Ukraine readies for cold, dangerous chapter in Russian war

The hill ^ | 11/20/2022 | Laura Kelly

[caww]

I doubt very much that will happen.

[ought-six]

“You are correct. And the Crimeans twice voted to leave Ukraine (1991 and 2014), with an overwhelming vote on both occasions to become a part of Russia again that exceeded 90%. That’s democracy!”

But it wasn’t the Ukrainian constitution. That supreme law stated that such referenda must be a nation-wide plebiscite. In other words, ALL of the Ukrainian voters would be allowed to vote on the issue, NOT just those in the subject territory.

In your post #142 you said: “Over eight years, the Ukes killed almost 14,000 Ukrainian citizens of predominantly Russian ethnicity.” I responded that that was a lie, and that the number included ALL deaths from that period, both combatant and non-combatant deaths. Yet, you replied to that with, “No it’s not a lie!” But, facts being the stubborn things they are, show you are wrong.

Then you segue into that time-honored refuge of someone who has lost the argument, the dodge: “But let’s assume for a moment that you are correct. So you agree it’s okay for the Ukrainians to kill 14,000 of their own citizens, INCLUDING 3700 civilians.” Faulty conclusion! Straw Man! Assuming facts not in evidence!

But, let’s look at the error of your question. First off, the conflict in eastern Ukraine was akin to a civil war: Citizens fighting each other. So, it is improper to say “…Ukrainians (killed) 14,000 of their own citizens.” Why? Because the citizens are not THEIRS. Citizens belong to the country of which they are citizens. It would have been more proper, and more factual, for you to have said, “14,000 Ukrainians killed each other.” But your major failing was in your fallacious conclusion, “So you agree it’s okay…” Hence, the fallacies I mentioned above.

You said that the US and NATO promised not to expand eastward after German re-unification. I replied that that was a lie, and that there was no such guarantee given, and that even Gorbachev said there was no such promise made. Your response? “Maybe it is a lie in your small mind. But academia reports otherwise, as noted HERE.” And the “HERE” goes to an ERROR #404: Not Found. Then a subscription requirement pops up. So, please provide non-restricted sources for your assertion.

You then go off on another tack, and trot out the infamous fallacy of Tu quoque: “So Putin did exactly what we have done as an aggressor since Vietnam time after time.” The easy response to your fallacy is, “And? So two wrongs make a right? Tom killed Joe, so Mike killed Bob. Does that make Mike’s murder of Bob okay because sometime in the past Tom had killed Joe?”

[ought-six]

“It has always been the Ukraine. Even when it was the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, I never heard it called anything but the Ukraine. It sort of reminds me of how we say the United States.”

No. It was “THE Ukraine” when it was not independent, and was “part” of Russia. When it became and independent and sovereign nation, it was entitled to drop the definite article. We say THE United States because it describes a UNION of individual states. We don’t say THE America.

“But tell me, if Lindsey Graham intends to fight Putin, how would he do that without fighting Putin where he lives?”

Putin represents the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Just as the Balkans in the 1990s was Clinton’s War. There were politicians and foreign leaders who decried “Clinton’s War” and said they had to fight against him. Ditto with LBJ during Vietnam. That didn’t mean they were calling for an invasion of the United States.