Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    13 Jan '17 11:364 edits
    UK Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn Accused Of "Collaborating With Russia" For Wanting Peace????

    Welcome to “everyone I disagree with works for Putin,” the UK version.

    UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn sits on the polar opposite of the political spectrum in most respects from U.S. President elect Donald Trump, yet they are both being accused of the same blasphemy — wanting peace with Russia. Here’s what I’m talking about, from The Independent:

    In an interview with BBC Wales today, Mr Corbyn said it was “unfortunate that troops have gone up to the border on both sides”.

    He added: “I don’t want to see any more troops deployed on the borders between Nato and Russia, I want to see a de-escalation, ultimately a de-militarisation and better relationships between both sides of it... there cannot be a return to a Cold War mentality.”

    This is precisely the sort of sober commentary I’d want to hear from an elected leader at such an unnecessarily charged and dangerous moment, yet Mr. Corbyn was attacked for it in a manner quite familiar to us Americans…

    The Conservative Armed Forces Minister Mike Penning has accused Jeremy Corbyn of “collaborating with Russia” in response to comments that British troops about to be deployed to Estonia were there to “escalate tensions” between Russia and NATO.

    Mr Penning said the comments made on Wednesday by a spokesperson for Mr Corbyn showed that Labour “cannot be trusted with Britain’s national security”.

    Mr Penning said: “Britain has Nato’s second biggest defence budget and plays a leading role in the alliance. It is unprecedented for a leader of the opposition to attack the defensive deployment of British troops in Nato territory.

    “These comments suggest that the Labour leader would rather collaborate with Russian aggression than mutually support Britain’s Nato allies. As with Trident, everything Labour says and does shows that they cannot be trusted with Britain’s national security.”

    The fact that Jeremy Corbyn is being attacked in exactly the same manner as Donald Trump tells us all we need to know. Namely, that if you disagree with the neocon/neoliberal establishment’s foreign policy, this makes you an agent of Vladimir Putin. Absurd and childish? Certainly, but that’s what they’re going with. Which is extremely important to recognize.

    Those of us opposed to a continued insane push for more imperial overseas militarism must understand this isn’t a partisan issue. There is an entrenched establishment in power, and they laugh at Republican/Democrat or Conservative/Labour distinctions. These people are totally united in their thirst for confrontation with Russia.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-12/uk-labour-leader-jeremy-corbyn-accused-collaborating-russia-wanting-peace
  2. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    13 Jan '17 12:20
    Russia is no friend. Personally I think that all US military forces in Europe should be starioned in Poland, Ukrain, Estonia and any other former Eastern Block country that wants the US.

    If they don't want the US anymore, bring. Our troops back to the US.
  3. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1407
    13 Jan '17 14:24
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    UK Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn Accused Of "Collaborating With Russia" For Wanting Peace????

    Welcome to “everyone I disagree with works for Putin,” the UK version.

    UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn sits on the polar opposite of the political spectrum in most respects from U.S. President elect Donald Trump, yet they are both being accused of the sam ...[text shortened]... ge.com/news/2017-01-12/uk-labour-leader-jeremy-corbyn-accused-collaborating-russia-wanting-peace
    I think both sides in this argument need to be careful here. 99.9% of us don't know the extent of Trump's business/government/personal ties with Russia. It could be a great deal, or very little. Making accusations without knowing all the facts can make one look rather foolish.
  4. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56302
    13 Jan '17 14:43
    If people who want peace are so viciously attacked, one can only wonder which war loving lobby has it's hooks in the balls of the pro-escalation politicians.

    Obviously we don't remember 1913/14... the world tumbling towards conflict, everyone seeing it, nobody seemingly able or wanting to stop the momentum... the socialists being called unpatriotic...

    Mhmmmmm...
    There's a lesson there.
    Damned if I know what it is though!
  5. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    13 Jan '17 15:201 edit
    Originally posted by mchill
    I think both sides in this argument need to be careful here. 99.9% of us don't know the extent of Trump's business/government/personal ties with Russia. It could be a great deal, or very little. Making accusations without knowing all the facts can make one look rather foolish.
    Look at it from the Russian perspective. A whole load of anti Russian sentiment in the Western media, some of it absolutely ludicrous. NATO troops stationed at it borders. So called missile 'defence', systems surrounding its borders, promises made to Mikhail Gorbachev broken that NATO would NOT expand eastwards when he entered reunification talks on Germany. Economic sanctions.

    My goodness who is doing this and why?
  6. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    13 Jan '17 15:241 edit
    Originally posted by shavixmir
    If people who want peace are so viciously attacked, one can only wonder which war loving lobby has it's hooks in the balls of the pro-escalation politicians.

    Obviously we don't remember 1913/14... the world tumbling towards conflict, everyone seeing it, nobody seemingly able or wanting to stop the momentum... the socialists being called unpatriotic...

    Mhmmmmm...
    There's a lesson there.
    Damned if I know what it is though!
    It is frightening, I admit.

    Look at Syria, the west calls for the removal of Assad, who were they thinking of replacing him with? Democracy? look what happened in Egypt, perhaps they want the Muslim brotherhood running the country? what about the Saudi backed Islamic state or some other Jihadi group of moral reprobates? There is just no answer.
  7. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    13 Jan '17 16:39
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Russia is no friend. Personally I think that all US military forces in Europe should be starioned in Poland, Ukrain, Estonia and any other former Eastern Block country that wants the US.

    If they don't want the US anymore, bring. Our troops back to the US.
    If you want a friend, get a dog.
  8. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    13 Jan '17 16:40
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    It is frightening, I admit.

    Look at Syria, the west calls for the removal of Assad, who were they thinking of replacing him with? Democracy? look what happened in Egypt, perhaps they want the Muslim brotherhood running the country? what about the Saudi backed Islamic state or some other Jihadi group of moral reprobates? There is just no answer.
    All you have to do is remove a government and give the people democracy.

    Only then can they have utopia! 😵
  9. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    80056
    13 Jan '17 17:36
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    UK Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn Accused Of "Collaborating With Russia" For Wanting Peace????

    Welcome to “everyone I disagree with works for Putin,” the UK version.

    UK Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn sits on the polar opposite of the political spectrum in most respects from U.S. President elect Donald Trump, yet they are both being accused of the sam ...[text shortened]... ge.com/news/2017-01-12/uk-labour-leader-jeremy-corbyn-accused-collaborating-russia-wanting-peace
    Well, you can take the "collaborating with Russia" line as rhetoric, but it's an obvious line of attack for the Tories. Jeremy Corbyn is a dove. So the Conservatives are going to try to point this out. While I don't think he actually collaborates with the Russians his policies are in their interests. He's a unilateralist and from their point of view that is ideal.

    Putin seems to be working to get the Soviet Union's satellite states back for Russia and is prepared to play an extremely rough game to do it. Were Corbyn to be Primeminister, which seems unlikely given poll results but then again so did Trump's win, then Putin would hope that actions he took on borders with the Baltic States and Poland would be ineffectively opposed by Britain. In combination with a Trump Presidency he'd have reasonably good hopes for success. Judging by the fate of the Georgian population of Ossetia this will go badly for populations which are not either ethnically Russian or historically supporters of Russia.
  10. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    13 Jan '17 21:282 edits
    Originally posted by Eladar
    Russia is no friend. Personally I think that all US military forces in Europe should be starioned in Poland, Ukrain, Estonia and any other former Eastern Block country that wants the US.

    If they don't want the US anymore, bring. Our troops back to the US.
    First of all, after the Berlin Wall came down, the USSR (later Russia) consented to the
    reunification of Germany (and all Germany joining NATO) after the USA pledged that
    NATO never would expand farther eastward. The USA quickly violated that agreement.

    Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are members of NATO, and hence the USA has treaty obligations.
    Donald Trump has said that the USA should not necessarily honor these treaty obligations.

    Ukraine's not a member of NATO, and given the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and
    Russia, Russia would likely regard NATO accepting Ukraine as a new member as close
    to declaration of war by NATO against Russia.

    Does Eladar want Americans to fight and die in support of Ukraine's claim of sovereignty over Crimea?
  11. Standard memberDeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    Cosmopolis
    Joined
    27 Oct '04
    Moves
    80056
    14 Jan '17 01:27
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    First of all, after the Berlin Wall came down, the USSR (later Russia) consented to the
    reunification of Germany (and all Germany joining NATO) after the USA pledged that
    NATO never would expand farther eastward. The USA quickly violated that agreement.

    Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are members of NATO, and hence the USA has treaty obligatio ...[text shortened]... Eladar want Americans to fight and die in support of Ukraine's claim of sovereignty over Crimea?
    Pledged is putting it a little strongly. The West says that there was no such pledge and Russia says that there was. According to the article below there was some discussion of making such a commitment at the time but no formal promise was made.

    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-11/broken-promise
  12. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    14 Jan '17 01:40
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    Pledged is putting it a little strongly. The West says that there was no such pledge and Russia says that there was. According to the article below there was some discussion of making such a commitment at the time but no formal promise was made.

    https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-11/broken-promise
    'Foreign Affairs' is a journal of the American foreign policy establishment.
    I would hardly expect it to be very critical of mainstream US foreign policy.
    A dissenting view comes from Stephen Cohen, an American scholar of Russia.

    Although there might not have been a formal written agreement, it seems clear enough
    that the USA and Russia discussed future limits to NATO expansion, and Russia reached
    the understanding that the USA would respect its sphere of influence in eastern Europe.
    US foreign policy pundits prefer to focus on whether there was enough ambiguous or
    misleading language from the USA in order for the USA to be very deceptive about its
    aims without being condemned for outright lying and blatantly violating an agreement.
  13. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    14 Jan '17 20:39
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    'Foreign Affairs' is a journal of the American foreign policy establishment.
    I would hardly expect it to be very critical of mainstream US foreign policy.
    A dissenting view comes from Stephen Cohen, an American scholar of Russia.

    Although there might not have been a formal written agreement, it seems clear enough
    that the USA and Russia discussed fut ...[text shortened]... about its
    aims without being condemned for outright lying and blatantly violating an agreement.
    My general point is that Russia has reasons to distrust the real aims of the USA and NATO.
    For instance, during Libya's (first) civil war, Russia went along with NATO's intervention
    to stop Gaddafi's air force from operating. NATO claimed that this had pure humanitarian
    motives, only to protect civilians on the ground. In reality, NATO (led by the USA) was
    really motivated by 'regime change', the mission of overthrowing Gaddafi by force.
    Russia believed that NATO (led by the USA) had lied in order to mislead it for its own ends.
Back to Top