back online properly.

[quote userid="8991" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246785#246785"]Talk of what is fair [/quote]

David Mills I guess the philosophical question is: if you argue that 'what is fair' is somehow irrelevant, unimportant, whatever, then what are we left with? I mean, where does it take us if all major decisions are predicated on cost, with no sense of right or wrong, or fairness.

If Trump had been President during WW2, I have a feeling I might be addressing you as Herr Mills.

[quote userid="8991" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246785#246785"]As for Trump, Putin, Vance - moral outrage against these people is as useful as pissing in your own ear.[/quote]

My aim is probably not that good anyway.

But I disagree. What else can the populations of democracies do, except express their disapproval and hope to sway opinion?

My only hope is that behind the scenes, Trump is actually playing a blinder, which will become clear in the months ahead. Maybe the whole White House thing was staged and Zelensky was in on it (Trump to Zelensky: "We're going to belittle you to send the right signal to Putin, but don't worry, we love you really.")

But I wouldn't bet my house on it.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

David Mills — Tue, 04 Mar 2025 14:52:48 GMT

Talk of what is fair and the ever-increasingly-vigorous handwringing about who is to blame is completely diversionary - as was seen in stark highlight in the Oval Office grand statements and labelling aggressors vs victims has no real place in diplomacy (if it ever did), and the hard truth is that the current situation is unsustainable and arguably has been from the start. For all the lofty superiority and Ukrainian flags dotted around, the West is continuing to haemorrhage money and seeing its costs soar for what is, for most, a distant war in a distant country that has been at stalemate for around 2 years. To an extent, that is why the staged Oval Office stuff happened - it is time to face the cold reality of the situation and unfortunately that means Crimea and Donbas will be Russian. Bemoaning "but they stole them" helps nothing. Zelensky, unfortunately, walked into a trap, but his leadership has been questioned for many months and I would be surprised if the majority of Ukrainians backed him these days. Yes there will be a price to pay for peace, but that price is of magnitudes smaller than the cost of the last 3 years.

Whether Russia was "right" or "justified" to feel threatened, we only need to look back at the Cold War for how proximity of an ideological enemy ca lead to paranoia and unpredictability - at several points the world came close to nuclear war when either side moved uncomfortably close - it wasn't just Russia rattling the sabre by any means. Nato is a Western organisation which had taken the piss against a weakened Russia with expansion withiut backing it up with any real hardware or readiness to make good on its defensive strategy - as Macolm says look at how many months we feasted on Russian gas and oil before reluctantly turning off the taps. And from this, look how it has totally fucked our inflation and spending power, the national debt, and any kind of economic control. Twas ever thus that unfortunately some countries are just more important than others, whether due to size, natural resources, economic power, or the international interconnections between states that increasingly exist - co dependence is the surest way to peace, whethe we like our neighbours or not.

As for Trump, Putin, Vance - moral outrage against these people is as useful as pissing in your own ear.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Malcolm Ness — Tue, 04 Mar 2025 09:35:15 GMT

[quote userid="3097" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246778#246778"]I think people need to understand the history a bit more as Dinu and Gerry have been pointing out.[/quote]

I concur. Even the relatively recent history is revealing. When Russia invaded, the "Western" response was, at best, muted. While there was a huge humanitarian/refugee response that response was largely driven by the geographical proximity of the war to Europe's heartland - similar but more distant refugee flows over the last half-century have often barely made the six o' clock news.. Politics and ideology were peripheral concerns. That was emphasised by the subsequent Western political response which comprised the often remarkably slow supply of minor league armaments and strict instructions NOT to do anything (like overflying Russia or using effective modern weaponry) that might 'poke the bear'. If the West was ever serious about assisting Ukraine in the winning of this war, those limitations simply would not have been imposed - the West, and especially the EU (Germany and many of the Northern EU states hoped to continue trading with Russia, for example importing vast quantities of gas) was somewhat equivocal about resisting Russia. The one unexpected, I think, is the relatively modest territorial gains made by the Russians. However, the West didn't have the conviction needed to do what was necessary to remedy that 3 years ago and they certainly haven grown any new testicles since then. Consequently, ANY settlement of this debacle WILL involve the giving up of a swathe of formerly Ukrainian territory. Whether or not that is 'fair' is beside the point - as Gerry pointed out, questions of 'Realpolitik' trump those considerations.

What next? Zelensky is, personally, in an impossible position. He has indeed overplayed his hand. He has been unceremoniously bullied by a big, boorish and wealthy bully and that is the real issue. The US is no longer a rules-based democracy and neither is it a reliable ally, though Trump, like all politicians is transient and that is likely to change. However, in the short/medium term Europe needs to promptly and substantially bolster its military spending/defence potential. That will require a huge shake-up within NATO and especially the EU. Europe should move to having a coordinated military functionality largely independent of the US. Countries like Spain, Portugal, Italy, Belgium or Luxembourg who have under-contributed to NATO for very many years should be held to account. These countries, along with 'neutral' Austria and Ireland, have enjoyed the financial benefits of EU which has been protected by the defence umbrella afforded by NATO, an organisation on which they have freeloaded to varying degrees. That needs to change.

The biggest threat to wellbeing in this country, I think, will come from the normalisation and persistence of the current US political position.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Gerry Henry — Tue, 04 Mar 2025 09:27:29 GMT

Care to elaborate ?

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Desiree Scott — Tue, 04 Mar 2025 09:07:36 GMT

Wow. Just wow. Your ignorance is astounding. Or are you a Russian bot?

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Roger Meacock — Tue, 04 Mar 2025 08:39:09 GMT

I think people need to understand the history a bit more as Dinu and Gerry have been pointing out. Prof Jefrey Sachs explained it to the EU last week. I suggest you watch it here https://youtu.be/lD_KEFpuIro?si=bog9dR5TQ4sR08Mr

To say that NATO is no threat when there are official US papers about poking the bear rather misses the point that what matters here is Russia's perception. The buffer zone between NATO and Russia was part of the nuclear deterrent situation that kept peace for so long because it meant both sides had sufficient time and warning to retaliate. That's what kept the peace. Allowing Uk into NATO would remove that buffer and as Putin warned every time NATO expanded east (5 times) that was destabilising and provocation. Why should Russia accept NATO and potentially nuclear missiles on its doorstep any more than the USA wanted them in Cuba or would accept Chinese military bases in Canada or Mexico. To say NATO can do what it wants is arrogant and naive. What's worse is it is knowingly at deliberately destabilising peace. That in itself is concerning to Russia because it begs the question why would NATO do that if not because it intends to be a threat to Russia.

When operating in the public, NATO should realise that the "other" side's perception is an important consideration. If a big burly man walks 10 steps behind a single girl walking home late at night with nobody else around are you going to say it's her fault that she feels scared and intimidated, and that because you know you have no intention to do any harm that therefore it's OK and she's being unreasonable?

Nobody should want WW3, yet it seems like many leaders of NATO countries are prepared to risk it far too readily.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Dinu Catilina — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 20:37:50 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246771#246771"]all I see at the moment is Ukraine being told to give up everything, and that seems not just unfair, but it also seems completely unrealistic and sets a bad precedent to Putin and his successors, and any other power crazed loon with imperialist designs. [/quote]

What if they were set up from the beginning to end up where we are now? We keep blaming Trump for the current narrative but what if it all started before Trump? What if he is just the blunt axe but not the brain of this whole operation?

You remember how when it all started it was all about freedom and self determination and how the russians are weak and Putin is dying of cancer and all that jazz? I followed the news closely and it was all about freedom and winning until suddenly Zelensky talks about minerals and giving up territory. After the US elections but before Trump came in office.

This video was filmed in Dec 2024, watch it if you have time. It is interesting to see an "american" podcaster behave like a russian asset but listen to what Zelensky says. Shocking. I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up assassinated at some point.

www.youtube.com/watch

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 16:29:53 GMT

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246767#246767"]

Arlo Guthrie said:
But it is not and never has been in the business of conquering countries,

No, just bombing them, destabilising and leaving them at the mercy of various war lords and waring factions. Which NATO country did Afghanistan attach before they got bombed by NATO and the USA?

Arlo Guthrie said:
is not a threat to Russia.

Well, why did NATO then move nuclear weapons and rockets more and more east at a time when Russia had no aspirations (declared ones at least) to get back to USSR? We have to be realistic and understand that two neighbouring powers are always a threat to each other.

[/quote]

I am sure you will think me naive, but here is NATO's response to your points: https://www.nato.int/cps/ra/natohq/115204.htm

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246767#246767"]

Arlo Guthrie said:
There are many reasons for desertion, not least the desire not to be killed, I would imagine. That doesn't necessarily mean people don't support the war - just that they would rather not die it it.

Wait, what? So they support the war as long as someone else is fighting? How does this make any sense at all?

[/quote]

It makes absolute sense. I can well imagine how someone might believe their country needs to fight, but perhaps be too scared to pick up arms when the odds are increasingly that they won't survive. I wouldn't like to have to find out how I would feel in that situation.

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246767#246767"]He will be back anyway and if not him someone else will be back.[/quote]

Well someone else will sure as hell be back if we allow Putin to get away with it.

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246767#246767"]Look, I really understand your points from an ideological perspective.[/quote]

And I take your points too. And I do see that pragmatism and compromise are needed ... it's just that all I see at the moment is Ukraine being told to give up everything, and that seems not just unfair, but it also seems completely unrealistic and sets a bad precedent to Putin and his successors, and any other power crazed loon with imperialist designs.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 15:43:20 GMT

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"]China is the big threat on the horizon[/quote]

True.

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"]we need Russia restored and onside[/quote]

Unfortunately not the answer, because Russia will never be "onside".

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"]Trump and Vance understand this[/quote]

I doubt if they understand anything very deeply.

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"]Ukraine is a sideshow[/quote]

Not if you are Ukrainian.

Or have Ukrainian friends and relations.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Dinu Catilina — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 15:01:51 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246766#246766"]But it is not and never has been in the business of conquering countries,[/quote]

No, just bombing them, destabilising and leaving them at the mercy of various war lords and waring factions. Which NATO country did Afghanistan attach before they got bombed by NATO and the USA?

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246766#246766"] is not a threat to Russia.[/quote]

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246766#246766"]There are many reasons for desertion, not least the desire not to be killed, I would imagine. That doesn't necessarily mean people don't support the war - just that they would rather not die it it.[/quote]

Wait, what? So they support the war as long as someone else is fighting? How does this make any sense at all?

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246766#246766"]The problem is, Putin has form. I fear that if the appeasers succeed, he'll be back.[/quote]

He will be back anyway and if not him someone else will be back. No Russian ruler will ever give away country security just like the Americans or the Chinese won't.

Look, I really understand your points from an ideological perspective. People should be free to do whatever they want and self determine but we live in the real world with real consequences and you know, once dead always dead.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 14:43:32 GMT

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246763#246763"]Arlo, we discussed this before, about 3 years ago, as I can name several countries that did not attack and were no danger to NATO and were bombed by NATO. And NATO is not a peacekeeping organisation, it is a defensive alliance which is very different. [/quote]

Point taken, up to a point. I mean, it IS a peacekeeping organisation (or at least it has performed that role), but yes, it was born as a defensive alliance. But it is not and never has been in the business of conquering countries, and is not a threat to Russia.

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246763#246763"]The push to bring the Ukrainians (or allow them if you prefer) towards the EU and USA was absolutely an aggravation for Putin. You can talk as much as you want about what's fair and right but life is not fair and the role of politics and negotiators is to navigate these dangerous w[/quote]

The push came from Ukraine, not NATO or the West. I don't doubt that it aggravated Putin, but that is not a justification for the war.

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246763#246763"]And the last thing, if you want to check how Ukrainians support the war and Zelensky check what their rate of desertion is. The Ukrainian friends we have ( which of course are selection bias and may not be representative) had enough and they want the war to stop. They openly said to me they don't care if Russia takes half of the country as long as people stop dying. [/quote]

There are many reasons for desertion, not least the desire not to be killed, I would imagine. That doesn't necessarily mean people don't support the war - just that they would rather not die it it.

I don't know, of course, what the Ukrainian population wants - my point is just that there are many reasons for desertion which don't necessarily indicate support or not for Zelensky or the war.

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"]Trump is not an idiot.[/quote]

I used to think probably not. I've changed my mind.

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"]The Crimea has been Russian since the days of Catherine the Great[/quote]

OK - I don't happen to think history offers a justification for going to war today. Else perhaps we should have some of the Empire back! Predates Catherine the Great.

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"]It’s Russian by any reasonable metric you choose,[/quote]

Except the small fact that it's not.

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246765#246765"] You’ll notice Zelenskyy hasn’t offered a plebiscite on the issue of accepting the American peace deal - because he knows he’ll lose it.[/quote]

No, because there is no deal to vote for (it appears Trump's deal was: "Give us all your minerals, and we'll forget what we've given you so far. If we're mining in your country, that may make it less likely Russia will come back. But we're not going to fight if he does. Oh, and all that land Russia has taken, and all those of your people that Russia has killed. Sorry 'bout that. You'll just have to take that on the chin"

That's not really what I would call a deal.

And yes, I do GET IT that people have to compromise to find peace, but equally I think anyone who thinks that one would fly, without ANY compromises from Putin is foolish.

[quote userid="9239" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246763#246763"]What we do now is not help them win, is helping them to not lose yet at the cost of Ukrainian lives. [/quote]

So far, yes, that appears to have been the case.

The problem is, Putin has form. I fear that if the appeasers succeed, he'll be back.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Gerry Henry — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 13:51:37 GMT

Trump is not an idiot. He’s crass and unpleasant but he’s no fool. The Crimea has been Russian since the days of Catherine the Great, it’s the home of the Black Sea fleet, it’s also overwhelmingly ethnic Russian. It became Ukrainian under Khrushchev in a bit of Soviet window dressing. It’s Russian by any reasonable metric you choose, the west were fools to think otherwise. Do we really want Erdogan unchallenged in the Black Sea and the Bosphorus ? Maintaining the balance of power in this region has been a tenet of Britain’s foreign policy since Palmerston. China is the big threat on the horizon, we need Russia restored and onside before that gets any worse. Trump and Vance understand this, Ukraine is a sideshow. You’ll notice Zelenskyy hasn’t offered a plebiscite on the issue of accepting the American peace deal - because he knows he’ll lose it.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Dinu Catilina — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 13:35:10 GMT

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246757#246757"]Nor do I accept that the growth of NATO presents a reasonable justification. NATO is a peacekeeping organisation which presents precisely zero threat to Russia. If countries want to join NATO, that’s none of Russia’s business. [/quote]

Arlo, we discussed this before, about 3 years ago, as I can name several countries that did not attack and were no danger to NATO and were bombed by NATO. And NATO is not a peacekeeping organisation, it is a defensive alliance which is very different.

The UN should be the peacekeeping organisation but they have no real power.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246760#246760"]

I don’t happen to think that the fear of invasion by people you meet is the reason for this war. I think the reason is Putin.

But even if there is a fear of invasion, that’s not a justification for invading Ukraine.

[/quote]

There is almost never a justification to start a war and Putin is a monster and everyone knows this. The push to bring the Ukrainians (or allow them if you prefer) towards the EU and USA was absolutely an aggravation for Putin. You can talk as much as you want about what's fair and right but life is not fair and the role of politics and negotiators is to navigate these dangerous waters and keep people safe and alive. How many Ukrainians are dead now?

And the last thing, if you want to check how Ukrainians support the war and Zelensky check what their rate of desertion is. The Ukrainian friends we have ( which of course are selection bias and may not be representative) had enough and they want the war to stop. They openly said to me they don't care if Russia takes half of the country as long as people stop dying.

Also, re-read the Ukraine topics from 2 years ago and see how right or wrong my predictions were.

[quote userid="2100" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246760#246760"]The more likely alternative seems to me that the Ukranians will fight on regardless, probably lose the main event, but continue fighting ad infinitum.[/quote]

They will not and can not without support. What we do now is not help them win, is helping them to not lose yet at the cost of Ukrainian lives.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Arlo Guthrie — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 09:03:47 GMT

https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/08/04/ukraine-maidan-revolution-russia-coup-myth-yanukovych/

Of course Surrey isnt analogous, any more than Napoleon.

My point was that I don’t understand what grounds you think Russia had for invading Crimea (other than it wanted it).

I don’t happen to think that the fear of invasion by people you meet is the reason for this war. I think the reason is Putin.

But even if there is a fear of invasion, that’s not a justification for invading Ukraine.

Yes, I know that we dont have an army to speak of. But that doesn’t make a US brokered deal the only show in town. The more likely alternative seems to me that the Ukranians will fight on regardless, probably lose the main event, but continue fighting ad infinitum.

The idea that the morons Trump and Vance could broker peace between an aggressor that has illegally invaded a sovereign nation, killed hundreds of thousands of its people and laid waste to a large part of its country by appeasing the aggressor is simply not a runner. You think the Ukrainians should capitulate? Like the front page of Private Eye: Trump: “I’ve got a plan”. Zelensky: “I give up” Trump: “That’s it”.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Gerry Henry — Mon, 03 Mar 2025 07:58:05 GMT

A' brief search of the Internet reveals that the myth of the West being behind Yanukovych‘s downfall is precisely that.'

No point in continuing this thread if that's the best you can do. Which part of the internet did you search ? Wikipidia - FFS. You seem to think CNN is a reliable source of information, MSNBC too ? The EU, the DOS and their agencies set up the coup that defenestrated Yanukovych, fact.

'I’m not sure why you think Ukraine should give up Crimea and Donbas. Should we give up Surrey?'

Because it's completely analogous - right ? again, FFS

'That’s laughable as a justification for invading Ukraine. 1812 was Napoleon. By that argument we should probably close the channel tunnel. Likewise it seems a bit daft to be justifying the invasion of Ukraine on the Crimean War, or the first world war, or Adolf Hitler.'

I go to Eastern Europe every year as part of my research, have done since since 2004. I have a lot of Polish, Czech, Slovakian and Russian friends and acquaintances. If you don't understand how scarred these people are by war, the soviet legacy, and fear for the future, then you really should refrain from idiot comments such as the one above. The Russians still have a primordial fear of invasion, we remember the Battle of Britain with pride, they remember Leningrad with horror, they lost 27 Million people ... 27 Million.

You seem to think there's an alternative to an American brokered peace, that somehow Europe will grudgingly, reluctantly, but at last, shoulder its responsibilities and ride to the rescue, let me relate a conversation I had with my daughter (Captain Royal Artillery) and my son in law (Captain, Infantry).

"So how long do you think we could last in a toe to toe with the Russians?

Gunner - "Seven days"

Infanteer - "14 days"

Gunner - "Well you'll be doing the last 7 without fire support 'cause we ain't got the ammunition."

Yes it's that bad. Its Trump's peace or the Russians will take everything and there is NOTHING Europe can do about it.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Arlo Guthrie — Sun, 02 Mar 2025 23:53:11 GMT

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246755#246755"]1812, 1854, 1914, 1941[/quote]

That’s laughable as a justification for invading Ukraine. 1812 was Napoleon. By that argument we should probably close the channel tunnel. Likewise it seems a bit daft to be justifying the invasion of Ukraine on the Crimean War, or the first world war, or Adolf Hitler.

Nor do I accept that the growth of NATO presents a reasonable justification. NATO is a peacekeeping organisation which presents precisely zero threat to Russia. If countries want to join NATO, that’s none of Russia’s business.

A brief search of the Internet reveals that the myth of the West being behind Yanukovych‘s downfall is precisely that.

No, what this is all about is a man with an enduring KGB mentality driven slightly mad by years in power (happens to all leaders) who is determined to make Russia great again and secure his legacy.

I’m not sure why you think Ukraine should give up Crimea and Donbas. Should we give up Surrey?

As to Zelensky diverting the meeting and getting his comeuppance. Sorry, but that is utter garbage. What actually happened is that Zelensky found himself negotiating with a pair of morons who have no grasp of history (ref Nick Carter on Question Time), or any experience of living three years under constant attack (Pearl Harbour was the last time the US was invaded), or any understanding of Ukranian culture. So when he had the outright temerity to make a case that the Putin started the war and that does have a bearing on how peace can be negotiated...

As for: “you didnt say thank you”. I mean FFS. CNN pulled out about a dozen bits of footage of Zelensky thanking the Americans for their support. It was just part of a pattern of bullying.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Gerry Henry — Sun, 02 Mar 2025 21:48:01 GMT

www.facebook.com/.../

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Gerry Henry — Sun, 02 Mar 2025 21:25:21 GMT

‘Absolutely nobody was threatening Russia.’ The west invaded Russia in 1812, 1854, 1914, 1941, do you have any sense of history at all ? We PROMISED Gorbachev we would not extend NATO eastwards and we did. Ukraine was a step too far. Putin gave fair warning and the west ignored him. The Ukrainians will need to come to terms. I’d rather a crass Trump ended the war than some smooth Eurocrat prolonged it. One third of the Ukrainian population has already left the country, that tells you how ‘united’ they are.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Francisco Gomez — Sun, 02 Mar 2025 19:44:49 GMT

[quote userid="7530" url="~/f/non-clinical-questions/31120/rcvs-leaving-x-social-media-platform/246753#246753"]From the get go[/quote]

From the get go has never ever mattered either this or the other Trump's administration. Hardly a defense of the ridicule he made of his country.

But if we want to pick moments in history, I happen to roll a dice and I find 'rich' that Putin 'thinks' that the world should fear his use of the nuclear weaponry he's robbed the Ukrainians.

Signing START and threatening is nothing short of trespassing your house with the knife that used to be in your own kitchen.

I cannot fathom how you can use this single and completely virtual excuse (as absolutely nobody was threatening Russia) to justify his either failure at diplomacy or his delusion of grandeur.

RE: RCVS leaving X social media platform

Gerry Henry — Sun, 02 Mar 2025 19:00:26 GMT

From the get go we have promised the Russians that NATO would not move further east. They were promised this repeatedly. American and EU institutions ignored the promise, they funded an insurrection (a real one) to depose the democratically elected president. Putin warned what would happen if it continued and it did. Zelenskyy had everything to gain and everything to lose at that meeting, and he lost. There will be peace, Ukraine will lose the Crimea as it should and a chunk of the Donbas. Zelenskyy got his comeuppance, he tried to divert the meeting and he picked the wrong guy.