Once again Hitchens brings truth and unrelenting clarity to what’s actually going on. For the neoliberal warmongers it’s extremely uncomfortable to have to listen to him. I suspect if they could they’d try to muzzle him but can’t. Bravo Hitchens. Always the smartest guy in the room.
Peter Hitchens arguments are stupid and seem to rely on the concept that the Kremlin will somehow act in good faith with any negotiations (Every attempt at negotiation with them over this entire conflict, and for treaties made between Ukraine and Russia going back to the 90's has ended in bad faith actions on Russia's behalf and violation of treaties), or that "Peace" is desirable for the Kremlin, which if you actually see what their stated long-term goals are that they repeatedly have said and shown with their actions extend well beyond the current conflict in Ukraine. If you want to get a good grasp on the conflict in terms of the Kremlins goals and motives look up Russian philosopher Vlad Vexler's videos not opinionated unqualified journalist talking head contrarians like Peter Hitchens.
Hi nimbledick don’t really think the Russians are bad faith actors. To the contrary it’s the western powers acting in bad faith predominantly Washington with London at its back. It was the Russians who voluntarily disbanded the Warsaw Pact albeit on a (now broken) promise from the US NATO would not expand eastwards. The Americans via NATO then went onto to bomb Yugoslavia, start an illegal war in Iraq murdering approximately 1 million people, toppling Gaddafi in Libya, a country to that point being the per capita richest in Africa, all because Gaddafi wanted to sell oil in non-US dollars, then turned its colour revolution to Syria even arming Al Shabab Al queda affiliated. Then onto Ukraine. Toppling the democratically elected Party of the Regions Yanokovych government with a putsch. They then installed their own American puppet regime in Kiev. The Minsk 1 and 2 accords, both ratified by the UN, signed in 2015 but the US controlled Regime refused to honour them and kept shelling the Russian speaking minority in the Donbas. Killed approximately 15000 people. Zelensky’s response to the Russian speakers after he banned their language is if the don’t like it they can @ get the hell out of Ukraine” nice. Didn’t bother to mention the US withdrawing unilaterally from non-proliferation deal with the Iranians.
@@johnmccaffrey5942 Give one example of a major treaty/agreement between Ukraine and the Russian Federation that the Russian Federation has not broken, Libya, Syria, Al-Shabab, Yugoslavia and all other manor of wuddaboutisms you want to bring up have nothing to do with the current situation. You're just parroting pro-Putin propaganda.
He's talking utter nonsense. Ultra nationalistic forces in Russia are the sole cause of this war. Ukraine is fighting for its right to exist as an independent country.
@@robertstorey7476 Robert it already existed as an independent country. That was until 2014 when the Ukrainian government was overthrown in a US backed coup. Since then the neocons in Washington have controlled Ukraine. The Americans use it as a staging ground to destabilise Russia.
Heroic? Fearless? Really? What has anyone, here in civilisation, to really fear? That people might say harsh and unpleasant things about him. That he will be more popular with some than others. In his youth he was fearlessly convinced of the inevitable glorious victory of great Russia with Soviet branding. His mistake, he admits it, he now properly loathes international socialism as much as nternational socialism. Last I checked he was fearlessly applauding the revival of ( Orthodox) Christianity , traditional family values, etc etc in Russia. What are the terrible consequences that shall befall him if that idea turns out to be another crock of sxxt?
Peter is the only guy who actually bothered to study the history , visit Ukraine and Russia, have been writing about it since 2014. I see all the armchair warriors wanting Ukraine to be whole as it should be but not giving a damn abt the Russian speaking Ukrainians in the East and crimea. Peter said it right. The U.S is laughing all the way to the bank. Eu suffers , Russia weakened while Ukrainians die. But no American death. Used the afghans in the 80s,now its the Ukrainians.
Most Russian-speaking Ukrainians have a Ukrainian identity. The areas that have fought the Russian invasion the hardest are all Russian-speaking. Cities where 95%+ of the population are Russian-speaking - Dnipro, Odesa, Kharkiv, Mariupol, Kryvih Rih (where Zelenskyy is from), Zaporizhzhia, etc., have populations that are 80-90% (or more) pro-Ukraine. Granted, Crimea is different, as are parts (but not all) of Donbas. But it is an absurd wrong to state that most Russian-speaking Ukrainians have a Russian identity or are pro-Russian - it is simply false.
@@decekfrokfr3mdx Thank you, however; why were laws made to erase the Russian language and the orthodox church? When Europeans colonized Canada, they also made our original language illegal, plus our way of life, plus our way of prayer to creator. Our people still suffer today because of those laws. So why did Zelensky do it? Do you support the stupidity, the indignant act of power?
@@25abbafather There weren't any laws to erase the Russian language. Lies. If their language was really being 'erased', I can't imagine that 80-90%+ of Russian-speaking cities like Dnpiro, Odesa, Mariupol and Kharkiv would be pro-Ukrainian, and determinedly resisting the Russian invasion...After the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and sponsoring of separatists in Donbas, education was mandated in Ukraine to be through Ukrainian (the official state language). Quotas for Ukrainian and Russian language were introduced for publishing and broadcasting. You can debate the wrongs and rights of these policies, but they are not 'erasure' or event discrimination against Russian - merely a country trying to ensure the preeminence of its own language, with people able to speak whatever language they want socially. The Russian-Ukrainian Orthodox Church only recent had some restrictions placed on it because many of its priests were found to be spying on behalf of Russia (many of the priests originate or were educated in Russia, and their loyalty lies there), and aiding them in their invasion of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church, theologically the same as the Russian-Ukrainian Orthodox Church but not politically aligned to Moscow, remains unrestricted. Bear in mind also that the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill (a former KGB agent) has openly endorsed Russia's invasion of Ukraine many times, and this is the official Church position.
@@decekfrokfr3mdx Thank you for that info, I will forward it on to others asking questions of the same sort as we explore your reply. If we may ask a few more questions, why does Ukraine want to be part of NATO, what do you benefit in doing so? Have you listened to John Mearsheimer on the conflicts within geopolitics - Nato/USA vs regime change in Russia? Is he wrong? On another note, a UA-camr by name of bald and bankrupt we watched walking through many places in Ukraine showed us how poor many are living there, many say it was better before 1991 or 1992, what happened? Why are so towns, villages, rural people and city people struggling in your country when it has been independent since collapse of Soviet Union? And one last question, why have so many Ukrainian men and women left the country rather than stay and fight or help? Why come to Canada, USA, and now try to learn English? Did these people vote, do they not care for their country? Thank you.
We need individuals and ALL governments on all sides to be truthful to their respective citizens about their reasons for starting and maintaining this war...but this will never happen!
@@WilkinsMichael The war staarted in 2014 when Obama the US terrorist president got together with the Azov Nazis and started killing ethnic Russian Ukrainians.
16:50 that's nonsense actually. If you can refer to the fact that Russia deployed far fewer resources than Ukraine. And without western aid......you know what!
@@maryanchabursky9148 Yeah we were basically watching them roll in on live cams, if we could do that, a bunch of anons... Well you know. They underestimated the Ukies, and I don't understand why.
Yes, and it was the aggressor against Serbia, including the bombing Belgrade - in Yugoslavia NATO waged war only against the Serbs not the other Yugoslavian populations so it was a war against Serbia @@ballshippin3809
It's nice that they are speaking English. If Peter and Mary had given the same advice during WWII, America would have never entered the war to help a far off nation like Britain and they would all be speaking German at this talk. Well, let's be honest, they would not be having this talk because Ukraine and Russia would be part of the German Empire anyway. Is it only British democracy and British freedom that America should aid in times of war?
The USA are quite happy for Ukraine to fight until the the last Ukrainian soldier is standing. They are 10,000 kms away, hence zero risk to them, off-load arms and weaken Russia in numbers but not in resilience?
people don't fight like the Ukrainians because they manipulated foreigners. They know what happened in the Chechen wars and in the Donbas. They are fighting for their country. The Russians have no clear idea why they are there.
A bunch of people sitting on a moral high horse acting like they get to magically decide if Putin stops attacking or not. We all know begging and capitulation works every time vs bullies. It's a really good strategy I support it.
You are a sheep, aren’t you? As for these woeful inadequates, they are painfully unable to address the true history of Ukraine and Russia, particularly focussed on the last thirty years, which will inform you of the facts that these choose to avoid
Mary Dejevsky and Peter Hitchens clearly understand the situation for what it is. If one does their research carefully they can also avoid being hoodwinked by mainstream western media outlets.
@@tomo_xD you've been bambozzled! If Peter is not your cup of tea try: UN Analysis-Jeffrey Sachs Former German Chancellor-Angela Merkel Professor of International Relations at University of Chicago-John Mearsheimer Professor of International Relations at Harvard-University Stephan Walt Former UN Weapons Inspector from Iraq War-Scott Ritter Elon Musk Henry Kissinger Ret Col Douglas Macgregor Former MIT Professor and Peace advocate- Naom Chomsky Pope Francis Former Ambassador to Russia and Current- CIA Director Bill Burns Former Senator-Richard H Black Former Congress Woman-Tulsi Gabbard Congress Woman-Pramila Jayapal Congressman-Kevin McCarthy Former World Is One News Anchor- Palki Sharma Roger Waters of Pink Floyd Mikhail Gorbachev (deceased)
Too many still do not think that war is a tragedy - especially if it is far away. We have always loved to have an "Evil" to transform our own sub- conscious evil into!
Peter and Mary: logical and peaceable arguments, well put together and backed up by historical analysis. Svetlana: Emotional arguments void of any realistic conversation and clouded by her own family’s experience. There is no chance, whatever the outcome, that Crimea returns to being Ukrainian. Edward: some reasonable statements and a good attempt to rebuttal against Peter, however, his arguments were generally weak or incorrect.
Peter and Mary would have opposed American aid to Britain during WWII and had Britain sue for peace with the Nazis. Their stance is unjustifiable historically or practically.
@@caindarin9665 Actually Peter has said on film that he believes that Winston Churchill standing up to Hitler was the right thing to do and he recognises the criticality of American aid to the British empire, in his interview at the Edinburgh book festival when talking about his book "the phony victory". Video of this is on UA-cam. It sounds like you have fallen for what he describes as "Munich syndrome" where you think this is 1939, and that Putin is Hitler. Well, the Russian Federation is not the 3rd Reich and Putin is not Hitler. The Nazi ideology and MO was completely different in every way to that of the Russian one today. This is not excusing Putin and the Rfed, but it is an important distinction.
Same here, any pro war advocate must first serve on the front line. I'd they survive intact then they can take a platform to debate the topic. I am sure there are plenty if ukranians who would rather end the war and survive come what may with their families.
@@George-nv1ri you guys are exactly like anarchists. You believe in this fictional utopia and get angry that others don't want to join you there. Nobody "wants" war. But the reason anyone with common sense is saying Ukraine must win, is because Russia clearly can not be peacefully negotiated with - Russia has initiated violence on 4 separate occasions now, not to mention its attempts in other countries before that. First with Crimea - Russia started, and then there was peace. Then the Donbas, Russia funnelled in their troops, and then stopped. Then with Luhansk. And then after attempting a ceasefire for a year or two while Ukraine was fighting separatists in these two regions, Russia attacked a fourth time...only this time it tried to invade all of Ukraine. Peace doesn't work. At some point you have to realize that, get it through your head. Or else you look as silly as the countries in Western Europe that continually tried to make peace with Hitler as his armies conquered one country after the other. The reason people are pro war is because that is the only way to stop Putin. And as for your "logic" it is as bad as the people who argue you can't criticize someone unless you have their exact same occupation. Yes you can, and believe it or not people can support the war in other ways (funding to aid civilians, provide weaponry and training).
Hitchens should have pushed the Bandera issue more. A very good debate, all-in-all. We need more of this. There's far too little debate in Britain and the west on this extremely important issue.
This militant ultra-nationalism so prevalent in Ukraine is nothing to be proud of. It's deeply rooted in antisemitism and a disdain for ethnic Russians. How can Ukrainians like Svetlana not realise the absurdity of saying "of course we want peace" but be so callously proud towards one of the root causes sustaining the conflict?
@@xxvxxv5588 Yes, I would. Emphatically. Of course, Putin isn't ''xenophobic'' towards Ukrainians at all. Like all Great Russian Chauvinists, he likely considers Ukrainians to be recalcitrant Russians. To compare him to Bandera is ahistorical.
I love how Edward and people like him completely ignore the invalidity of NATO. Hitchens summed it up brilliantly on the Estonian NATO question: "It's like having an alliance against Austria-Hungary Empire".
Let me guess: you don't live in Europe, certainly not in Eastern Europe. Lest you be spouting this BS. Hitchens is an idiot and nearly every Estonian knows exactly why they are glad to be in NATO, as does nearly every Slovak, Pole, Romanian etc. and why now nearly ever Swede and Finn desires the same protection.
@@Liam-yr4uf Why Sweden and Finland want to join NATO? And why I as a Slovak am beyond glad to be in NATO along with the majority of Slovaks, Czechs, Estonians etc.? I am not sure what isn't clear to you about it. The reasons why we want to be in NATO are pretty clearly expressed by the Finns and Swedes who are applying for membership. You can read their statements if you require some clarification. If you need a further hint: who do you think feels more secure that they won't be invaded, occupied and annexed by Russia, the Moldovans or the Romanians?
@@matejluptak So you're glad to be a part of NATO because of Russian imperialism? A non-existant threat. Tell me, between 1991 and 2004 (the year when Slovakia joined NATO), was there ever an indication or direct threat from Russia that they would invade Slovakia or the Baltics? NATO was established to contain the spread of Soviet communism post-ww2. This ideology completely collapsed in 1991. Needless anxiety by Europeans towards modern Russia is devised completely by American interests. Can you not see how maintaining an alliance (implying that there's an adversary to ally against) along with its continued Eastward expansion (despite agreements not to) might make Russians feel anxious, excluded, and insulted that their security interests have been completely ignored? George Kennan, the architect of Soviet containment I'm Europe, was clear in claiming that this was a big mistake. While I condemn unequivocally the invasion of Ukraine, it's easy to see how preventable this conflict was without NATO.
The call for peace is understandable but it should also be remembered what is driving in the opposite direction. Peace is the greatest threat to our socio-economic system which is built on cooperative exploitation, backed by militarisation. That is why people working for peace and those exposing corrupt, unethical practices, e.g., Julian Assange et al, are marginalised or removed.
Peter makes an excellent point; what was the motivation behind western powers; (namely the EU and the United States) in subjecting the Ukraine to policies, which have destabilised the country, and ultimately the region. Not enough is known about the Association Agreement bestowed on Ukraine by the EU. Especially the small print on military cooperation. Not enough is known about the CIA’s involvement in that country before the revolution. The two men who’s analysis I believe is the most enlightening on this issue are; the late Stephen F. Cohen and John J Mearsheimer. Both have written excellent books joining the dots for all to see. This is a huge geopolitical struggle. Ukraine is what Halford Mackinder referred to as the Heartland. Mackinder a late Victorian imperialist, and the pioneer of geopolitical theory postulated; “whoever rules East Europe commands the Heartland; whoever rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; whoever rules the World-Island commands the World.” American foreign policy hasn’t much evolved from late nineteenth century British imperial thinking. The Ukrainians for all they hope and wish for are actually irrelevant. Sad but true, they are a pawn on what Zbigniew Brzezinski referred to as the grand chessboard.
@@SocialDemocrat1789 Have you heard about the American involvement into the revolution that led to ousting the then elected president, Victor Yanukovich? I'm quoting exerpts from the transcript of Nuland's leaked conversation that you can find at bbc, article "Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call", appeared on 7 February 2014: "Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea. Pyatt: Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff." So, Nuland, the representative of an external force "contemplates" about how the Ukrainian government should be organized. Then, Pyatt answers what "Klitch" should be allowed to do by them (presumably American foreign policymakers) Jonathan Marcus writes about the conversation in 2014: "An intriguing insight into the foreign policy process with work going on at a number of levels: Various officials attempting to marshal the Ukrainian opposition; efforts to get the UN to play an active role in bolstering a deal; and (as you can see below) the big guns waiting in the wings - US Vice-President Joe Biden clearly being lined up to give private words of encouragement at the appropriate moment." so, current president Biden was clearly involved into the matter back in 2014, when he was vice-president. "Nuland: So on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [US vice-president's national security adviser Jake] Sullivan's come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need [US Vice-President Joe] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden's willing." So, the USA's foreign policymakers were actively coordinated who should hold what position in Ukraine. The US was clearly meddling into Ukrainian affairs, then EU member-states brokered the Minsk agreement, which was signed by Ukraine in order to achieve peace and which obliged Ukraine to not have military partnership with western powers (but 10 000 Ukrainian soldiers were trained by the US) and Donetsk and Luhansk were to receive autonomous status, which was also broken by Ukraine. Then, a civil war was fought between the Russian minority (backed by Russia) and the Ukrainian state.
@@LajosArpad85 nice copy & paste of long debunked talking points, full of half-truths and mischaracterizations. Yanukovych was impeached by the parliament in a unamimous vote. He was a Russian agent, and felt to Moscow soon after his impeachment. The Maidan Revolution was a popular uprising (7 million people turned out for it) against Yanukovych's corruption and "Dictatorship Laws" which he passed in order to try and make himself a mini-Putin.
@@SocialDemocrat1789 you know, when I quote someone, I copy & paste. Do you quote others in a different manner? Do you edit the source before quoting? As about Nuland's conversation that was leaked being debunked, the transcript was quoted from the bbc, a pro-Ukrainian media product. So, who should I believe: the bbc, or some random nameless troll on UA-cam? The decision is not difficult.
The level of western-centrism and patronising of former eastern bloc nations from pro panelists is astonishing. Case in point Peter Hitchens stating that "NATO expansion has done nothing but harm". As someone living next to Russia, and whose country was occupied and exploited by it for the past 200 years, I can tell mr. Hitchens what good NATO "expansion" did. It provided safety, freedom and allowed for peaceful growth and economic prosperity for +100 million people. But it is obvious that for Hitchens and Dajevsky it doesn't matter what some Ukrainians, Poles or Lithuanians think, and already they are all happy to barter with Ukrainian land and lives with the aggressor, over the heads of Ukrainians.
The funny thing is that they simply do not understand that if NATO had not accepted the countries of the former Warsaw Pact into NATO, then Russia would still have received a military bloc on its borders, but this time led by Poland.
@@SG-wi9kd Should i count you countries in last 30 years your government has invaded, and number of families destroyed. It is nice to talk the talk, you should walk the walk. morally you are all pygmies. All best from Serbia
@@SG-wi9kd 14,000 dead BEFORE the invasion. This has been going on for 8 bloody years. The Dombas has been shelled by the ruthless Azov for years. The burning alive of Russian civilians at ODESSA destroyed Ukraine. We need negotiations. Let the oppressed Russian minority brake free.
@@SG-wi9kd Peter H. and Tucker Carlson do have skin in the game in the sense that they earn money from provoking the consensus among the side and alliances of the victim. This increases their chances of being showcased (as the West is a liberal democracy and debates are encouraged, even on television and social media, at least since Gore Vidal versus William Buckley). Unfortunately this makes Peter H. and Tucker C. so powerful.
@@alg7115 delusion. I'm Lithuanian not a single one eastern European state will ever side with Russia, Russia is our eternal nemesis. It's like for Jews siding with Nazi Germany over cheap resources.
While I do understand and support the arguments for self-determination presented by the third speaker, I believe there were ways to achieve it that would not spark a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. For example, in what way joining NATO contributes towards self-determination of Ukraine, when it is known that is the US that controls 95% of NATO forces? I am just trying to be as honest as possible when analysing this situation.
It's called alliances. It doesn't matter which country has more weight in a union or invests more. You decide to join an alliance with countries you believe are your allies and can serve to protect you, as alliances (see also the alliances during World War II: some countries had more weight, others less; this will always be the case).
In his opening points, Peter Hitchens was addressing the wrong question. No matter if you are christian or not, any sane person don't like wars. But this is not the issue here. The issue is Putin's imperialist ideas. Ukraine will prevail.
of course the only pertinent question is what Lucas would think about China installing military bases in Mexico, or in the Scottish Borders for that matter after an Indie Ref II
If there were already military bases on their border then acting like another military base on their border is an unacceptable threat would be stupid and definitely an excuse to pursue a different agenda from the one being promoted.
@@nougat4416 sorry, why is it 'stupid' for Russian people not to want the most powerful military machine in history, an overt enemy of Russia, massing military assets all along their 1500 mile border with Ukraine and effectiovely on top of their Caspian oil basin? do please enlighten us beyond your virtiol.
Cities reduced to rubble visible from space….that gives you a CLUE dontcha think? Apartment buildings flattened by Russian artillery? Hundreds of shallow graves? Mile long tank columns crossing international borders? You expect us not to notice? We would need to drink twice as much vodka as you and be five times more stupid. Your gopnik rapists and murderers are dying like flies …even Russians are starting to notice. Perhaps you should double down and try crossing a NATO border. Watch what happens Ivan.
@@WilkinsMichael No, it is actually very hard indeed for these people. The G.I.s who liberated Buchenwald took the people from the town to look at the concentration camp. Took them at gunpoint. MADE them see what was done in the name of their ( national) socialism. Some of those who saw hanged themselves soon after.
@@actionflower6706 I'm sure people don't know the every detail of the war but I'm pretty sure they know a war is taking place and bad things are happening. Just a hunch.
Not at the minute, but independent reporters have been in there since at least 2014, but what they have to say doesn't fit NATO's narrative so they didn't get printed in the newspapers.
This debate is almost a year too late. A brutal Russian dictator invaded a neighboring sovereign country and now wants to negotiate how much land he can keep. Easy answer - none
@@nicholasfry4253 A bit too complicated for you Dimitry? It's the same answer the allies gave Hitler and Tojo and Mussolini in WWll. Negotiations picked up speed in Japan after Hiroshima and Nagasaki ☺ The fascists never learn
@@rickegarner8111 And Franco? Oh wait there were plenty of fascist countries after WW2 and "the allies" supported them for a long time. Next time you bring up a point that is not related to the topic you should really research it before you make yourself look like the absolute moron that you are.
@@h____hchump8941 Is that you Vlad? You still in Moscow? Fun fact: Trump's KGB code name is Comrade Bonespurs 😂 Bet you never thought there'd be so many dead Russians in their futile attempt trying to take over Europe, kill children and rape women and destroy democracy. How's the "special operation" going? I haven't seen any recent pictures of the Moskva. Have you? Putin's days are numbered. Too bad, the dictator gig was really working for him. Maybe the Russians should negotiate how much Russian territory they're willing to give to Ukraine 🇺🇦
Thanks for holding this debate. MDejevsky 10:00 made the point that “the talks (peace talks)… were halted apparently with the encouragement…from… Ukraine’s Western backers”. This is (if true) the West contributing to Ukraine at the strategic level which is far above and different from simply providing military aid etc. All this took place a few months ago now. What other strategic advice has the West given to Ukraine? We may not be involved directly in the fight but our strategic performance is on show.
You do know that the regime that the "Are we the baddies" soldiers referred to was invading other countries, whilst Ukraine is the country being invaded, right? Besides, are you a fan of heads of government posing as proud corrupt mafia organisation leaders and presenting an image and PR message of this kind to its own people and the world (almost akin to what could be seen on the "Are we the baddies" hats)?
As a Ukrainian I must say this is like having children explain why ice cream should be your main source of nutrition. They completely lack the experience and knowledge to understand why what they are saying is silly. Frankly it is insulting to think you want to end the war more than we do.
Your peace depends of the West, not you. The future's history, will tell us that Ukraine was ground of battlefield West vs Russia. Feel sorry for the common Ukrainian....
@Desoti Cambinza what is the point of what you are saying? "You are weaker loser, nobody cares about you, nobody will care about you in the future" toxic for no reason. Buy some rope and improve the planet.
You don't end war by continuing it, that's the basic point - its not an insult its common sense. What vast knowledge of history and politics do you possesses that renders the panellists children?
Churchill was a goddamn monster and warmonger. I will even be able to defend my argument that he was not only as bad, bot actually worse than Adolf Hitler
The comments are quite depressing. Freedom is not free. Writing from Dillon Montana. The son of a WWII veteran who fought Adolf Hitler. Great Britain appeased Hitler. One of the lowest points in history. From the comfort of safety, Peter Hitchens opposes Ukraine. I don’t think Christopher would agree.
Yeah.. (i mean they get outta that bed pretty quickly after.. but hey they visit, which is more than a lot of the so called left do these days .. even tokenistically!) *yeesh*
Ukraine is being destroyed in the name of Corporate profits & US hegemony. Peace talks are needed to end the war. The US has no interest in that because weapon & energy companies are making a killing, literally. That's what is dangerous and certainly not good for Ukraine.. ! (The Ukrainian voice you are probably hearing is the one amplified by our media.. obviously..)
Ukrainians aren't a homogenous group that all think what the US wants, we only hear the voices that Capital needs us to hear such that we support the profiteering under the guise of 'protecting democracy'. And even if all Ukrainians did think that, it still isn't good for Ukraine for the US & Russia to fight each other in their country, destroying it in the process & burning horrific amounts of fossil fuels while we do it.. AND creating an energy profits emergency everywhere (good for capital though) All this is the OPPOSITE of what humans need to be doing right now.. even if this WAS about Ukrainian democracy & the goodwill of the US, it STILL isn't good enough to justify risking nuclear apocalypse AND destroying our chances at climate cooperation accross the globe. Imo
The strange thing is everything did they criticize about Russia as far as media control, minority rights corruption, the right to protest the war, extremism; Ukraine has all of it and at least And in some cases much more than Russia.
Excellent point. Luckily the EU sets high standards for such things in prospective member states, and it has many programs to help correcting these problems. So I completely agree with you: The sooner the Ukrainians can boot the invading forces from the 5 occupied / partially occupied oblasts the better, so they can begin the heavy work of fixing said problems and becoming members of the EU. Becoming subservient to Russia again would disastrously keep it in the same old sphere of corruption, repression and kleptocracy.
@@karsten11553 One of the difficulties with "fixing the problems" of corruption in any country is- all those in charge are doing rather well the way things are? Why would the people in power give up this gravy train? If you read the PANDORA PAPERS, you know Zelenskyy is in deep too. The EU will have to set a low bar for Ukraine. Then you have to get investors to enter Ukraine in the private sphere. Ask yourself why they have not since 2014? And make no mistake, Ukraine will be subservient to the EU, with the debt it now carries, it has no choice. And you know how the EU plays, we see this with Poland and HUNGARY, if you don't tow the line on Immigration Trans rights Global warning etc, the Eu withhold funds which is intended to make the govt fall and replaced by a more agreeable govt. So Ukraine is trading one dominating rule for another, the EU may be preferable but its not without its baggage.
@@59Gretsch I guess it will be up to the Ukrainians who they prefer, then. My guess is: the ones who hasn't invaded their country and murdered their cititizens. European bureacracy is probably the lesser evil. And yes, as Hungary has been moving in a less democratic direction, it is only natural that the EU puts pressure on the Orban government to strengthen their democratic institutions, but I guess that would seem oppressive to a president who is more or less aligned with the Dwarf in the Kremlin.
@@karsten11553 I agree, this is for Ukraine to decide. Not long after the invasion happened Ukraine and Russian negotiators met in Turkey and had a deal worked out until (it is reported) Boris Johnson scuttled the deal with assurances Ukraine would win by military action and NOT to negotiate. 200K lives later I and many are worried for Ukraine ever getting the victory they were promised. Anyway, part of that agreement was that RU had no objection to them joining the EU. I noticed you did this thing where -People voting for the person they want as leader- is not democracy, such as the landslide victory in Hungary. This is what I was referring to- in order to be a "real democracy" you must bend to social issues the EU keeps evolving on. We see this all the time where words have no meaning. The essence of democracy is that the will of the people are reflected in govt. For example, Putin may be a lot of things but it sounds silly when my Ukraine friends say two opposing thing 1. Putin is a dictator 2. We hate Russians because they overwhelmingly like and support Putin. Russia is a federation of wildly diverse regions and people. It would be very difficult to both rig-elections, fool Western pollsters who find Putin is very popular and no real anti-putin demonstrations out in these federations. All across the work even dictators face "Arab Springs" Hungarian uprisings and all sorts of people massing in protest. Putin, I think is more of a democratically elected Autocrat.
Mary Dejevsky made an observation I noticed when recently corresponding with my MP, and it's that they seem to be representing Ukrainians more than us. Many times my MP has ignored very serious concerns I have. Yet, in a recent reply, he waxed lyrical about Ukraine, a place I am 99.9% sure he's never been to, nor had much interest in prior to February 2022. He also had the cheek to say any concerns I have about my life or the future of this country is not important because people are suffering in Ukraine. Even though he, and people like Edward Lucas (the latter I think genuinely well meaning but misguided) speak of democracy, agency, rule of law, prosperity, independence, freedom of speech, and representation, yet those very same attributes they praise Ukraine for fighting in defence of, are fast disappearing and been slowly but surely being abolished here by our almost unanimous political class. They love grandstanding on the world stage, whilst our own country is falling to pieces. My MP, on the occasion he does reply, usually peddles the party propaganda line. If I reply back and challenge it, he just ignores me. So much for representation. These chancers know there isn't any electable opposition. Britain is a bad joke, especially if you're at the working class end of the spectrum.
How strange. The lady fro. Ukraine seems in no hurry for peace. People are dying and freezing but she still seems to think its OK. Die for your country what nonsense.
Wheeling on a Ukrainian voice just to basically puppet a ra-ra pro Ukranian stance feels a bit iffy. While we all like to hear nice things, really there was no substance to Svitlana's points. Didn't fit with the other 3 speakers making well considered historical and geopolitical points IMO. If she could have weaved in the same kind of acumen as Peter, Edward and Mary with a 'boots on the ground' Ukrainian perspective she may have convinced me, unfortunately I fear this actually weakens the opposition positive.
The idea that Russia doesn't pose a greater threat is concerning. Finland didn't order over 60 F-35's from the US due to a threat from *NATO.* It was because of the threat from Russia.
You invited a Ukrainian but why not a Russian speaking Ukrainian from the East and from the Donbas, they may have a slightly different view point. Does this woman speak for all Ukrainians? I don't think so.
This war is particularly strange because it is difficult to understand why it is happening at all. What do the Russians hope to gain by this action? Subjugating a country the size of Ukraine even if they had been successful on the battlefield would have been all but impossible and certainly not worth the pain in any terms. Surely it has been shown time and time again that unless a large majority of the common people accept being occupied or positively want to be so it ain't happening. The Germans were already having ever more amounts of grief keeping northern France under control before D-day. The Japanese had all kinds of grief with the Philopean Resistance which became stronger and more murderous with every day the Japanese stayed there. Neither the powers of the USA, The Soviet Union nor the British Empire managed to keep Afghanistan under profitable control and that was populated by little more than sheep herders armed with not a lot. The British Empire only managed to hold profitable control of large parts of its empire by soliciting the assistance of local leaders using bribery, subversion, and corruption, taking control of virtually uninhabited areas, or sending in British Colonists in their many thousands. Even then much of the British Empire soon started to cost more than it yielded, which is why the British systematically left the scene to let the locals fight it out among themselves or slaughter each other in their millions. Empire using even a modicum of force worked none too well 200 years ago, and that sort of thing simply won't work at all these days. What was Putin planning on doing? Lining up 100 locals every time a Russian soldier got it in the arse? However, if Putin just wanted to make a point then it would seem that his point is now made. If Zelensky needed to make a point, it would seem that his point is also made. Therefore there would seem to be absolutely no point in not calling it a day ASAP.
Subjugating all of Ukraine wouldn't work. Making a land bridge to Crimea and protecting ethnic Russians in the eastern region while making sure Ukraine never joins nato. It's a complex situation.
"The British Empire only managed to hold profitable control of large parts of its empire by soliciting the assistance of local leaders using bribery, subversion, and corruption, taking control of virtually uninhabited areas, ..." There were no "virtually uninhabited areas" of the world with the exception of the Arctic wastes and extreme deserts, and why would the British (or the indigenous peoples) want them anyway? "... by soliciting the assistance of local leaders using bribery, subversion, and corruption, ..." "Subversion" here is a meaningless word, and while there may have been some corruption within the vast British Empire, it paled into insignificance compared with the rampant corruption of local officials. This is why the British were able to control large parts of the Earth, because most of the inhabitants actually preferred British law-based rule over the random, tyrannical rule by their own aristocracies. If this were not so, it would have been impossible for the British or any other European country to have ruled over a massive territory like India. To suggest that the Indian people were incapable of throwing out the British if they had really wanted to is tantamount to racism. During the Indian Mutiny, for example, massive sections of the population supported the British. By the mid-20th century, most Indians had come to believe that they could rule themselves, and so it proved.
Maybe an unpopular opinion: War is horrific and should be avoided at all costs. Best way to avoid war is to prepare for war. Best way to prepare for war is to built weapons of war and train to use them. There are people who always benefit financially from manufacturing weapons, and those who sell and supply them, but ultimately a country benefits more from peace. To me this is a small price to pay. There are no solutions, only trade-offs. Russia is ruled by an evil, violent Mafia who abuses and lies endlessly. The western rulers aren't that bad, but there are no angels here either. There are those among every society who neither care or worry about their fellow man, and it is an unfortunate fact, that those people often are the most aggressive and ruthless, and push themselves to the positions of power and influence, no matter the time and place in history. I understand the both sides of the arguments, but ultimately the problem is the Sin of man. It is the Sin inside all of us that causes evil things. We collectively choose the bad over good. You want good in the world? Listen and learn of yourself. Clean the bad from yourself. There would be no need for weapons or governments, if men were angels. The only way people become angels, is to listen to our Savior Jesus Christ, but people do not want to be good in the eyes of God, so here we are. John 14:6 "Jesus said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me"
@@robertaspindale2531 The cynic in me suspects that might be a large part of the attraction of this war for the British and American governments (wrecking Germany).
I like how westoids have Ukrainian people coming over in these discussions and never Russian, so representative and thoughtful Btw, the shift in public opinion in Russia is so radical that you will feel this in generations to come.
@Jacob B Nah, we have a runaway here, still admires imperialist russia and putin. just do not want to get shot at himself. Ideas do not die as easily as people.
@Throughthe lookingglass well she demands the fighting carries on and we continue to give money and weapons from her safe life in the West. Walk the walk is what I’m saying.
@Throughthe lookingglass No if history has taught us anything it’s that the people wanting to start or prolong a war should be the ones fighting it. Might knock them off their moral high ground.
@Throughthe lookingglass there was a chance for peace but the British PM Johnson and Biden told Ukraine it wasn’t to make peace under any circumstances. Ukraine is being used by the Americans.
I'm listening to this from Canada on Feb. 1, 2023, thank you for sharing to the public. Svitlana Morenets and Edward Lucus might gather some geopolitical insight if they listen to a top international relations political scholar who belongs to the realist school of thought. Here in Canada, our education system informs us on world issues and the history of wars, and the fact, millions of immigrants that arrive here on our shores are running away from speaking truths and fighting for their homes. Understanding geopolitical reality is highly required in order to maintain peace in our world. If you can grasp an intellectual understanding of realism in the powers of geopolitics, then one may respect reality. Professor John Mearsheimer is the intellect which provides us with that wisdom. Believe me, he is outstanding.
Mearsheimer is an old moron who deliberately ignores the facts contradicting his narrative about how the "West" frightened Russia forcing it to attack another country. Like the revanchist views of Putin and his hatred of Ukraine. Or the fact that Ukraine on its way to NATO has encountered the coalition of member countries that decisively blocked its advance in 2008. Or the fact that from 2014 the entrance of Ukraine to NATO is fundamentally impossible.
You should look into the Social Constructivist school of IR as Constructivism is diametrically opposed to Realism as Realism negatives the influence of idea and ideology and focuses exclusively on the power of political actors. If you look at this conflict through the SC school of thought you would see that Putin is not invading Ukraine due to security concerns they have nuclear weapons which guarantees their sovereignty. Russia is invading as Putin believes that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest disaster of the 20th century and he seeks to rebuild it or at the very least absorb Belarus and Ukraine.
@@zacharypereira1450 absolutely not true, I disliked Putin since 1999 you know why? Because of his super pro western orientation, supporting Bush in Afghanistan, withdrawal of two military bases from Vietnam and Cuba, he even visited Bushes ranch and looked like their little partner. He even wanted to become NATO member, but what then? He was rejected in the same time Bush invited Ukraine and Georgia in NATO and withdrew from agreement about anti missiles in Europe. In 2014 USA supported coup in Ukraine, Putin understood that this is red line and if he does not take Crimea there will be NATO base in future, in that period he easily could capture half of Ukraine without big opposition from local people whole east of Ukraine would support his troops mainly. But he stoped thinking that he will find agreement with West and Ukraine based on Minsk agreement but in vain. That is why Putin is only apparent imperialist in reality he just defends because since 1992 western expansion to the east is absolutely obvious including military expansion. Just remember George Kennan words.
@@ruslankbr5243 So one can be an imperialist in Eastern Europe while trying to accomodate the US and the Western Europe. The logic would be that if Russia accomodates the US and Western Europe then both Western Europe and the US will give Russia free reign in Eastern Europe. The problem with this thinking is that it creates a hierarchy of states and prioritizes some countries at the expense of others. Why should US Ukraine, US Baltics and US Poland relations run through Russia? If Russia wants to move nuclears to Belgorod in retaliation for stronger Ukraine West relations that is Russia's business but Russia cannot expand its borders by force.
What causes a war is ineffective communication - basically - when a collective entity decides or is not prepared to see the other collective personae point of view! In my opinion Russia and the Russian people (Putin or no Putin ) must be considered in a detached manner and in an un impulsive way but for the debate to be conducted in a contextual and comprehensive manner we do need to be objective .
I think objectively the Russian viewpoint was understood but rejected. They wanted to exert dominance over their old sphere of influence and the people living in it did not want that and they had help so they could say no. Russia couldn't accept this and escalated to violence.
@@scottbuchanan9426 they're our brothers. Really, we're all brothers and sisters, but my point is that they aren't the people "all the way over there." They're British, American, German, Polish... They are us. That shouldn't mean hating or wanting to humiliate Russia. It should mean affirming Ukrainian sovereignty, identity and existence. Occupation of Ukraine is the occupation of us.
It was Dr. Raphael Lemkin a human rights lawyer who in 1944 defined the term "genocide". He presented the genocide of Ukrainians perpetrated by Soviet Bolshevik communists in four stages. The Holodomor Genocide 1932 -33 (death by starvation of the Ukrainian peasantry), the extermination of the Ukrainian intelligentsia, the destruction of the Ukrainian Orthodox church its parishes and clergy and the mass deportations of ethic Ukrainians from the territory of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic to remote and extreme areas of the Soviet Union and Gulag concentration camps. With the suppression of the Ukrainian language, arts and culture Ukraine became a Russified soviet satellite republic. It was the Ukrainians who showed the greatest resistance to soviet communism demonstrated by the hundreds of peasant uprisings and dissident movements and as a consequence it was the Ukrainians who suffered the most repression during the Soviet Union's reign of terror which resulted in millions of deaths. Estimates go as high as ten million victims. This is not common knowledge in the UK for some strange reason. Not taught in British schools and not commemorated alongside other genocides of Holocaust Memorial Day. Britain in fact has refused to officially recognise the genocide of Ukrainians on several occasions.
I couldn’t get beyond the first 5 minutes. Always been a fan of Peter Hitchens but listening to his opening remarks especially re President Putin made me wonder where he’s been since 2014. Bit of a disappointment to watch a hero shoot himself in the foot.
There is simple logic here. If would say Putin invaded Ukraine because of NATO’s expansion, why he wouldn’t deploy nuclear weapons somewhere against NATO like Cuban Missile Crisis? But why he did annex their neighbors instead of against NATO directly?
@@LajosArpad85 If Ukraine was a de facto NATO member, Russia wouldn't have invaded. Russia only invades its neighbours that aren't in NATO (Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia). One foot into the Baltics or Poland, and NATO would flatten Putin's bunker in a matter of minutes.
False, Russia has been interfering and corrupting Ukranian internal affairs and inciting violence from day 1 after the breakup of the USSR, trying to reconstruct its previous colonial hegemony.
When this was filmed they thought Ukraine’s had lost 10,000 soldiers we now know it’s closer to 150,000 at this point in growing by the day. As unaffiliated experts predicted Ukraine cannot win this war and the longer it goes on the greater the cost not just a Ukraine But world security as well.
That's dead soldiers. And it's likely a estimate that is dated now.. also there are more wounded. And a huge part of them will be incapacitated for the rest of their lives
Peter is the sultan of irrelevant discourse that sounds meaningful through its pompous delivery. Whether NATO expansion was truly a reason for the Russian invasion or how the West abandoned Russia after the fall of the USSR have nothing to do with--absolutely nothing to do with the next steps in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Ask the Americans whether they would respect Mexican sovereignty if the Mexicans allowed Russian nuclear missiles on their territory. The answer is obvious.
It will not about usa nuclear weapon in Ukraine or NATO for Putin.Its about his idea X about restore USSR . Its what majority people around the world dont understand at all.
@@HazardDynamo Putin has expressly said that he has no intention of retaking former Soviet territory. He obviously does not want a war with NATO. It's just Western propaganda that says he does. You shouldn't believe everything you read in the mainstream media, which is completely under the thumb of the Neocons.
I'd say he is restoring Russian imperialism but I get your point. Why would Mexico not want an alliance with Russia; there biggest economic partner is the US. And what danger does the US pose to Mexican sovereignty compared to a partner like putin?
@@Thomas...191 You could say the same about Ukraine. Why would Ukraine want an alliance with America; their biggest economic partner is Russia. Yet America interfered by inviting Ukraine to join NATO, by fomenting a coup against the pro-Russian government and sending arms for attacks on its Russian-speaking citizens who only wanted the right to follow their cultural traditions.
@@robertaspindale2531 ever had a neighbour like Putin? Or would you aspire to be a country like Belarus with their (lukashenckos) alliance with Russia. There is an appetite for imperial expansion in Russia (the people really likes the crimean annexation). There is no such appetite in most western countries anymore thankfully.
What Svetlana said about the Russians not protesting: could that really mean that they don’t like this separation? May be that is their will? Why? The western countries do not get it that a change must occur at the pace and from within the context and the culture of the countries themselves and by their own brand of democracy.
Their own brand of democracy being invading their neighbors to forcefully unseparate from people who are finally free of being your colony? If that is their will, then fuck'em.
Yes, and this is why Russia has thrown out the western funded NGOs attempting to create color revolutions. They know what game US and the collective west plays.
Edward likes to talk, but stays far from the fight. I suspect he would be suing for peace if his life were on the line, but it’s not and there are still a few Ukrainians left so the fight should continue. The young Ukraine lady seemed out of her depth and drew on sentiments mostly, but sentiments right or wrong does not win wars.
I wish the Ukrainian lady had been pushed farther on her nationalistic views such as embracing Bandera, and forcing everyone to speak Ukrainian in public settings and this is not just the 25% Russian population but also Hungarians in the Carpathian area and also Poland voices who also live in Ukraine. They could’ve addressed the book burnings over 1 million bucks I’ve been burned recently or should we say recycled, purging any unauthorized thought even if I’m 100 years ago in historic novel
Can't believe I ever admired Hitchens. Sadly, with his smooth voice and appearance of expertise, he fooled me. I know I was only of of many who were deluded into taking the wrong position on this conflict by him. Sadly it took a full-blown war to wake me up. Russia cannot be negotiated with. There can be no peace or prospect of peace or hope for peace while Russian remain on European soil. Rossia delenda est.
The Ukrainian young woman is not so convincing when she refer to one man (Putin )v Ukrainians she should speak of the Russian people v Ukrainians. Her stand logically by the same token might allow the Russians to also refer Zelenski ‘ and his actions against the Russians(?)
I wonder, what would Mary and Peter say if Great Britain was in precisely the same situation as Ukraine is now and its allies decided to cut the supplies in a war started by Russia?
Those opposing piece by the blood of others shouldn't be braying in the audience with the cloven mitts, but rather go to the front of the battlefield and see if their vote makes the count.
Gyóni Géza: For a single night (Translation) Send them out for a single night The proud of their will and might For a single night: Those who spread "We don't forget", When the song of warmachines beget; When the invisible seed hatches the mist And we see the omnipresent deadly plummet-swifts Send them out for a single night Those who at plank break look for speck sight For a single night: With the deafening scream of the grenade When the bloody Earth cries as if its cut stomach decayed When the exploding bullet alights the blood Causes the red water of the Vistula to flood Send them out for a single night Whom with their teeth on usury bite For a single night: In the middle of grenade spree Men rotate like the leaf of the tree And when he collapses oh, terrible crashes, From a fine soldier only black ashes Send them out for a single night The traders and whose belief is light For a single night: When Hell opens its fiery throat And blood flows on earth and oat When the ragged tent in wind groans And dying soldier for his family mourns Send them out for a single night Those who only voice their national pride For a single night: When the blinding starlight travels in their direction So they can see their faces in the San rivers' reflection When Hungarian blood vapor is rolled along They scream crying: God, I cannot endure for long. Send them out for a single night promptly So they can remember their mother's pain at delivery For a single night: How they would huddle together, shivering under terror How they would wallow, screaming "mea culpa" in horror How they would tear their shirt, how they would beat their bust How their sobbing howl sound: Chirst, how long does this last Christ, how long does this last, Brothers, what may I give As a price of blood, if only I could continue to live How would swear - all of them - In their unbelieving hubris, the One he ignored How would he call Christ, how would he call the Lord: Never again do this to Hungarian brothers I might Send them out for a single night
Mary Dejevsky seems to be confused about when the Ukraine war started, but never mind. Worse is her insinuation (@11:17) that the Ukrainian people, unlike the British during the second world war, may lack the fortitude to keep fighting till victory. It makes me wonder if her expressed views are the result of sincere beliefs, or financial incentives.
this is not a debate it's a one sided opinion sharing. All of them already decided Russia is the bad guy so what's there to debate? They are also uninformed about the cause and effects of events leading to the war. Totally ignorant bunch of amateurs.
I'm neutral. I recognize that Russia felt an existential threat and had to do something and Russians in Ukraine were persecuted. But I also understand that Ukrainians love their state and protect it. I recognize Russia had to do something, but I also think there were better ways to achieve its goals, so, according to me, escalating the civil war in Ukraine into an international war is reprehensible on the one hand. But I do recognize that the Zelensky regime and the open support of banderists by Ukraine and the collective west is reprehensible on the other hand. But regardless of what you, I or the members of the panel may think about who is right or wrong, it is interesting to discuss whether we want peace. It was quite telling that the Ukrainian lady was so opposed to peace. So, the debate was interesting even if you disagree with the members of the panel on another topic.
@@LajosArpad85 _I recognize that Russia felt an existential threat_ - Marines from Kalingrad has been moved to Donbas, Murmańsk was emptied from any military worth speaking of months ago, Anti-air batteries from the very Moscow are guarding Crimea right now. Russian military does not believe to be under any external military threat, existential or not. That's the entire bloody problem. _Russians in Ukraine were persecuted_ - Russians in X are persecuted, we need to invade. Yep, we've heard this song. Not once, not twice, not thrice. Multiple times. _I recognize Russia had to do something, but I also think there were better ways to achieve its goals_ - they not only had no better, but they had no other way of doing it. What they were supposed to do? Gain influence by offering their neighbors high-end civilian technology, showing enviable standards of living of their citizens, referring to their common history of fruitful cooperation? They have none of those things. All they had were magazines full of tanks made with intention of spreading the glorious communism to Western Europe and a bloated military budget. So that's what they used. _But I do recognize that the Zelensky regime_ - that's funny. We have two governments here: one of them is represented by a former comedian who got sworn in three years ago, the other by a former KGB agent who has held power uninterrupted for over twenty years. Guess which one you call a "regime". As to "support of banderists" I am really touched that so many people shows all of a sudden so much interest in the tragic pages in the history of my nation, but what about you will let us resolve our historical differences between ourselves? In a civilized manner, and certainly after the war is over and, let's hope, Ukraine has returned to its proper, internationally-recognized borders.
@@jakubklis6797 "Russian military does not believe to be under any external military threat, existential or not. That's the entire bloody problem." Any great power would feel threatened if another great power would move its military or military alliance up to its border. If China would add Mexico into a military alliance formed against the USA, then the USA would rightly consider it to be an existential threat. This was the very reason of the Cuban missile crisis, when the Soviet Union was getting close to the USA. The USA has the Monroe doctrine, which considers any military activity of great powers in the Americas to be a hostile action against the USA. Like it or not, great powers do not accept other great powers moving their military up to their borders and feel threatened whenever that happens. "Russians in X are persecuted, we need to invade. Yep, we've heard this song. Not once, not twice, not thrice. Multiple times." Russians in Ukraine are persecuted indeed. According to the Minsk agreement (which was signed by Ukraine), Russians in eastern Ukraine will have autonomy. According to a referendum in Transcarpathia (1991), Transcarpathia will have autonomy. Ukraine disrespected both of these obligations. There was a civil war in Ukraine between the Ukrainian state and its Russian minority for 8 years. History did not start on the 24th of February. "they not only had no better, but they had no other way of doing it. What they were supposed to do?" If Russia was to stop the flow of natural gas and other resources (like oil) at the end of this summer, then Ukraine and the EU would have faced unsolvable economic problems. So, yes, Russia had better options. "We have two governments here: one of them is represented by a former comedian who got sworn in three years ago, the other by a former KGB agent who has held power uninterrupted for over twenty years. Guess which one you call a "regime"." Putin has a regime as well, if that makes you happy. From my perspective, Russia is a country that fought wars against my nation and occupied it several times and Ukraine is a country that currently oppresses members of my nation in Transcarpathia. So, yes, Zelensky has an oppressive regime that severely disrespects the basic human rights of minorities, banned opposition parties and press and these problems are not changed by the fact that Ukraine is under attack. "As to "support of banderists" I am really touched that so many people shows all of a sudden so much interest in the tragic pages in the history of my nation, but what about you will let us resolve our historical differences between ourselves?" Why do you assume that my interest about banderists is sudden? Would it be difficult to believe that as a Hungarian I do care about my Hungarian brothers and sisters in Transcarpathia? Would it be difficult to believe that as a human being I do care about the non-Hungarian minorities in Ukraine? And it's a really nice try on your part to attempt to depict banderism as a historic problem. We also had war criminals of the like of Bandera, but we do not celebrate their birthday as a national holiday, like Ukraine.
@@LajosArpad85 _Any great power would feel threatened if another great power would move its military or military alliance up to its border._ - USSR is dead. Russia is no more a great power. And no amount of middle aged, sexually frustrated man dancing around a Sarmat rocket, the Russian symbol of fertility, will change it. _There was a civil war in Ukraine between the Ukrainian state and its Russian minority for 8 years. History did not start on the 24th of February._ - Yes, it started 8 years ago, with Russian army crossing into Donbas and invading Crimea. _If Russia was to stop the flow of natural gas and other resources (like oil) at the end of this summer, then Ukraine and the EU would have faced unsolvable economic problems. So, yes, Russia had better options._ - there is no such things as "unsolvable problems". Both economies depend on each other and both can wean themselves from the other, if necessary. Only one of them is incomparably bigger and is not engaged in open war right now. Also, I've heard that all electronic in Russian modern-ish tanks smell faintly of garlic, fried snails and wine. I wonder why. _Putin has a regime as well, if that makes you happy._ - no, it makes me very unhappy. I doubt there is a person in the world whom it makes happy, with a possible exception of Kreml's wierchuszka, although lately they've becomed far less cocky than they used to be. _These problems are not changed by the fact that Ukraine is under attack._ - these problems are changed by the fact that Ukraine is in war. We can talk about them in peace and ask which of them are made up by Russian propaganda and which of them is real and to what point after the war. Now there are bigger issues. I would be of the same opinion about the Viktor Orbán's regime, was Hungary under attack. It is very difficult to believe you care about them. Really, really difficult. It is a strange time to express concern. But it rises a strange suspicion in my mind. That piece of Russian propaganda they were repeating a few months ago, untill that turned out to be too obvious a lie and they make up something new, that about the Western Ukraine being about to be divided between Poland, Romania and Hungary... There is no doubt about Poland and Romania, judging by their actions, but, hey, I'm just asking: haven't you Hungarians had some dirty thoughts about Transcarpathia? Something along the lines of liberating the opressed minorities, obviosuly forced by circumstances and obviouosly made with the best interest of falling apart Ukrainian nation in mind, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, tanks are crossing the border?
I fast forwarded the input of Hitchens - no point listening to the one track mind he has on this subject over and over again, he never has anything new to offer. Listened intently to the others. The Ukrainian lady has a very firm grasp of the realities (she's lived with it) of the situation forced upon her and her fellow citizens. I'll listen to almost anything Hitchens offers on almost any subject apart from his myopia concerning this matter.
These people don’t understand you can’t compromise with Russia and you can’t let them keep their dignity after such barbaric actions in Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya or the 30+ years of meddling in Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict. We’ve got Russia boots on the ground too. So did the Kazakhs, Belarus and so many more. Russia needs to be stopped and these apologists must stop.
We compromised with Stalin in 1945, handing him Poland (who we supposedly went to war to defend). Don't think we won't do it again if it is a better option than more war.
Not sure what you meant by NATO's war in 1999 but it is most likely be the NATO intervention into the Kosovo War in 1999. If so, then it is two completely different situations, I do not see any point in bringing it here.
The lesson of Yugoslavia is that NATO failed to punish the communist murderers hard enough. Stalin, Hitler, Saddam, Milosovic, Putin…all creatures of that sort are depressingly predictable. They respect violence and absolutely, emphatically nothing else. We WANT to think about rational solutions, about laws, about principles, …and they do not.
@@MinhVu-up5pk NATO intervening to assist the Kosovan ethinic minority is analagous to Russia intervening to help the Russian minority in the Donbass is it not?
@@turquoiseowl Absolutely not! The Ukrainians were not comitting genocide in the Donbas as Milocevic was doing. All the Ukrainians were doing was fighting Russian backed separatists.
Hitchens literally killed the Ukrainian propaganda lady 1:06:10 with "Bandera is our father." She was shocked until the end of the dispute, it turns out that it is not so easy to arrange a theater when the opponent is at least a little informed. It's funny how a professional anti-Russian bald guy immediately intercepted the discussion with a verbal salad, blocking the development of the topic, and how the moderator helped him
That crowd, appeasing expansionist authoritarian regimes and thinking “if we just give them one more, they’ll surely stop invading!” Russia has the exact same playbook every time: Fund & supply separatists, recognize “independence,” violently invade, annex territory to Russia. Did it in Moldova, did it in Georgia, did it in Crimea, now doing it in Donbas… Foolish if you think it stops there. Appeasement does nothing but tell Putin “if you threaten nukes, we have to obey and let you do what you want! Please, please just take whatever you want, we don’t want to upset you.” The world is a dangerous place and always has been - e.g. warring tribes. Bow to predators, they will gleefully take your neck.
@@LajosArpad85 privyet Olginskii troll. Nobody believes your lies. (what's Zelenskyy's native language, dummy?) There's also schools in Romanian, Hungarian, Greek, Tatar and any subject at all up to university level can be studied in Russian. Russian is still the dominate language of daily discourse. Ukraine has one of the freest presses in the region, and only Kremlin-backed fringe parties were banned (with most of their leaders fleeing to Moscow at the beginning of the invasion). major oppisition figures and parties still intact and in their offices and seats in parliament. Oh, and only Kremlin
@@wellardme that's fine, but Russia needs to agree to leave. If Russia doesn't then they need to be kicked out. There also needs to be airtight guarantees that Russia won't do something this stupid again. And all Frozen Russian assets need to go to the rebuilding of Ukraine.
@@markheithaus that is all one-sided still, I'm afraid. Russia won't leave and the West need to work around this. Negotiations are unfortunately over. Russian assets were seized which is state theft. Who took America's assets when they bombed Iraq and Afghanistan to the Dark Ages and occupied those countries for years on end? To say Russia has to leave or me made poor will solve nothing. Peace means both parties have an "off-ramp."
@@wellardme a big difference is that Russia is committing genocide. Russian media is filled with "Ukraine isn't a real country" and "Ukrainian isn't a real language." I speak Russian. I don't speak Ukrainian. Putin is terrorizing Ukraine and can never be allowed to do this again. Russia needs to be forced to accept the existence of an independent Ukraine. Hundreds of missiles were fired all over Ukraine as retaliation for the liberation of Kherson. That's insane.
@@markheithaus You speak Russian but you are not Russian as I can tell. I am English and have been living in Russia for 16 years and I try to see a balanced perspective. I agree that Russian TV spouts total crap but I get my info from independent journalists (mainly UK and US) plus through my friends who are in Ukraine. But then so does Western MSM as they seem to want war rather than edge for peace as most of what they report are total fabrications (Ukraine strictly forbid CNN, BBC etc in Kherson). As for Russia committing genocide, I see no evidence of that. It is awful that people die but to have a proposed industrial murder program, no, it's not happening. Russia for example evacuated Kherson when they pulled back to SAVE civilians because the SVO is known to torture and execute civilians who were under Russian occupation. These people are officially Nazis (like the Azov battalion who is ordained by Kiev). I have many friends who were being used as human shields in Mariupol before Russia liberated the city. They thanked Russia on Western media but these interviews were quickly deleted and there was a famous case with Der Spiegel. Russia was wrong to invade. War sucks big time! But it is vital to understand the Russian mindset when Putin kept saying "Existential threat." The Soviets lost 27 million people in WW2 with many western Ukrainians under Bandera in SS uniform murdering Poles, Jews and Russians. So, to have NATO encroaching on Russian territory, despite Russia's several pleas falling on deaf ears, the US led coup of 2014 (US Secretary Victoria Nuland leaked phone call), the public acceptance of US bio labs in Ukraine (Again, Victoria Nuland), the fact that since 2014 NATO was openly funding and training Ukraine... is Russia supposed to sit on its arse? Why when Zelenskiy was about to have a meeting with the Duma did Boris Johnson fly to Kiev and scuttle negotiations? I could go on. Russia is by no means innocent but to ignore NATO's input, how the West is using poor Ukrainians to fight a proxy war against Russia for world hegemony... is Russia supposed to sit on its arse and be another Iraq? Another Afghanistan? Another Syria? Another Libya? There are two sides, I'm afraid. I want peace because through this whole propaganda circus, we're closer to nuking the entire planet than ever before. We need negotiations, diplomacy and honesty even if the truth goes against our narrative.
One feels that the USA will sell them down the river, while holding aloft the idea that any negotiated settlement is better, that they are doing Ukraine a favour. We cannot negate the needs of Ukraine itself, even if by proxy we are supplying support. We have our own self determination our own beliefs plus things we hold dear. Supporting Ukraine is not a notion of protecting us in the future, they deserve all the help we can offer.
I'm glad the question is being raised "How to get peace". In my opinion Ukraine can prepare itself by looking at Syria for guidance. Edit: Syria was a bad example. The people of Ukraine should look to Afghanistan! Unless the Ukrainian's can hold the NATO and EU countries feet to the fire. It's my opinion Ukraine can't defeat Russia militarily but it has the moral high ground. With the population armed Ukraine should send the Oligarchs packing (including the corrupt politicians) - but that's an internal Ukrainian affair. I urge Ukrainian's to listen to people from Georgia on their views of the 2008 war in hindsight. This war is primarily damaging Ukraine. Common wisdom shows the longer a war is allowed to rage the crazier it will manifest.
@@mattss4725 -No, I take that back. Syria was a bad example. The people of Ukraine (what's left of them inside the government controlled part 25-30 million?) should look to Afghanistan! Why do I say that? This is obviously a proxy war (at the present). Search: "Fight Russia to the last Ukrainian" Bleed Russia with Ukrainian lifes for as long as they can. Russia opted to play its strong hand = war of attrition. -Give me one example where the US has been involved in state building post-1955? -Except Germany, Japan (+ the Western European countries that received the Marshall plan), I have a hard time to find one example where the US has "defended a country" and also helped it reconstruct. Maybe South Korea and Taiwan, but that wasn't done over night. Book recommendation: The bad Samarithans by an economist from South Korea => for some economic history of how countries develop. There are, on the other hand, many more examples of countries being destroyed (Vietnam) or used for some purpose (Libya, Iraq and Syria) only to be abandoned in a haste. What Ukraine has going for it is its proximity to the EU and pledged humanitarian help + vocal expat community. +The strong solidarity movement among ordinary people in the West. Expose the fact NATO prevented negotiations! Ukraine has been given EU candidate status (same as Turkey since 1985,87?). Listen to former economist Michael Hudson of Chase Manhattan Bank about the economic aspects of the war. I don't agree with everything Dr Hudson say but most. Link below (watch from 40 min) ua-cam.com/users/liveCkQCSPM2QUY?feature=share I'm not saying the above with any glee. Of course the Ukraine was attacked and they have the right to defend themselves. My statement is not a condemnation of Ukraine (except maybe the corrupt leadership) its more based on previous US behaviour (worthy victims one day / forgotten the next). I try to listen beyond the sloganering, what are the policy think tanks saying in the US and UK? -Right now a majority is saying "get out" (using other words), based on real politics. One last remark, how much land and/or other resources have Ukraine given to US/outside corporations and asset managers in return for the present "aid"? I can only say: Hope I'm wrong when I say: Ukraine get ready to be forgotten!
@@dushas9871 Thanks for your comment! - I can't argue with against it. Sometimes one has to be diplomatic and/or speak in hypothetical terms (for various reasons)- in my opinion. You are however right, tell it like it is - 8 year's of generating bad karma/disciplining part of the Ukrainian population is now destroying Ukraine. To Hell with NATO!
Indeed, and then there was a popular uprising to oust Putin's man, who then fled to Russia. Russia then retorted by annexing Crimea. I imagine this solidified some fence sitters, don't you?
Once again Hitchens brings truth and unrelenting clarity to what’s actually going on. For the neoliberal warmongers it’s extremely uncomfortable to have to listen to him. I suspect if they could they’d try to muzzle him but can’t. Bravo Hitchens. Always the smartest guy in the room.
Peter Hitchens arguments are stupid and seem to rely on the concept that the Kremlin will somehow act in good faith with any negotiations (Every attempt at negotiation with them over this entire conflict, and for treaties made between Ukraine and Russia going back to the 90's has ended in bad faith actions on Russia's behalf and violation of treaties), or that "Peace" is desirable for the Kremlin, which if you actually see what their stated long-term goals are that they repeatedly have said and shown with their actions extend well beyond the current conflict in Ukraine.
If you want to get a good grasp on the conflict in terms of the Kremlins goals and motives look up Russian philosopher Vlad Vexler's videos not opinionated unqualified journalist talking head contrarians like Peter Hitchens.
Hi nimbledick don’t really think the Russians are bad faith actors. To the contrary it’s the western powers acting in bad faith predominantly Washington with London at its back. It was the Russians who voluntarily disbanded the Warsaw Pact albeit on a (now broken) promise from the US NATO would not expand eastwards. The Americans via NATO then went onto to bomb Yugoslavia, start an illegal war in Iraq murdering approximately 1 million people, toppling Gaddafi in Libya, a country to that point being the per capita richest in Africa, all because Gaddafi wanted to sell oil in non-US dollars, then turned its colour revolution to Syria even arming Al Shabab Al queda affiliated. Then onto Ukraine. Toppling the democratically elected Party of the Regions Yanokovych government with a putsch. They then installed their own American puppet regime in Kiev. The Minsk 1 and 2 accords, both ratified by the UN, signed in 2015 but the US controlled Regime refused to honour them and kept shelling the Russian speaking minority in the Donbas. Killed approximately 15000 people. Zelensky’s response to the Russian speakers after he banned their language is if the don’t like it they can @ get the hell out of Ukraine” nice. Didn’t bother to mention the US withdrawing unilaterally from non-proliferation deal with the Iranians.
@@johnmccaffrey5942 Give one example of a major treaty/agreement between Ukraine and the Russian Federation that the Russian Federation has not broken, Libya, Syria, Al-Shabab, Yugoslavia and all other manor of wuddaboutisms you want to bring up have nothing to do with the current situation. You're just parroting pro-Putin propaganda.
He's talking utter nonsense. Ultra nationalistic forces in Russia are the sole cause of this war. Ukraine is fighting for its right to exist as an independent country.
@@robertstorey7476 Robert it already existed as an independent country. That was until 2014 when the Ukrainian government was overthrown in a US backed coup. Since then the neocons in Washington have controlled Ukraine. The Americans use it as a staging ground to destabilise Russia.
Peter Hitchens is a hero (on this issue). They are very few people who tell the truth about Russia/Ukraine as clearly and fearlessly as he does.
Heroic? Fearless? Really? What has anyone, here in civilisation, to really fear? That people might say harsh and unpleasant things about him. That he will be more popular with some than others. In his youth he was fearlessly convinced of the inevitable glorious victory of great Russia with Soviet branding. His mistake, he admits it, he now properly loathes international socialism as much as nternational socialism. Last I checked he was fearlessly applauding the revival of ( Orthodox) Christianity , traditional family values, etc etc in Russia. What are the terrible consequences that shall befall him if that idea turns out to be another crock of sxxt?
'Fearlessly'? Hitchens is hiding behind Christianity in order to make the easy decision that a people should always surrender.
@@cbarclay99 No, he just invoked Christianity to support his pro-peace position. His argument is considerably more involved than that.
He says it like it is.
Peter is the only guy who actually bothered to study the history , visit Ukraine and Russia, have been writing about it since 2014. I see all the armchair warriors wanting Ukraine to be whole as it should be but not giving a damn abt the Russian speaking Ukrainians in the East and crimea. Peter said it right. The U.S is laughing all the way to the bank. Eu suffers , Russia weakened while Ukrainians die. But no American death. Used the afghans in the 80s,now its the Ukrainians.
Why don’t Ukrainians who align with Russia, you know, move to Russia??
Most Russian-speaking Ukrainians have a Ukrainian identity. The areas that have fought the Russian invasion the hardest are all Russian-speaking. Cities where 95%+ of the population are Russian-speaking - Dnipro, Odesa, Kharkiv, Mariupol, Kryvih Rih (where Zelenskyy is from), Zaporizhzhia, etc., have populations that are 80-90% (or more) pro-Ukraine.
Granted, Crimea is different, as are parts (but not all) of Donbas. But it is an absurd wrong to state that most Russian-speaking Ukrainians have a Russian identity or are pro-Russian - it is simply false.
@@decekfrokfr3mdx Thank you, however; why were laws made to erase the Russian language and the orthodox church? When Europeans colonized Canada, they also made our original language illegal, plus our way of life, plus our way of prayer to creator. Our people still suffer today because of those laws. So why did Zelensky do it? Do you support the stupidity, the indignant act of power?
@@25abbafather There weren't any laws to erase the Russian language. Lies. If their language was really being 'erased', I can't imagine that 80-90%+ of Russian-speaking cities like Dnpiro, Odesa, Mariupol and Kharkiv would be pro-Ukrainian, and determinedly resisting the Russian invasion...After the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and sponsoring of separatists in Donbas, education was mandated in Ukraine to be through Ukrainian (the official state language). Quotas for Ukrainian and Russian language were introduced for publishing and broadcasting. You can debate the wrongs and rights of these policies, but they are not 'erasure' or event discrimination against Russian - merely a country trying to ensure the preeminence of its own language, with people able to speak whatever language they want socially.
The Russian-Ukrainian Orthodox Church only recent had some restrictions placed on it because many of its priests were found to be spying on behalf of Russia (many of the priests originate or were educated in Russia, and their loyalty lies there), and aiding them in their invasion of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church, theologically the same as the Russian-Ukrainian Orthodox Church but not politically aligned to Moscow, remains unrestricted. Bear in mind also that the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill (a former KGB agent) has openly endorsed Russia's invasion of Ukraine many times, and this is the official Church position.
@@decekfrokfr3mdx Thank you for that info, I will forward it on to others asking questions of the same sort as we explore your reply. If we may ask a few more questions, why does Ukraine want to be part of NATO, what do you benefit in doing so? Have you listened to John Mearsheimer on the conflicts within geopolitics - Nato/USA vs regime change in Russia? Is he wrong? On another note, a UA-camr by name of bald and bankrupt we watched walking through many places in Ukraine showed us how poor many are living there, many say it was better before 1991 or 1992, what happened? Why are so towns, villages, rural people and city people struggling in your country when it has been independent since collapse of Soviet Union? And one last question, why have so many Ukrainian men and women left the country rather than stay and fight or help? Why come to Canada, USA, and now try to learn English? Did these people vote, do they not care for their country? Thank you.
We need individuals and ALL governments on all sides to be truthful to their respective citizens about their reasons for starting and maintaining this war...but this will never happen!
Only one government started and is maintaining this war, Putin's government in Russia. Not sure why you are confused.
Victoria Nuland and Fiona Hill stared this war in 2014. But you don't want people to know that.
@@user-pf5xq3lq8i Fiona Hill started the war in Ukraine not Vladimir Putin? LOL! That's a new one. I give you points for creativity.
@@WilkinsMichael The war staarted in 2014 when Obama the US terrorist president got together with the Azov Nazis and started killing ethnic Russian Ukrainians.
@@WilkinsMichael Vi Nuland more than Fiona Hill, though Fiona is a CIA stooge as well.
16:50 that's nonsense actually. If you can refer to the fact that Russia deployed far fewer resources than Ukraine. And without western aid......you know what!
Nah they just expected to roll in, they have force superiority but still lost
@@maryanchabursky9148 Yeah we were basically watching them roll in on live cams, if we could do that, a bunch of anons... Well you know. They underestimated the Ukies, and I don't understand why.
The last war in Europe was against Serbia
There was no „war agaisnt Serbia” what you are refering is the Yugoslavia wars.
It was against bosnia, serbia got well deservedly fucked for being genocidal maniacs.
Of course they want to forget about the Yugoslav wars because NATO was the aggressor
Yes, and it was the aggressor against Serbia, including the bombing Belgrade - in Yugoslavia NATO waged war only against the Serbs not the other Yugoslavian populations so it was a war against Serbia @@ballshippin3809
"And Putin did nothing" - The most important comment made during the whole of this debate.
It's nice that they are speaking English. If Peter and Mary had given the same advice during WWII, America would have never entered the war to help a far off nation like Britain and they would all be speaking German at this talk. Well, let's be honest, they would not be having this talk because Ukraine and Russia would be part of the German Empire anyway. Is it only British democracy and British freedom that America should aid in times of war?
The USA are quite happy for Ukraine to fight until the the last Ukrainian soldier is standing. They are 10,000 kms away, hence zero risk to them, off-load arms and weaken Russia in numbers but not in resilience?
No, Ukrainians are happy to fight, the West either supports them in that or it doesn't
Actually the US is happy for the Ukranians to fight to the last Russian soldier and kick their pathetic assess out of a sovereign, democratic country.
people don't fight like the Ukrainians because they manipulated foreigners. They know what happened in the Chechen wars and in the Donbas. They are fighting for their country. The Russians have no clear idea why they are there.
If you think the USA is more committed to defeating this invasion than the people of Ukraine, you're as delusional as Putin.
@@evolassunglasses4673 it's funny to read comments like this being Ukrainian. 10 000 per weak is just your dream.
A bunch of people sitting on a moral high horse acting like they get to magically decide if Putin stops attacking or not. We all know begging and capitulation works every time vs bullies. It's a really good strategy I support it.
You are a sheep, aren’t you? As for these woeful inadequates, they are painfully unable to address the true history of Ukraine and Russia, particularly focussed on the last thirty years, which will inform you of the facts that these choose to avoid
Exactly. Those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it.
Mary Dejevsky and Peter Hitchens clearly understand the situation for what it is. If one does their research carefully they can also avoid being hoodwinked by mainstream western media outlets.
Tell that to the civilians who were bound and shot in the back of the head by Russian soldiers.
Hitchens is delusional
@@jamesmullins6681 You can tell them you're in favour of more of the same
@@tomo_xD you've been bambozzled! If Peter is not your cup of tea try:
UN Analysis-Jeffrey Sachs
Former German Chancellor-Angela Merkel
Professor of International Relations at University of Chicago-John Mearsheimer
Professor of International Relations at Harvard-University Stephan Walt
Former UN Weapons Inspector from Iraq War-Scott Ritter
Elon Musk
Henry Kissinger
Ret Col Douglas Macgregor
Former MIT Professor and Peace advocate- Naom Chomsky
Pope Francis
Former Ambassador to Russia and Current- CIA Director Bill Burns
Former Senator-Richard H Black
Former Congress Woman-Tulsi Gabbard
Congress Woman-Pramila Jayapal
Congressman-Kevin McCarthy
Former World Is One News Anchor- Palki Sharma
Roger Waters of Pink Floyd
Mikhail Gorbachev (deceased)
Propaganda. Just like the kids in Syria who they US lied about being gassed.
The picture is too dim and the volume is too small
Peace, Peace and Peace instead of funding the war machine in the US please!
Too many still do not think that war is a tragedy - especially if it is far away. We have always loved to have an "Evil" to transform our own sub- conscious evil into!
In this case, it is clearly Putin who is 'evil'. Would you choose to be a client state of the Kremlin?
If you capitulate to Tyrants they will pursue war. We saw this from 2014.
@@saattlebrutaz Same old "choir" -But history NEVER repeat itself! WHY is this war we will have to ask ourself ?
How do wee proceed from that.
We can think all we want, but the reality is, most of us cannot go up against Russia or the United States. We don't have that kind of army.
@@alvodin6197 But our thoughts are the important thing - for in that is the will to change and we make the impact on each other through that.
Peter and Mary: logical and peaceable arguments, well put together and backed up by historical analysis.
Svetlana: Emotional arguments void of any realistic conversation and clouded by her own family’s experience. There is no chance, whatever the outcome, that Crimea returns to being Ukrainian.
Edward: some reasonable statements and a good attempt to rebuttal against Peter, however, his arguments were generally weak or incorrect.
Buy some rope
I don’t get it ?
@@benjaminjames5157 I can see that you don't get a lot of things.
Peter and Mary would have opposed American aid to Britain during WWII and had Britain sue for peace with the Nazis. Their stance is unjustifiable historically or practically.
@@caindarin9665 Actually Peter has said on film that he believes that Winston Churchill standing up to Hitler was the right thing to do and he recognises the criticality of American aid to the British empire, in his interview at the Edinburgh book festival when talking about his book "the phony victory". Video of this is on UA-cam. It sounds like you have fallen for what he describes as "Munich syndrome" where you think this is 1939, and that Putin is Hitler. Well, the Russian Federation is not the 3rd Reich and Putin is not Hitler. The Nazi ideology and MO was completely different in every way to that of the Russian one today. This is not excusing Putin and the Rfed, but it is an important distinction.
As a working class fighting age male. My reason is self preservation.
@@Andras_Schiff yes, thanks for completely ignoring the Ukrainian voice. Bravo.
Let the people with the most money and property to lose take the brunt on the front line.
@@danielj2653 meh no one can escape hearing the Ukrainian voice begmanding and trying to false flag war crimes and radiological events…
Same here, any pro war advocate must first serve on the front line. I'd they survive intact then they can take a platform to debate the topic. I am sure there are plenty if ukranians who would rather end the war and survive come what may with their families.
@@George-nv1ri you guys are exactly like anarchists. You believe in this fictional utopia and get angry that others don't want to join you there. Nobody "wants" war. But the reason anyone with common sense is saying Ukraine must win, is because Russia clearly can not be peacefully negotiated with - Russia has initiated violence on 4 separate occasions now, not to mention its attempts in other countries before that. First with Crimea - Russia started, and then there was peace. Then the Donbas, Russia funnelled in their troops, and then stopped. Then with Luhansk. And then after attempting a ceasefire for a year or two while Ukraine was fighting separatists in these two regions, Russia attacked a fourth time...only this time it tried to invade all of Ukraine.
Peace doesn't work. At some point you have to realize that, get it through your head. Or else you look as silly as the countries in Western Europe that continually tried to make peace with Hitler as his armies conquered one country after the other. The reason people are pro war is because that is the only way to stop Putin. And as for your "logic" it is as bad as the people who argue you can't criticize someone unless you have their exact same occupation. Yes you can, and believe it or not people can support the war in other ways (funding to aid civilians, provide weaponry and training).
Hitchens should have pushed the Bandera issue more. A very good debate, all-in-all. We need more of this. There's far too little debate in Britain and the west on this extremely important issue.
This militant ultra-nationalism so prevalent in Ukraine is nothing to be proud of. It's deeply rooted in antisemitism and a disdain for ethnic Russians. How can Ukrainians like Svetlana not realise the absurdity of saying "of course we want peace" but be so callously proud towards one of the root causes sustaining the conflict?
Is Bandera more controversial than Putin who is hero for millions of Russians?
@@xxvxxv5588 I suspect historical illiteracy, such as the kind you proudly display, is the main reason debate over this issue is at such a low level.
@@jordanjohnanderson would you deny that Putin is more xenophobic towards Ukrainians than Bandera was towards Russians?
@@xxvxxv5588 Yes, I would. Emphatically. Of course, Putin isn't ''xenophobic'' towards Ukrainians at all. Like all Great Russian Chauvinists, he likely considers Ukrainians to be recalcitrant Russians. To compare him to Bandera is ahistorical.
I love how Edward and people like him completely ignore the invalidity of NATO. Hitchens summed it up brilliantly on the Estonian NATO question: "It's like having an alliance against Austria-Hungary Empire".
Let me guess: you don't live in Europe, certainly not in Eastern Europe. Lest you be spouting this BS. Hitchens is an idiot and nearly every Estonian knows exactly why they are glad to be in NATO, as does nearly every Slovak, Pole, Romanian etc. and why now nearly ever Swede and Finn desires the same protection.
@@matejluptak Then elucidate exactly why they are glad to be in NATO. Let's see if your reasoning conforms to reality.
@@Liam-yr4uf Why Sweden and Finland want to join NATO? And why I as a Slovak am beyond glad to be in NATO along with the majority of Slovaks, Czechs, Estonians etc.? I am not sure what isn't clear to you about it.
The reasons why we want to be in NATO are pretty clearly expressed by the Finns and Swedes who are applying for membership. You can read their statements if you require some clarification.
If you need a further hint: who do you think feels more secure that they won't be invaded, occupied and annexed by Russia, the Moldovans or the Romanians?
there is a difference between being wise and eloquent and PH is perfect example of that.
@@matejluptak So you're glad to be a part of NATO because of Russian imperialism? A non-existant threat. Tell me, between 1991 and 2004 (the year when Slovakia joined NATO), was there ever an indication or direct threat from Russia that they would invade Slovakia or the Baltics? NATO was established to contain the spread of Soviet communism post-ww2. This ideology completely collapsed in 1991. Needless anxiety by Europeans towards modern Russia is devised completely by American interests.
Can you not see how maintaining an alliance (implying that there's an adversary to ally against) along with its continued Eastward expansion (despite agreements not to) might make Russians feel anxious, excluded, and insulted that their security interests have been completely ignored? George Kennan, the architect of Soviet containment I'm Europe, was clear in claiming that this was a big mistake. While I condemn unequivocally the invasion of Ukraine, it's easy to see how preventable this conflict was without NATO.
The call for peace is understandable but it should also be remembered what is driving in the opposite direction. Peace is the greatest threat to our socio-economic system which is built on cooperative exploitation, backed by militarisation. That is why people working for peace and those exposing corrupt, unethical practices, e.g., Julian Assange et al, are marginalised or removed.
Decent point
Peter makes an excellent point; what was the motivation behind western powers; (namely the EU and the United States) in subjecting the Ukraine to policies, which have destabilised the country, and ultimately the region.
Not enough is known about the Association Agreement bestowed on Ukraine by the EU. Especially the small print on military cooperation. Not enough is known about the CIA’s involvement in that country before the revolution.
The two men who’s analysis I believe is the most
enlightening on this issue are; the late Stephen F. Cohen and John J Mearsheimer. Both have written excellent books joining the dots for all to see.
This is a huge geopolitical struggle. Ukraine is what Halford Mackinder referred to as the Heartland. Mackinder a late Victorian imperialist, and the pioneer of geopolitical theory postulated; “whoever rules East Europe commands the Heartland; whoever rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; whoever rules the World-Island commands the World.”
American foreign policy hasn’t much evolved from late nineteenth century British imperial thinking.
The Ukrainians for all they hope and wish for are actually irrelevant. Sad but true, they are a pawn on what Zbigniew Brzezinski referred to as the grand chessboard.
What "US and EU policies" destabilized Ukraine and/or "the region"? Specifically? What?
@@SocialDemocrat1789 Have you heard about the American involvement into the revolution that led to ousting the then elected president, Victor Yanukovich?
I'm quoting exerpts from the transcript of Nuland's leaked conversation that you can find at bbc, article "Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call", appeared on 7 February 2014:
"Nuland: Good. I don't think Klitsch should go into the government. I don't think it's necessary, I don't think it's a good idea.
Pyatt: Yeah. I guess... in terms of him not going into the government, just let him stay out and do his political homework and stuff."
So, Nuland, the representative of an external force "contemplates" about how the Ukrainian government should be organized. Then, Pyatt answers what "Klitch" should be allowed to do by them (presumably American foreign policymakers)
Jonathan Marcus writes about the conversation in 2014:
"An intriguing insight into the foreign policy process with work going on at a number of levels: Various officials attempting to marshal the Ukrainian opposition; efforts to get the UN to play an active role in bolstering a deal; and (as you can see below) the big guns waiting in the wings - US Vice-President Joe Biden clearly being lined up to give private words of encouragement at the appropriate moment."
so, current president Biden was clearly involved into the matter back in 2014, when he was vice-president.
"Nuland: So on that piece Geoff, when I wrote the note [US vice-president's national security adviser Jake] Sullivan's come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying you need [US Vice-President Joe] Biden and I said probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick. So Biden's willing."
So, the USA's foreign policymakers were actively coordinated who should hold what position in Ukraine.
The US was clearly meddling into Ukrainian affairs, then EU member-states brokered the Minsk agreement, which was signed by Ukraine in order to achieve peace and which obliged Ukraine to not have military partnership with western powers (but 10 000 Ukrainian soldiers were trained by the US) and Donetsk and Luhansk were to receive autonomous status, which was also broken by Ukraine. Then, a civil war was fought between the Russian minority (backed by Russia) and the Ukrainian state.
@@LajosArpad85 nice copy & paste of long debunked talking points, full of half-truths and mischaracterizations.
Yanukovych was impeached by the parliament in a unamimous vote. He was a Russian agent, and felt to Moscow soon after his impeachment.
The Maidan Revolution was a popular uprising (7 million people turned out for it) against Yanukovych's corruption and "Dictatorship Laws" which he passed in order to try and make himself a mini-Putin.
@@SocialDemocrat1789 you know, when I quote someone, I copy & paste. Do you quote others in a different manner? Do you edit the source before quoting?
As about Nuland's conversation that was leaked being debunked, the transcript was quoted from the bbc, a pro-Ukrainian media product. So, who should I believe: the bbc, or some random nameless troll on UA-cam? The decision is not difficult.
@@SocialDemocrat1789 Backing the 2014 Maidan coup, for one thing. In the longer term, having pressed for years to have Ukraine enter NATO.
The level of western-centrism and patronising of former eastern bloc nations from pro panelists is astonishing. Case in point Peter Hitchens stating that "NATO expansion has done nothing but harm". As someone living next to Russia, and whose country was occupied and exploited by it for the past 200 years, I can tell mr. Hitchens what good NATO "expansion" did. It provided safety, freedom and allowed for peaceful growth and economic prosperity for +100 million people. But it is obvious that for Hitchens and Dajevsky it doesn't matter what some Ukrainians, Poles or Lithuanians think, and already they are all happy to barter with Ukrainian land and lives with the aggressor, over the heads of Ukrainians.
The funny thing is that they simply do not understand that if NATO had not accepted the countries of the former Warsaw Pact into NATO, then Russia would still have received a military bloc on its borders, but this time led by Poland.
Hitchens would happily throw Ukraine and the rest of Eastern Europe under the bus to appease Putin!
Hitchens = Sensible man.
Hitchens=Comfortable Man.
@@SG-wi9kd If he'd spent more time in Russia he'd be more opposed to Putin.
@@SG-wi9kd Should i count you countries in last 30 years your government has invaded, and number of families destroyed. It is nice to talk the talk, you should walk the walk. morally you are all pygmies. All best from Serbia
@@SG-wi9kd 14,000 dead BEFORE the invasion. This has been going on for 8 bloody years. The Dombas has been shelled by the ruthless Azov for years. The burning alive of Russian civilians at ODESSA destroyed Ukraine. We need negotiations. Let the oppressed Russian minority brake free.
@@SG-wi9kd Peter H. and Tucker Carlson do have skin in the game in the sense that they earn money from provoking the consensus among the side and alliances of the victim. This increases their chances of being showcased (as the West is a liberal democracy and debates are encouraged, even on television and social media, at least since Gore Vidal versus William Buckley). Unfortunately this makes Peter H. and Tucker C. so powerful.
Merry and Peter are voice of reason. I’m afraid if war continues Ukraine will not only has twisted arm but two broken legs when supplies go dry
Their arguments are capitulation, reward the aggressor. Do your history. Russia need to leave all Ukrainian territory
Bizarrly I can see alot of the Eastern European states realineing with Russia in the long run for cheap energy.
@@alg7115 delusion. I'm Lithuanian not a single one eastern European state will ever side with Russia, Russia is our eternal nemesis. It's like for Jews siding with Nazi Germany over cheap resources.
@@Anthrax6989 I didn't say all. States like Bulgaria, romania, Moldova. Check Republic defiantly might in long run.
@@alg7115 I’d say Germany and Austria. Poland started new pipeline from Norway and lots of lpg from USA and will support other Eastern countries.
While I do understand and support the arguments for self-determination presented by the third speaker, I believe there were ways to achieve it that would not spark a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. For example, in what way joining NATO contributes towards self-determination of Ukraine, when it is known that is the US that controls 95% of NATO forces? I am just trying to be as honest as possible when analysing this situation.
Simple. Because if Ukraine was in NATO, Russia would be too afraid to attack it. And it could focus on building its economy and culture.
It's called alliances. It doesn't matter which country has more weight in a union or invests more. You decide to join an alliance with countries you believe are your allies and can serve to protect you, as alliances (see also the alliances during World War II: some countries had more weight, others less; this will always be the case).
@@oreganoregan5947 the same culture Ukraine was seeking to delete or destroy. This war has so many reasons to it.
@@felipe-vibor Yes, deleting the culture of autocracies.
Edward Lucas talks like propagandist unlike his opponents
It's always time to make peace in Ukraine!
All you have to do is ask Mr Putin is to give up his pointless war of aggression and see what happens next!
Thank you for sharing this
In his opening points, Peter Hitchens was addressing the wrong question. No matter if you are christian or not, any sane person don't like wars. But this is not the issue here. The issue is Putin's imperialist ideas. Ukraine will prevail.
he is still afraid of his brother 🙂
You do not know what it is you're talking about.
of course the only pertinent question is what Lucas would think about China installing military bases in Mexico, or in the Scottish Borders for that matter after an Indie Ref II
If there were already military bases on their border then acting like another military base on their border is an unacceptable threat would be stupid and definitely an excuse to pursue a different agenda from the one being promoted.
@@nougat4416 why stupid?
@@nougat4416 sorry, why is it 'stupid' for Russian people not to want the most powerful military machine in history, an overt enemy of Russia, massing military assets all along their 1500 mile border with Ukraine and effectiovely on top of their Caspian oil basin? do please enlighten us beyond your virtiol.
@@nougat4416 again, why stupid?
@@nougat4416 do you think Gaddafi was wise to trust Blair? any insights on that to amuse us with?
Svitlana seems happy to go into Nuclear war which scares me
Most Ukrainians are like that. They're lunatics.
Putin is the one threatening Nuclear weapons. If you allow him to do this, you basically allow anyone with nukes to do whatever they want.
i bet she has few swastikas tattooed
@Throughthe lookingglass He should ware those pink glasses like you i guess
@Throughthe lookingglass No its not Ivan it is Pedja it is written in my nick, nice to meet you Imperialistic Pinki.
It is impossible to know what has been going on in Ukraine
Cities reduced to rubble visible from space….that gives you a CLUE dontcha think? Apartment buildings flattened by Russian artillery? Hundreds of shallow graves? Mile long tank columns crossing international borders? You expect us not to notice? We would need to drink twice as much vodka as you and be five times more stupid. Your gopnik rapists and murderers are dying like flies …even Russians are starting to notice. Perhaps you should double down and try crossing a NATO border. Watch what happens Ivan.
A massive Russian invasion. Now that wasn't that hard was it.
@@WilkinsMichael No, it is actually very hard indeed for these people. The G.I.s who liberated Buchenwald took the people from the town to look at the concentration camp. Took them at gunpoint. MADE them see what was done in the name of their ( national) socialism. Some of those who saw hanged themselves soon after.
@@actionflower6706 I'm sure people don't know the every detail of the war but I'm pretty sure they know a war is taking place and bad things are happening. Just a hunch.
Not at the minute, but independent reporters have been in there since at least 2014, but what they have to say doesn't fit NATO's narrative so they didn't get printed in the newspapers.
This debate is almost a year too late.
A brutal Russian dictator invaded a neighboring sovereign country and now wants to negotiate how much land he can keep.
Easy answer - none
Easy answer for a simple mind.
@@nicholasfry4253
A bit too complicated for you Dimitry?
It's the same answer the allies gave Hitler and
Tojo and Mussolini in WWll.
Negotiations picked up speed in Japan after Hiroshima and Nagasaki ☺
The fascists never learn
@@rickegarner8111 And Franco? Oh wait there were plenty of fascist countries after WW2 and "the allies" supported them for a long time.
Next time you bring up a point that is not related to the topic you should really research it before you make yourself look like the absolute moron that you are.
Nicholas Fry was too generous
@@h____hchump8941
Is that you Vlad? You still in Moscow?
Fun fact:
Trump's KGB code name is Comrade Bonespurs 😂
Bet you never thought there'd be so many dead Russians in their futile attempt trying to take over Europe, kill children and rape women and destroy democracy.
How's the "special operation" going? I haven't seen any recent pictures of the Moskva. Have you?
Putin's days are numbered. Too bad, the dictator gig was really working for him.
Maybe the Russians should negotiate how much Russian territory they're willing to give to Ukraine 🇺🇦
Thanks for holding this debate. MDejevsky 10:00 made the point that “the talks (peace talks)… were halted apparently with the encouragement…from… Ukraine’s Western backers”. This is (if true) the West contributing to Ukraine at the strategic level which is far above and different from simply providing military aid etc. All this took place a few months ago now. What other strategic advice has the West given to Ukraine? We may not be involved directly in the fight but our strategic performance is on show.
Uncle Sam is ready to fight to the blood of the last Ukrainian for another debacle and quagmire the American taxpayer cannot support.
more than advice, we literally imposed a new Ukranian President and his team in 2014
Joe Biden American Military Industrial Weapons Complex Hegemon SCREAMING EAGLES won the War for Ukraine !
@@turquoiseowl
Youve definitely made that up :)
@@nougat4416 do you say that with knowledge of the leaked Nuland/Pyatt Feb 2014 phone call, or without?
Hitchens is too switched on for the rest of those midwits, all I took from this is “Hans…. Are we are the baddies?” 😅
Hitchens is an entertaining personality but was totally trounced by Mr Lucas here. Good debate, anyway.
Hitchens is a charlatan with an agenda-and hardly worthy of a public platform on most issues, including this one.
At least he bothered to prepare.
@Dominik Holewinski Yes, I also thought she did very well.
You do know that the regime that the "Are we the baddies" soldiers referred to was invading other countries, whilst Ukraine is the country being invaded, right? Besides, are you a fan of heads of government posing as proud corrupt mafia organisation leaders and presenting an image and PR message of this kind to its own people and the world (almost akin to what could be seen on the "Are we the baddies" hats)?
As a Ukrainian I must say this is like having children explain why ice cream should be your main source of nutrition. They completely lack the experience and knowledge to understand why what they are saying is silly.
Frankly it is insulting to think you want to end the war more than we do.
well said. Thank you
Your peace depends of the West, not you. The future's history, will tell us that Ukraine was ground of battlefield West vs Russia.
Feel sorry for the common Ukrainian....
@Desoti Cambinza what is the point of what you are saying? "You are weaker loser, nobody cares about you, nobody will care about you in the future" toxic for no reason. Buy some rope and improve the planet.
You don't end war by continuing it, that's the basic point - its not an insult its common sense. What vast knowledge of history and politics do you possesses that renders the panellists children?
@@sebastianbooth5659 You end the war by winning it. Aggressors must suffer. That is how learning works.
Yes it is time to make peace just after Russia has withdrawn from Ukrain.
'War Bad 'as Winston Churchill never said, a man who never missed the opportunity to send poor people to their deaths in order to defend his friends.
Yeah should've let the Nazis keep most of Europe
Churchill was a goddamn monster and warmonger. I will even be able to defend my argument that he was not only as bad, bot actually worse than Adolf Hitler
Indeed, the butcher of Britain was Churchill
Also contributed to the starvation of Indian during ww2……. You know, a hero …… funny how they don’t mention that
@@alexplummer6397 yep and murdered 100k refugees in dresden, and ran on a racist campaign post war what a guy
The comments are quite depressing. Freedom is not free. Writing from Dillon Montana. The son of a WWII veteran who fought Adolf Hitler. Great Britain appeased Hitler. One of the lowest points in history. From the comfort of safety, Peter Hitchens opposes Ukraine. I don’t think Christopher would agree.
Vince Cable in the audiences area ?
What strange bedfellows, Kissinger & Chompsky, Peter Hitchens & me.. 😑
Don't forget Majorie Taylor Greene and Tucker Carlson
Yeah.. (i mean they get outta that bed pretty quickly after.. but hey they visit, which is more than a lot of the so called left do these days .. even tokenistically!) *yeesh*
Dream team
Ukraine is being destroyed in the name of Corporate profits & US hegemony. Peace talks are needed to end the war. The US has no interest in that because weapon & energy companies are making a killing, literally. That's what is dangerous and certainly not good for Ukraine.. ! (The Ukrainian voice you are probably hearing is the one amplified by our media.. obviously..)
Ukrainians aren't a homogenous group that all think what the US wants, we only hear the voices that Capital needs us to hear such that we support the profiteering under the guise of 'protecting democracy'.
And even if all Ukrainians did think that, it still isn't good for Ukraine for the US & Russia to fight each other in their country, destroying it in the process & burning horrific amounts of fossil fuels while we do it.. AND creating an energy profits emergency everywhere (good for capital though)
All this is the OPPOSITE of what humans need to be doing right now.. even if this WAS about Ukrainian democracy & the goodwill of the US, it STILL isn't good enough to justify risking nuclear apocalypse AND destroying our chances at climate cooperation accross the globe.
Imo
The strange thing is everything did they criticize about Russia as far as media control, minority rights corruption, the right to protest the war, extremism; Ukraine has all of it and at least And in some cases much more than Russia.
Excellent point. Luckily the EU sets high standards for such things in prospective member states, and it has many programs to help correcting these problems. So I completely agree with you: The sooner the Ukrainians can boot the invading forces from the 5 occupied / partially occupied oblasts the better, so they can begin the heavy work of fixing said problems and becoming members of the EU. Becoming subservient to Russia again would disastrously keep it in the same old sphere of corruption, repression and kleptocracy.
@@karsten11553 One of the difficulties with "fixing the problems" of corruption in any country is- all those in charge are doing rather well the way things are? Why would the people in power give up this gravy train? If you read the PANDORA PAPERS, you know Zelenskyy is in deep too. The EU will have to set a low bar for Ukraine.
Then you have to get investors to enter Ukraine in the private sphere. Ask yourself why they have not since 2014?
And make no mistake, Ukraine will be subservient to the EU, with the debt it now carries, it has no choice. And you know how the EU plays, we see this with Poland and HUNGARY, if you don't tow the line on Immigration Trans rights Global warning etc, the Eu withhold funds which is intended to make the govt fall and replaced by a more agreeable govt.
So Ukraine is trading one dominating rule for another, the EU may be preferable but its not without its baggage.
@@59Gretsch I guess it will be up to the Ukrainians who they prefer, then. My guess is: the ones who hasn't invaded their country and murdered their cititizens. European bureacracy is probably the lesser evil. And yes, as Hungary has been moving in a less democratic direction, it is only natural that the EU puts pressure on the Orban government to strengthen their democratic institutions, but I guess that would seem oppressive to a president who is more or less aligned with the Dwarf in the Kremlin.
@@karsten11553 I agree, this is for Ukraine to decide. Not long after the invasion happened Ukraine and Russian negotiators met in Turkey and had a deal worked out until (it is reported) Boris Johnson scuttled the deal with assurances Ukraine would win by military action and NOT to negotiate. 200K lives later I and many are worried for Ukraine ever getting the victory they were promised. Anyway, part of that agreement was that RU had no objection to them joining the EU.
I noticed you did this thing where -People voting for the person they want as leader- is not democracy, such as the landslide victory in Hungary. This is what I was referring to- in order to be a "real democracy" you must bend to social issues the EU keeps evolving on.
We see this all the time where words have no meaning. The essence of democracy is that the will of the people are reflected in govt. For example, Putin may be a lot of things but it sounds silly when my Ukraine friends say two opposing thing 1. Putin is a dictator 2. We hate Russians because they overwhelmingly like and support Putin.
Russia is a federation of wildly diverse regions and people. It would be very difficult to both rig-elections, fool Western pollsters who find Putin is very popular and no real anti-putin demonstrations out in these federations.
All across the work even dictators face "Arab Springs" Hungarian uprisings and all sorts of people massing in protest. Putin, I think is more of a democratically elected Autocrat.
Mary Dejevsky made an observation I noticed when recently corresponding with my MP, and it's that they seem to be representing Ukrainians more than us. Many times my MP has ignored very serious concerns I have. Yet, in a recent reply, he waxed lyrical about Ukraine, a place I am 99.9% sure he's never been to, nor had much interest in prior to February 2022. He also had the cheek to say any concerns I have about my life or the future of this country is not important because people are suffering in Ukraine.
Even though he, and people like Edward Lucas (the latter I think genuinely well meaning but misguided) speak of democracy, agency, rule of law, prosperity, independence, freedom of speech, and representation, yet those very same attributes they praise Ukraine for fighting in defence of, are fast disappearing and been slowly but surely being abolished here by our almost unanimous political class. They love grandstanding on the world stage, whilst our own country is falling to pieces.
My MP, on the occasion he does reply, usually peddles the party propaganda line. If I reply back and challenge it, he just ignores me. So much for representation. These chancers know there isn't any electable opposition. Britain is a bad joke, especially if you're at the working class end of the spectrum.
I smell a troll.
@@Scaleyback317 , probably from yourself.
@@SagaciousFrank Yes, of course!
How strange. The lady fro. Ukraine seems in no hurry for peace. People are dying and freezing but she still seems to think its OK. Die for your country what nonsense.
Wheeling on a Ukrainian voice just to basically puppet a ra-ra pro Ukranian stance feels a bit iffy. While we all like to hear nice things, really there was no substance to Svitlana's points. Didn't fit with the other 3 speakers making well considered historical and geopolitical points IMO. If she could have weaved in the same kind of acumen as Peter, Edward and Mary with a 'boots on the ground' Ukrainian perspective she may have convinced me, unfortunately I fear this actually weakens the opposition positive.
Big thank you to Svitlana and Edward for presenting and defending facts and logic.
The idea that Russia doesn't pose a greater threat is concerning. Finland didn't order over 60 F-35's from the US due to a threat from *NATO.* It was because of the threat from Russia.
Well done on rebutting the argument that NATO is a threat to Finland, even if nobody anywhere has argued that.
It's too quiet. I am watching on a rubbish tablet, but every other video from every random content creator is audible, this is not.
You invited a Ukrainian but why not a Russian speaking Ukrainian from the East and from the Donbas, they may have a slightly different view point. Does this woman speak for all Ukrainians? I don't think so.
This war is particularly strange because it is difficult to understand why it is happening at all. What do the Russians hope to gain by this action? Subjugating a country the size of Ukraine even if they had been successful on the battlefield would have been all but impossible and certainly not worth the pain in any terms. Surely it has been shown time and time again that unless a large majority of the common people accept being occupied or positively want to be so it ain't happening. The Germans were already having ever more amounts of grief keeping northern France under control before D-day. The Japanese had all kinds of grief with the Philopean Resistance which became stronger and more murderous with every day the Japanese stayed there. Neither the powers of the USA, The Soviet Union nor the British Empire managed to keep Afghanistan under profitable control and that was populated by little more than sheep herders armed with not a lot.
The British Empire only managed to hold profitable control of large parts of its empire by soliciting the assistance of local leaders using bribery, subversion, and corruption, taking control of virtually uninhabited areas, or sending in British Colonists in their many thousands. Even then much of the British Empire soon started to cost more than it yielded, which is why the British systematically left the scene to let the locals fight it out among themselves or slaughter each other in their millions.
Empire using even a modicum of force worked none too well 200 years ago, and that sort of thing simply won't work at all these days. What was Putin planning on doing? Lining up 100 locals every time a Russian soldier got it in the arse?
However, if Putin just wanted to make a point then it would seem that his point is now made. If Zelensky needed to make a point, it would seem that his point is also made. Therefore there would seem to be absolutely no point in not calling it a day ASAP.
Subjugating all of Ukraine wouldn't work. Making a land bridge to Crimea and protecting ethnic Russians in the eastern region while making sure Ukraine never joins nato. It's a complex situation.
It's a perfectly logical war if you have imperial ambitions.
"Philopean"??
"The British Empire only managed to hold profitable control of large parts of its empire by soliciting the assistance of local leaders using bribery, subversion, and corruption, taking control of virtually uninhabited areas, ..." There were no "virtually uninhabited areas" of the world with the exception of the Arctic wastes and extreme deserts, and why would the British (or the indigenous peoples) want them anyway?
"... by soliciting the assistance of local leaders using bribery, subversion, and corruption, ..." "Subversion" here is a meaningless word, and while there may have been some corruption within the vast British Empire, it paled into insignificance compared with the rampant corruption of local officials. This is why the British were able to control large parts of the Earth, because most of the inhabitants actually preferred British law-based rule over the random, tyrannical rule by their own aristocracies. If this were not so, it would have been impossible for the British or any other European country to have ruled over a massive territory like India. To suggest that the Indian people were incapable of throwing out the British if they had really wanted to is tantamount to racism. During the Indian Mutiny, for example, massive sections of the population supported the British. By the mid-20th century, most Indians had come to believe that they could rule themselves, and so it proved.
@@dvforever why Russia needs more land?
It is the biggest country in the world
Maybe an unpopular opinion:
War is horrific and should be avoided at all costs. Best way to avoid war is to prepare for war. Best way to prepare for war is to built weapons of war and train to use them. There are people who always benefit financially from manufacturing weapons, and those who sell and supply them, but ultimately a country benefits more from peace. To me this is a small price to pay. There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
Russia is ruled by an evil, violent Mafia who abuses and lies endlessly. The western rulers aren't that bad, but there are no angels here either. There are those among every society who neither care or worry about their fellow man, and it is an unfortunate fact, that those people often are the most aggressive and ruthless, and push themselves to the positions of power and influence, no matter the time and place in history.
I understand the both sides of the arguments, but ultimately the problem is the Sin of man. It is the Sin inside all of us that causes evil things. We collectively choose the bad over good. You want good in the world? Listen and learn of yourself. Clean the bad from yourself. There would be no need for weapons or governments, if men were angels. The only way people become angels, is to listen to our Savior Jesus Christ, but people do not want to be good in the eyes of God, so here we are.
John 14:6 "Jesus said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me"
When Jesus said that, he was declaring that religion is not the way, he was the way, only his teachings, not Christianity.
@@25abbafather Not his "teachings", but him. Christianity is little Christs; meaning those who accept the truth and the savior.
That's it! Britain should set up an alliance against the Austro-Hungarian Empire!
Dear friends from west. It is nice to talk the talk, you should walk the walk. morally you are all pygmies. All best from Serbia
Peace will come when the Europeans want it.
Really
Only when they grow a spine and tell the USA where to go. Spoiler: this won't happen any time soon.
@@jenniferlawrence2701 True. But I live in hope. The Germans may insist on it, since the sanctions are destroying their country.
@@robertaspindale2531 The cynic in me suspects that might be a large part of the attraction of this war for the British and American governments (wrecking Germany).
@@robertaspindale2531 Annalena Baerbock, the foreign minister of Germany pledged to help Ukraine as long as it takes.
I like how westoids have Ukrainian people coming over in these discussions and never Russian, so representative and thoughtful
Btw, the shift in public opinion in Russia is so radical that you will feel this in generations to come.
Entitled schmuck
@@vaultsjan thanks for the laughs, this is the first time I've ever been called entitled in my life
@@ИльясГаллиулин-ы4к The time where Russians get to speak for Ukrainians is over.
@Jacob B Nah, we have a runaway here, still admires imperialist russia and putin. just do not want to get shot at himself. Ideas do not die as easily as people.
@@SocialDemocrat1789 the time when an american gets to speak for the world is at an end.
Why isn’t the Ukrainian women on the front line?
@Throughthe lookingglass well she demands the fighting carries on and we continue to give money and weapons from her safe life in the West. Walk the walk is what I’m saying.
@@fujohnson8667 Her strategy is to talk the talk and walk the dog.
@Throughthe lookingglass if she is so much against peace, she could fight herself rather than sending others to the frontline.
@Throughthe lookingglass No if history has taught us anything it’s that the people wanting to start or prolong a war should be the ones fighting it. Might knock them off their moral high ground.
@Throughthe lookingglass there was a chance for peace but the British PM Johnson and Biden told Ukraine it wasn’t to make peace under any circumstances. Ukraine is being used by the Americans.
Negotiations with a ruthless liar ? Only fools can believe that this can lead to a permanent sustainable outcome.
Agreed, though that doesnt give much hope with anyone making agreements with the West.
I'm listening to this from Canada on Feb. 1, 2023, thank you for sharing to the public. Svitlana Morenets and Edward Lucus might gather some geopolitical insight if they listen to a top international relations political scholar who belongs to the realist school of thought. Here in Canada, our education system informs us on world issues and the history of wars, and the fact, millions of immigrants that arrive here on our shores are running away from speaking truths and fighting for their homes. Understanding geopolitical reality is highly required in order to maintain peace in our world. If you can grasp an intellectual understanding of realism in the powers of geopolitics, then one may respect reality. Professor John Mearsheimer is the intellect which provides us with that wisdom. Believe me, he is outstanding.
Mearsheimer is an old moron who deliberately ignores the facts contradicting his narrative about how the "West" frightened Russia forcing it to attack another country.
Like the revanchist views of Putin and his hatred of Ukraine. Or the fact that Ukraine on its way to NATO has encountered the coalition of member countries that decisively blocked its advance in 2008. Or the fact that from 2014 the entrance of Ukraine to NATO is fundamentally impossible.
Professor Mearshimer is great speaker I would add Jeffry Sachs who was deeply involved in economic in former USSR.
You should look into the Social Constructivist school of IR as Constructivism is diametrically opposed to Realism as Realism negatives the influence of idea and ideology and focuses exclusively on the power of political actors. If you look at this conflict through the SC school of thought you would see that Putin is not invading Ukraine due to security concerns they have nuclear weapons which guarantees their sovereignty. Russia is invading as Putin believes that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest disaster of the 20th century and he seeks to rebuild it or at the very least absorb Belarus and Ukraine.
@@zacharypereira1450 absolutely not true, I disliked Putin since 1999 you know why? Because of his super pro western orientation, supporting Bush in Afghanistan, withdrawal of two military bases from Vietnam and Cuba, he even visited Bushes ranch and looked like their little partner. He even wanted to become NATO member, but what then? He was rejected in the same time Bush invited Ukraine and Georgia in NATO and withdrew from agreement about anti missiles in Europe. In 2014 USA supported coup in Ukraine, Putin understood that this is red line and if he does not take Crimea there will be NATO base in future, in that period he easily could capture half of Ukraine without big opposition from local people whole east of Ukraine would support his troops mainly. But he stoped thinking that he will find agreement with West and Ukraine based on Minsk agreement but in vain. That is why Putin is only apparent imperialist in reality he just defends because since 1992 western expansion to the east is absolutely obvious including military expansion. Just remember George Kennan words.
@@ruslankbr5243 So one can be an imperialist in Eastern Europe while trying to accomodate the US and the Western Europe. The logic would be that if Russia accomodates the US and Western Europe then both Western Europe and the US will give Russia free reign in Eastern Europe. The problem with this thinking is that it creates a hierarchy of states and prioritizes some countries at the expense of others. Why should US Ukraine, US Baltics and US Poland relations run through Russia? If Russia wants to move nuclears to Belgorod in retaliation for stronger Ukraine West relations that is Russia's business but Russia cannot expand its borders by force.
What causes a war is ineffective communication - basically - when a collective entity decides or is not prepared to see the other collective personae point of view!
In my opinion Russia and the Russian people (Putin or no Putin ) must be considered in a detached manner and in an un impulsive way but for the debate to be conducted in a contextual and comprehensive manner we do need to be objective .
agree. Hello from Moscow!
I think objectively the Russian viewpoint was understood but rejected. They wanted to exert dominance over their old sphere of influence and the people living in it did not want that and they had help so they could say no. Russia couldn't accept this and escalated to violence.
Ukrainians are brothers
And...?
@@scottbuchanan9426 they're our brothers. Really, we're all brothers and sisters, but my point is that they aren't the people "all the way over there." They're British, American, German, Polish...
They are us. That shouldn't mean hating or wanting to humiliate Russia. It should mean affirming Ukrainian sovereignty, identity and existence. Occupation of Ukraine is the occupation of us.
It was Dr. Raphael Lemkin a human rights lawyer who in 1944 defined the term "genocide". He presented the genocide of Ukrainians perpetrated by Soviet Bolshevik communists in four stages. The Holodomor Genocide 1932 -33 (death by starvation of the Ukrainian peasantry), the extermination of the Ukrainian intelligentsia, the destruction of the Ukrainian Orthodox church its parishes and clergy and the mass deportations of ethic Ukrainians from the territory of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic to remote and extreme areas of the Soviet Union and Gulag concentration camps. With the suppression of the Ukrainian language, arts and culture Ukraine became a Russified soviet satellite republic. It was the Ukrainians who showed the greatest resistance to soviet communism demonstrated by the hundreds of peasant uprisings and dissident movements and as a consequence it was the Ukrainians who suffered the most repression during the Soviet Union's reign of terror which resulted in millions of deaths. Estimates go as high as ten million victims. This is not common knowledge in the UK for some strange reason. Not taught in British schools and not commemorated alongside other genocides of Holocaust Memorial Day. Britain in fact has refused to officially recognise the genocide of Ukrainians on several occasions.
Anyone else expecting the young lady to cry about Russians taking babies from incubators?
What a good joke, haha. The Russian crimes in Ukraine are well-documented, despite people like you denying them.
Muppet
@@BlyatimirPootin you get it then chief? Or are you too young or ignorant or both?
They should’ve brought a smart ukranianian and not an emotional one
smart Ukrainians are against the US proxy war
I couldn’t get beyond the first 5 minutes. Always been a fan of Peter Hitchens but listening to his opening remarks especially re President Putin made me wonder where he’s been since 2014. Bit of a disappointment to watch a hero shoot himself in the foot.
There is simple logic here. If would say Putin invaded Ukraine because of NATO’s expansion, why he wouldn’t deploy nuclear weapons somewhere against NATO like Cuban Missile Crisis? But why he did annex their neighbors instead of against NATO directly?
There was peace between Ukraine and Russia from 1990 until Washington got between them.
How did Washington force Russia to invade Ukraine in 2014 or this year? How did Washington force Russia to invade Moldova and Georgia?
@@SocialDemocrat1789 By spreading its anti-Russian military alliance, reaching the Russian border. Ukraine has become a de facto NATO member.
@@LajosArpad85 If Ukraine was a de facto NATO member, Russia wouldn't have invaded. Russia only invades its neighbours that aren't in NATO (Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia).
One foot into the Baltics or Poland, and NATO would flatten Putin's bunker in a matter of minutes.
False, Russia has been interfering and corrupting Ukranian internal affairs and inciting violence from day 1 after the breakup of the USSR, trying to reconstruct its previous colonial hegemony.
@@SocialDemocrat1789 by organizing coup d'etat in 2014. Washington and EU are to blame for this conflict not Russia
shouldnt the chair actually be neutral, he really cant help himself.. End NATO serve peace.
When this was filmed they thought Ukraine’s had lost 10,000 soldiers we now know it’s closer to 150,000 at this point in growing by the day. As unaffiliated experts predicted Ukraine cannot win this war and the longer it goes on the greater the cost not just a Ukraine But world security as well.
That's dead soldiers. And it's likely a estimate that is dated now.. also there are more wounded. And a huge part of them will be incapacitated for the rest of their lives
Hush your mouth. That kind of statement of fact runs completely contrary to British propaganda!
@@zarni000 how many Russians have died? Do you have these numbers too? 🤣
@@divpolitics9520 yes. Roughly 1/10th of ukrainian numbers. That is based on eu estimates
@@zarni000 Hahahaha
Peter is the sultan of irrelevant discourse that sounds meaningful through its pompous delivery. Whether NATO expansion was truly a reason for the Russian invasion or how the West abandoned Russia after the fall of the USSR have nothing to do with--absolutely nothing to do with the next steps in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
WHY THE BANDERA TABOU? AND THE AZIMOF BATAILLONS? THEY HAVE DONE THEIR BEST JOB
AGAINST RUSSIANS. ALSO THE AMERICANS BLACKROCK AND DARKWATERS.
Ask the Americans whether they would respect Mexican sovereignty if the Mexicans allowed Russian nuclear missiles on their territory. The answer is obvious.
It will not about usa nuclear weapon in Ukraine or NATO for Putin.Its about his idea X about restore USSR . Its what majority people around the world dont understand at all.
@@HazardDynamo Putin has expressly said that he has no intention of retaking former Soviet territory. He obviously does not want a war with NATO. It's just Western propaganda that says he does. You shouldn't believe everything you read in the mainstream media, which is completely under the thumb of the Neocons.
I'd say he is restoring Russian imperialism but I get your point. Why would Mexico not want an alliance with Russia; there biggest economic partner is the US. And what danger does the US pose to Mexican sovereignty compared to a partner like putin?
@@Thomas...191 You could say the same about Ukraine. Why would Ukraine want an alliance with America; their biggest economic partner is Russia. Yet America interfered by inviting Ukraine to join NATO, by fomenting a coup against the pro-Russian government and sending arms for attacks on its Russian-speaking citizens who only wanted the right to follow their cultural traditions.
@@robertaspindale2531 ever had a neighbour like Putin? Or would you aspire to be a country like Belarus with their (lukashenckos) alliance with Russia. There is an appetite for imperial expansion in Russia (the people really likes the crimean annexation). There is no such appetite in most western countries anymore thankfully.
Well over due.
What Svetlana said about the Russians not protesting: could that really mean that they don’t like this separation? May be that is their will? Why? The western countries do not get it that a change must occur at the pace and from within the context and the culture of the countries themselves and by their own brand of democracy.
I think, IMHO, it has to do with what narrative the country is being fed. ( propaganda)
Their own brand of democracy being invading their neighbors to forcefully unseparate from people who are finally free of being your colony? If that is their will, then fuck'em.
Yes, and this is why Russia has thrown out the western funded NGOs attempting to create color revolutions.
They know what game US and the collective west plays.
Everybody: " *The biggest war in Europe since WW2* "
90's Yugoslav wars: " *Am I a joke to you?...* "
There was a peace agreement ready to be signed in April, but the US told Zelensky not to sign in return for military and financial support.
Ok general 🫡
Russia can get out from my counry at any moment and peace has become.
@@helenbairaya7461 Yes, and thanks for agreeing with me.
Are you sane?
Ruzzia did not plan to leave occupied territories. Unless you have proves
12:29 I could hear Christopher’s voice in my head “we know where your children go to school!”
Edward likes to talk, but stays far from the fight. I suspect he would be suing for peace if his life were on the line, but it’s not and there are still a few Ukrainians left so the fight should continue. The young Ukraine lady seemed out of her depth and drew on sentiments mostly, but sentiments right or wrong does not win wars.
Pretty sure Ukrainians are united in choosing to fight and not surrender to Russia rather than being tricked by the US or the UK.
I wish the Ukrainian lady had been pushed farther on her nationalistic views such as embracing Bandera, and forcing everyone to speak Ukrainian in public settings and this is not just the 25% Russian population but also Hungarians in the Carpathian area and also Poland voices who also live in Ukraine. They could’ve addressed the book burnings over 1 million bucks I’ve been burned recently or should we say recycled, purging any unauthorized thought even if I’m 100 years ago in historic novel
Can't believe I ever admired Hitchens. Sadly, with his smooth voice and appearance of expertise, he fooled me. I know I was only of of many who were deluded into taking the wrong position on this conflict by him. Sadly it took a full-blown war to wake me up. Russia cannot be negotiated with. There can be no peace or prospect of peace or hope for peace while Russian remain on European soil. Rossia delenda est.
NOT ONE STEEP CLOSER NOT ONE STEEP CLOSER THAT IS WHAT BAKER SAID
No, such a promise was never given. And why should the Eastern countries be barred from protection from Russia?
interesting how insistent Lucas and co are on telling us what is in Putin's mind, as if they know. without that of course they have nothing
Entire Western mainstream media and cable news claim that they know what is inside Putin's head
Interesting how insistent Hitchens is in telling us that it's all the fault of the West.
So naive there will never be peace without threat of force against Russia.
The Ukrainian young woman is not so convincing when she refer to one man (Putin )v Ukrainians she should speak of the Russian people v Ukrainians. Her stand logically by the same token might allow the Russians to also refer Zelenski ‘ and his actions against the Russians(?)
I was very surprised by her attitude. Especially from a woman. Surely stopping the killing should be everyone's priority.
I wonder, what would Mary and Peter say if Great Britain was in precisely the same situation as Ukraine is now and its allies decided to cut the supplies in a war started by Russia?
Those opposing piece by the blood of others shouldn't be braying in the audience with the cloven mitts, but rather go to the front of the battlefield and see if their vote makes the count.
Exactly.
Gyóni Géza: For a single night (Translation)
Send them out for a single night
The proud of their will and might
For a single night:
Those who spread "We don't forget",
When the song of warmachines beget;
When the invisible seed hatches the mist
And we see the omnipresent deadly plummet-swifts
Send them out for a single night
Those who at plank break look for speck sight
For a single night:
With the deafening scream of the grenade
When the bloody Earth cries as if its cut stomach decayed
When the exploding bullet alights the blood
Causes the red water of the Vistula to flood
Send them out for a single night
Whom with their teeth on usury bite
For a single night:
In the middle of grenade spree
Men rotate like the leaf of the tree
And when he collapses oh, terrible crashes,
From a fine soldier only black ashes
Send them out for a single night
The traders and whose belief is light
For a single night:
When Hell opens its fiery throat
And blood flows on earth and oat
When the ragged tent in wind groans
And dying soldier for his family mourns
Send them out for a single night
Those who only voice their national pride
For a single night:
When the blinding starlight travels in their direction
So they can see their faces in the San rivers' reflection
When Hungarian blood vapor is rolled along
They scream crying: God, I cannot endure for long.
Send them out for a single night promptly
So they can remember their mother's pain at delivery
For a single night:
How they would huddle together, shivering under terror
How they would wallow, screaming "mea culpa" in horror
How they would tear their shirt, how they would beat their bust
How their sobbing howl sound: Chirst, how long does this last
Christ, how long does this last, Brothers, what may I give
As a price of blood, if only I could continue to live
How would swear - all of them -
In their unbelieving hubris, the One he ignored
How would he call Christ, how would he call the Lord:
Never again do this to Hungarian brothers I might
Send them out for a single night
tell that to Putin and his cronies
@@crystalvala5707 They know, they are getting their ass whooped, but it's no good to the people who die in needless wars.
Silly argument.
Mary Dejevsky seems to be confused about when the Ukraine war started, but never mind. Worse is her insinuation (@11:17) that the Ukrainian people, unlike the British during the second world war, may lack the fortitude to keep fighting till victory. It makes me wonder if her expressed views are the result of sincere beliefs, or financial incentives.
this is not a debate it's a one sided opinion sharing. All of them already decided Russia is the bad guy so what's there to debate?
They are also uninformed about the cause and effects of events leading to the war. Totally ignorant bunch of amateurs.
So are you saying that Russia is not the bad guy then? A murdering psychopath holding the world to Nuclear Ransom? That's pretty bad by me.
I'm neutral. I recognize that Russia felt an existential threat and had to do something and Russians in Ukraine were persecuted. But I also understand that Ukrainians love their state and protect it. I recognize Russia had to do something, but I also think there were better ways to achieve its goals, so, according to me, escalating the civil war in Ukraine into an international war is reprehensible on the one hand. But I do recognize that the Zelensky regime and the open support of banderists by Ukraine and the collective west is reprehensible on the other hand.
But regardless of what you, I or the members of the panel may think about who is right or wrong, it is interesting to discuss whether we want peace. It was quite telling that the Ukrainian lady was so opposed to peace. So, the debate was interesting even if you disagree with the members of the panel on another topic.
@@LajosArpad85 _I recognize that Russia felt an existential threat_ - Marines from Kalingrad has been moved to Donbas, Murmańsk was emptied from any military worth speaking of months ago, Anti-air batteries from the very Moscow are guarding Crimea right now. Russian military does not believe to be under any external military threat, existential or not. That's the entire bloody problem.
_Russians in Ukraine were persecuted_ - Russians in X are persecuted, we need to invade. Yep, we've heard this song. Not once, not twice, not thrice. Multiple times.
_I recognize Russia had to do something, but I also think there were better ways to achieve its goals_ - they not only had no better, but they had no other way of doing it. What they were supposed to do? Gain influence by offering their neighbors high-end civilian technology, showing enviable standards of living of their citizens, referring to their common history of fruitful cooperation? They have none of those things. All they had were magazines full of tanks made with intention of spreading the glorious communism to Western Europe and a bloated military budget. So that's what they used.
_But I do recognize that the Zelensky regime_ - that's funny. We have two governments here: one of them is represented by a former comedian who got sworn in three years ago, the other by a former KGB agent who has held power uninterrupted for over twenty years. Guess which one you call a "regime".
As to "support of banderists" I am really touched that so many people shows all of a sudden so much interest in the tragic pages in the history of my nation, but what about you will let us resolve our historical differences between ourselves? In a civilized manner, and certainly after the war is over and, let's hope, Ukraine has returned to its proper, internationally-recognized borders.
@@jakubklis6797 "Russian military does not believe to be under any external military threat, existential or not. That's the entire bloody problem."
Any great power would feel threatened if another great power would move its military or military alliance up to its border. If China would add Mexico into a military alliance formed against the USA, then the USA would rightly consider it to be an existential threat. This was the very reason of the Cuban missile crisis, when the Soviet Union was getting close to the USA. The USA has the Monroe doctrine, which considers any military activity of great powers in the Americas to be a hostile action against the USA. Like it or not, great powers do not accept other great powers moving their military up to their borders and feel threatened whenever that happens.
"Russians in X are persecuted, we need to invade. Yep, we've heard this song. Not once, not twice, not thrice. Multiple times."
Russians in Ukraine are persecuted indeed. According to the Minsk agreement (which was signed by Ukraine), Russians in eastern Ukraine will have autonomy. According to a referendum in Transcarpathia (1991), Transcarpathia will have autonomy. Ukraine disrespected both of these obligations.
There was a civil war in Ukraine between the Ukrainian state and its Russian minority for 8 years. History did not start on the 24th of February.
"they not only had no better, but they had no other way of doing it. What they were supposed to do?"
If Russia was to stop the flow of natural gas and other resources (like oil) at the end of this summer, then Ukraine and the EU would have faced unsolvable economic problems. So, yes, Russia had better options.
"We have two governments here: one of them is represented by a former comedian who got sworn in three years ago, the other by a former KGB agent who has held power uninterrupted for over twenty years. Guess which one you call a "regime"."
Putin has a regime as well, if that makes you happy. From my perspective, Russia is a country that fought wars against my nation and occupied it several times and Ukraine is a country that currently oppresses members of my nation in Transcarpathia. So, yes, Zelensky has an oppressive regime that severely disrespects the basic human rights of minorities, banned opposition parties and press and these problems are not changed by the fact that Ukraine is under attack.
"As to "support of banderists" I am really touched that so many people shows all of a sudden so much interest in the tragic pages in the history of my nation, but what about you will let us resolve our historical differences between ourselves?"
Why do you assume that my interest about banderists is sudden? Would it be difficult to believe that as a Hungarian I do care about my Hungarian brothers and sisters in Transcarpathia? Would it be difficult to believe that as a human being I do care about the non-Hungarian minorities in Ukraine?
And it's a really nice try on your part to attempt to depict banderism as a historic problem. We also had war criminals of the like of Bandera, but we do not celebrate their birthday as a national holiday, like Ukraine.
@@LajosArpad85 _Any great power would feel threatened if another great power would move its military or military alliance up to its border._ - USSR is dead. Russia is no more a great power. And no amount of middle aged, sexually frustrated man dancing around a Sarmat rocket, the Russian symbol of fertility, will change it.
_There was a civil war in Ukraine between the Ukrainian state and its Russian minority for 8 years. History did not start on the 24th of February._ - Yes, it started 8 years ago, with Russian army crossing into Donbas and invading Crimea.
_If Russia was to stop the flow of natural gas and other resources (like oil) at the end of this summer, then Ukraine and the EU would have faced unsolvable economic problems. So, yes, Russia had better options._ - there is no such things as "unsolvable problems". Both economies depend on each other and both can wean themselves from the other, if necessary. Only one of them is incomparably bigger and is not engaged in open war right now. Also, I've heard that all electronic in Russian modern-ish tanks smell faintly of garlic, fried snails and wine. I wonder why.
_Putin has a regime as well, if that makes you happy._ - no, it makes me very unhappy. I doubt there is a person in the world whom it makes happy, with a possible exception of Kreml's wierchuszka, although lately they've becomed far less cocky than they used to be.
_These problems are not changed by the fact that Ukraine is under attack._ - these problems are changed by the fact that Ukraine is in war. We can talk about them in peace and ask which of them are made up by Russian propaganda and which of them is real and to what point after the war. Now there are bigger issues. I would be of the same opinion about the Viktor Orbán's regime, was Hungary under attack.
It is very difficult to believe you care about them. Really, really difficult. It is a strange time to express concern. But it rises a strange suspicion in my mind. That piece of Russian propaganda they were repeating a few months ago, untill that turned out to be too obvious a lie and they make up something new, that about the Western Ukraine being about to be divided between Poland, Romania and Hungary... There is no doubt about Poland and Romania, judging by their actions, but, hey, I'm just asking: haven't you Hungarians had some dirty thoughts about Transcarpathia? Something along the lines of liberating the opressed minorities, obviosuly forced by circumstances and obviouosly made with the best interest of falling apart Ukrainian nation in mind, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, tanks are crossing the border?
I fast forwarded the input of Hitchens - no point listening to the one track mind he has on this subject over and over again, he never has anything new to offer. Listened intently to the others. The Ukrainian lady has a very firm grasp of the realities (she's lived with it) of the situation forced upon her and her fellow citizens. I'll listen to almost anything Hitchens offers on almost any subject apart from his myopia concerning this matter.
These people don’t understand you can’t compromise with Russia and you can’t let them keep their dignity after such barbaric actions in Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya or the 30+ years of meddling in Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict. We’ve got Russia boots on the ground too. So did the Kazakhs, Belarus and so many more.
Russia needs to be stopped and these apologists must stop.
But US can continue to meddle and fiddle with other countries as well as outright invade them? Fool
They must stop? Who is is the actual tyrant, you? 😉🤔
We compromised with Stalin in 1945, handing him Poland (who we supposedly went to war to defend). Don't think we won't do it again if it is a better option than more war.
There were no Russian apologists in the panel. All panelists detested the invasion.
@@jenniferlawrence2701 Maybe you should ask Poles about it, why not?
Free Palestine from the Far Right.
What about NATO's war in 1999? Wasn't this also in the heart of Europe?
Not sure what you meant by NATO's war in 1999 but it is most likely be the NATO intervention into the Kosovo War in 1999. If so, then it is two completely different situations, I do not see any point in bringing it here.
The lesson of Yugoslavia is that NATO failed to punish the communist murderers hard enough. Stalin, Hitler, Saddam, Milosovic, Putin…all creatures of that sort are depressingly predictable. They respect violence and absolutely, emphatically nothing else. We WANT to think about rational solutions, about laws, about principles, …and they do not.
@@actionflower6706 what are you talking about?
@@MinhVu-up5pk NATO intervening to assist the Kosovan ethinic minority is analagous to Russia intervening to help the Russian minority in the Donbass is it not?
@@turquoiseowl Absolutely not! The Ukrainians were not comitting genocide in the Donbas as Milocevic was doing. All the Ukrainians were doing was fighting Russian backed separatists.
Hitchens literally killed the Ukrainian propaganda lady 1:06:10 with "Bandera is our father." She was shocked until the end of the dispute, it turns out that it is not so easy to arrange a theater when the opponent is at least a little informed. It's funny how a professional anti-Russian bald guy immediately intercepted the discussion with a verbal salad, blocking the development of the topic, and how the moderator helped him
That crowd… opposing peace and clapping for Crimea to return to Ukraine, they clearly want WW3. Deary me…
That crowd, appeasing expansionist authoritarian regimes and thinking “if we just give them one more, they’ll surely stop invading!”
Russia has the exact same playbook every time: Fund & supply separatists, recognize “independence,” violently invade, annex territory to Russia. Did it in Moldova, did it in Georgia, did it in Crimea, now doing it in Donbas…
Foolish if you think it stops there. Appeasement does nothing but tell Putin “if you threaten nukes, we have to obey and let you do what you want! Please, please just take whatever you want, we don’t want to upset you.”
The world is a dangerous place and always has been - e.g. warring tribes. Bow to predators, they will gleefully take your neck.
Wtf how about allowing counter arguments
Democracy cannot be forced from without.
Ukraine is already a democracy
Why did the Ukrainians then made it hard for other minorities to exist?
@@SocialDemocrat1789 With the language of minorities being restricted, opposition parties and media banned? I don't think so.
@@LajosArpad85 privyet Olginskii troll.
Nobody believes your lies.
(what's Zelenskyy's native language, dummy?)
There's also schools in Romanian, Hungarian, Greek, Tatar and any subject at all up to university level can be studied in Russian. Russian is still the dominate language of daily discourse.
Ukraine has one of the freest presses in the region, and only Kremlin-backed fringe parties were banned (with most of their leaders fleeing to Moscow at the beginning of the invasion).
major oppisition figures and parties still intact and in their offices and seats in parliament.
Oh, and only Kremlin
@@LajosArpad85 lies
If the lies end there will be peace
If Russia withdraws to internationally recognized borders then there will be peace
@@zolandia5262 😂 nope
Good stuff.
Christianity is a religion of peace. Hot take.
Russia needs to end this. It's time to withdraw from Ukraine, for peace
I agree and the West needs to pull out of Ukraine and maintain its neutrality. Geopolitics has to take TWO sides into account.
@@wellardme that's fine, but Russia needs to agree to leave. If Russia doesn't then they need to be kicked out. There also needs to be airtight guarantees that Russia won't do something this stupid again. And all Frozen Russian assets need to go to the rebuilding of Ukraine.
@@markheithaus that is all one-sided still, I'm afraid. Russia won't leave and the West need to work around this. Negotiations are unfortunately over. Russian assets were seized which is state theft. Who took America's assets when they bombed Iraq and Afghanistan to the Dark Ages and occupied those countries for years on end? To say Russia has to leave or me made poor will solve nothing. Peace means both parties have an "off-ramp."
@@wellardme a big difference is that Russia is committing genocide. Russian media is filled with "Ukraine isn't a real country" and "Ukrainian isn't a real language." I speak Russian. I don't speak Ukrainian. Putin is terrorizing Ukraine and can never be allowed to do this again.
Russia needs to be forced to accept the existence of an independent Ukraine.
Hundreds of missiles were fired all over Ukraine as retaliation for the liberation of Kherson. That's insane.
@@markheithaus You speak Russian but you are not Russian as I can tell. I am English and have been living in Russia for 16 years and I try to see a balanced perspective. I agree that Russian TV spouts total crap but I get my info from independent journalists (mainly UK and US) plus through my friends who are in Ukraine. But then so does Western MSM as they seem to want war rather than edge for peace as most of what they report are total fabrications (Ukraine strictly forbid CNN, BBC etc in Kherson). As for Russia committing genocide, I see no evidence of that. It is awful that people die but to have a proposed industrial murder program, no, it's not happening. Russia for example evacuated Kherson when they pulled back to SAVE civilians because the SVO is known to torture and execute civilians who were under Russian occupation. These people are officially Nazis (like the Azov battalion who is ordained by Kiev). I have many friends who were being used as human shields in Mariupol before Russia liberated the city. They thanked Russia on Western media but these interviews were quickly deleted and there was a famous case with Der Spiegel.
Russia was wrong to invade. War sucks big time! But it is vital to understand the Russian mindset when Putin kept saying "Existential threat." The Soviets lost 27 million people in WW2 with many western Ukrainians under Bandera in SS uniform murdering Poles, Jews and Russians. So, to have NATO encroaching on Russian territory, despite Russia's several pleas falling on deaf ears, the US led coup of 2014 (US Secretary Victoria Nuland leaked phone call), the public acceptance of US bio labs in Ukraine (Again, Victoria Nuland), the fact that since 2014 NATO was openly funding and training Ukraine... is Russia supposed to sit on its arse? Why when Zelenskiy was about to have a meeting with the Duma did Boris Johnson fly to Kiev and scuttle negotiations? I could go on. Russia is by no means innocent but to ignore NATO's input, how the West is using poor Ukrainians to fight a proxy war against Russia for world hegemony... is Russia supposed to sit on its arse and be another Iraq? Another Afghanistan? Another Syria? Another Libya?
There are two sides, I'm afraid. I want peace because through this whole propaganda circus, we're closer to nuking the entire planet than ever before. We need negotiations, diplomacy and honesty even if the truth goes against our narrative.
One feels that the USA will sell them down the river, while holding aloft the idea that any negotiated settlement is better, that they are doing Ukraine a favour.
We cannot negate the needs of Ukraine itself, even if by proxy we are supplying support.
We have our own self determination our own beliefs plus things we hold dear.
Supporting Ukraine is not a notion of protecting us in the future, they deserve all the help we can offer.
I'm glad the question is being raised "How to get peace".
In my opinion Ukraine can prepare itself by looking at Syria for guidance.
Edit:
Syria was a bad example.
The people of Ukraine should look to Afghanistan!
Unless the Ukrainian's can hold the NATO and EU countries feet to the fire.
It's my opinion Ukraine can't defeat Russia militarily but it has the moral high ground. With the population armed Ukraine should send the Oligarchs packing (including the corrupt politicians) - but that's an internal Ukrainian affair.
I urge Ukrainian's to listen to people from Georgia on their views of the 2008 war in hindsight.
This war is primarily damaging Ukraine.
Common wisdom shows the longer a war is allowed to rage the crazier it will manifest.
Really?
Seriously?
@@mattss4725 -No, I take that back.
Syria was a bad example.
The people of Ukraine (what's left of them inside the government controlled part 25-30 million?) should look to Afghanistan!
Why do I say that?
This is obviously a proxy war (at the present).
Search:
"Fight Russia to the last Ukrainian"
Bleed Russia with Ukrainian lifes for as long as they can. Russia opted to play its strong hand = war of attrition.
-Give me one example where the US has been involved in state building post-1955?
-Except Germany, Japan (+ the Western European countries that received the Marshall plan), I have a hard time to find one example where the US has "defended a country" and also helped it reconstruct.
Maybe South Korea and Taiwan, but that wasn't done over night.
Book recommendation: The bad Samarithans by an economist from South Korea => for some economic history of how countries develop.
There are, on the other hand, many more examples of countries being destroyed (Vietnam) or used for some purpose (Libya, Iraq and Syria) only to be abandoned in a haste.
What Ukraine has going for it is its proximity to the EU and pledged humanitarian help + vocal expat community.
+The strong solidarity movement among ordinary people in the West.
Expose the fact NATO prevented negotiations!
Ukraine has been given EU candidate status (same as Turkey since 1985,87?).
Listen to former economist Michael Hudson of Chase Manhattan Bank about the economic aspects of the war.
I don't agree with everything Dr Hudson say but most.
Link below (watch from 40 min)
ua-cam.com/users/liveCkQCSPM2QUY?feature=share
I'm not saying the above with any glee.
Of course the Ukraine was attacked and they have the right to defend themselves.
My statement is not a condemnation of Ukraine (except maybe the corrupt leadership) its more based on previous US behaviour (worthy victims one day / forgotten the next). I try to listen beyond the sloganering, what are the policy think tanks saying in the US and UK?
-Right now a majority is saying "get out" (using other words), based on real politics.
One last remark, how much land and/or other resources have Ukraine given to US/outside corporations and asset managers in return for the present "aid"?
I can only say:
Hope I'm wrong when I say: Ukraine get ready to be forgotten!
Ukraine holds no moral highground on this matter, as the matter of fact it's more like karma catching up with Ukraine for what they've done.
@@dushas9871 Thanks for your comment!
- I can't argue with against it.
Sometimes one has to be diplomatic and/or speak in hypothetical terms (for various reasons)- in my opinion.
You are however right, tell it like it is - 8 year's of generating bad karma/disciplining part of the Ukrainian population is now destroying Ukraine.
To Hell with NATO!
I'm skeptical of any poll where 90% of people agree on anything especially when you consider Ukraine elected pro Russia leaders not that long ago.
Indeed, and then there was a popular uprising to oust Putin's man, who then fled to Russia. Russia then retorted by annexing Crimea. I imagine this solidified some fence sitters, don't you?