Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[Josh]

Ukraine was an independent Republic. Stalin was one of the Bolshevik commanders who led an invasion of Ukraine in 1919 at Lenin's direction that violently overthrew the independent government of Ukraine and forced it into the Soviet Union.

This is a non-historical take. It was barely an "independent republic" for any of its existence. Lots of other independent republics existed at that time too which have long since been consigned to the dustbin of history.

For most of the land area known as Ukraine's history it was part of whatever nation was commonly known as Russia. That's an undeniable historic fact. Ukrainian nationalism did not even begin to exist until well into the 19th century.

[Bootstrap]

Ukraine was an independent Republic. Stalin was one of the Bolshevik commanders who led an invasion of Ukraine in 1919 at Lenin's direction that violently overthrew the independent government of Ukraine and forced it into the Soviet Union.

This is a non-historical take. It was barely an "independent republic" for any of its existence. Lots of other independent republics existed at that time too which have long since been consigned to the dustbin of history.

For most of the land area known as Ukraine's history it was part of whatever nation was commonly known as Russia. That's an undeniable historic fact. Ukrainian nationalism did not even begin to exist until well into the 19th century.

And therefore, if Russia wants to destroy Ukraine, you think they have every right to do so?

I think you are wrong about the history, but I am more concerned about justifying the kind of widespread destruction that Putin has caused on a country that clearly did not want him to take it over. You think something gives him the right to do that?

And you think that justifying this kind of warmongering is important for Anabaptists on public social media forums? I would think Putin is the polar opposite of what Kingdom Christians say we believe in. I am mourning and grieving and longing for justice and righteousness here.

[Ken]

Ukraine was an independent Republic. Stalin was one of the Bolshevik commanders who led an invasion of Ukraine in 1919 at Lenin's direction that violently overthrew the independent government of Ukraine and forced it into the Soviet Union.

This is a non-historical take. It was barely an "independent republic" for any of its existence. Lots of other independent republics existed at that time too which have long since been consigned to the dustbin of history.

For most of the land area known as Ukraine's history it was part of whatever nation was commonly known as Russia. That's an undeniable historic fact. Ukrainian nationalism did not even begin to exist until well into the 19th century.

People have been speaking Ukrainian, eating Ukrainian foods, following Ukrainian customs and viewing themselves as Ukrainian for very much longer than just the middle of the 19th Century.

You are conflating political nationalism with cultural nationalism. Most national groups didn't form much in the way of political nationalism until the middle of the 19th century because most were subsumed into large multi-ethnic empires before that. The British Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire, etc. WW1 largely redrew that map. Prior to WW2 most of Europe was ruled by multi-national monarchies. After WW2 nation states began to emerge, including Ukraine. But also dozens of other nations like Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Hungary, Romania, etc.

Why were say the Hungarians entitled to form their own nation in the wake of WW1 but not the Ukrainians? The answer of course is Russian imperialism that in 1919 manifested itself in the form of Bolshevism.

[Josh]

And therefore, if Russia wants to destroy Ukraine, you think they have every right to do so?

No, but I don't think the distinction of the modern nation-states of "Russia" and "Ukraine" is one that is particularly important for the Christian to get worked up about defending. It is particularly interesting to see this full-throated defence of the "sanctity" of "Ukrainian territorial integrity" coming from the same people who argue America shouldn't have or enforce its own borders.

I think you are wrong about the history, but I am more concerned about justifying the kind of widespread destruction that Putin has caused on a country that clearly did not want him to take it over. You think something gives him the right to do that?

I think you're wrong about the history too (do you really support every nationalist movement of the 19th century?), but what on earth does this have to do with justifying anything some particular Russian leader does?

country that clearly did not want him to take it over

And what "country' is this? The citizens in Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, and other places clearly would prefer to be part of Russia than whatever the Ukrainian state is. Why is the institution of the Ukrainian state so important for you to defend?

And you think that justifying this kind of warmongering is important for Anabaptists on public social media forums? I would think Putin is the polar opposite of what Kingdom Christians say we believe in. I am mourning and grieving and longing for justice and righteousness here.

As an American and a Westerner I think it's important to speak out against warmongering on our own country. I'm not Russian nor remotely connected to / responsible for anything going on in Russia.

What I see going on here is billions and billions of dollars being spent by America on advanced weapons systems, armaments, and ammunition. Do you support that?

And what I see is a gross confusion of the whatever the Ukrainian and Western side is in a conflict with being "the kingdom of God on earth". We saw this same thing happen when the U.S. invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, and other countries - praising the Western position as a noble one, and criticising and dehumanising anyone that opposed it. One of the most obvious examples of this was Western Christians calling French people "cheese-eating surrender monkeys", and going so far as to demand "French fries" be called "Freedom fries".

I'll take a pass on that kind of jingoism, thanks.

[Ken]

And what "country' is this? The citizens in Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, and other places clearly would prefer to be part of Russia than whatever the Ukrainian state is. Why is the institution of the Ukrainian state so important for you to defend

This is actually utterly false. The only referendum that was conducted under conditions that were remotely democratic was the 1991 referendum on Ukrainian independence. Every single region of Ukraine voted in favor of Ukrainian independence with solid majorities. This was the result. The citizens of Luhansk and Donetsk voted 83% in favor of independence. Crimea was the lowest vote but still voted for independence by 12 percentage points (54% in favor, 42% opposed).



Every referendum since then that was orchestrated by Russia was utterly fake and fraudulent with people being forced to vote at gunpoint on open ballots. The Russians actually used their 2014 referendum in Crimea and the ones from last month to generate enemies lists (voting no gets you put on a state enemies list). So that is hardly a fair election.

I have students in my classes from both Crimea and Luhansk this year. Both of their families had deep roots in both regions. They were driven out by the war and Russian persecution. Were they allowed to vote in the Russian-run referendums to determine the status of their homelands? No they were not. There was no absentee voting of the diaspora from Crimea or Donetsk/Luhansk.

And yes, they are both Russian-speaking but see themselves as Ukrainian.

To claim as you just did that majorities in those parts of Ukraine favor unification with Russia is to repeat the most vile form of Russian propaganda and to facilitate the ongoing genocide and war crimes that Russia is perpetrating in those regions.

And, of course, it doesn't actually matter how people voted. We don't settle such disputes by armed invasion. If the citizens of the Mexican state of Sonora, or the Canadian province of British Columbia voted to separate from Mexico or Canada, respectively. That would most certainly not entitle or authorize the United States to send in an invading army to lay siege on those regions using violence. And if the US did invade Sonora and then go door to door and force people to vote in a fake referendum at gunpoint, the results of such a referendum would be universally considered invalid and fraudulent as well.

[nett]

People have been speaking Ukrainian, eating Ukrainian foods, following Ukrainian customs and viewing themselves as Ukrainian for very much longer than just the middle of the 19th Century.

Do you actually know what those consist of? For example, Russian and Ukrainian are 50-75% mutually intelligible depending on who you listen to.

At my last job, I had the pleasure of hearing a Ukrainian and Russian who shared an office argue (facetiously) about this endlessly. They both maintained that they should be categorized as the same language, but that the other one was a gay, or brutish dialect respectively.

[Josh]

Every referendum since then that was orchestrated by Russia was utterly fake and fraudulent with people being forced to vote at gunpoint on open ballots. The Russians actually used their 2014 referendum in Crimea and the ones from last month to generate enemies lists (voting no gets you put on a state enemies list). So that is hardly a fair election.

This is the same rhetoric people who think the 2020 U.S. election was unfair use.

To claim as you just did that majorities in those parts of Ukraine favor unification with Russia is to repeat the most vile form of Russian propaganda and to facilitate the ongoing genocide and war crimes that Russia is perpetrating in those regions.

Notice the language Ken uses here: if you do not fully support the West and whatever country it decides to invade and be at war with (Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, Luhansk, Donetsk), you are "vile", support "genocide", "war crimes", etc.

Knock it off, Ken.

[Ken]

Every referendum since then that was orchestrated by Russia was utterly fake and fraudulent with people being forced to vote at gunpoint on open ballots. The Russians actually used their 2014 referendum in Crimea and the ones from last month to generate enemies lists (voting no gets you put on a state enemies list). So that is hardly a fair election.

This is the same rhetoric people who think the 2020 U.S. election was unfair use.

To claim as you just did that majorities in those parts of Ukraine favor unification with Russia is to repeat the most vile form of Russian propaganda and to facilitate the ongoing genocide and war crimes that Russia is perpetrating in those regions.

Notice the language Ken uses here: if you do not fully support the West and whatever country it decides to invade and be at war with (Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, Luhansk, Donetsk), you are "vile", support "genocide", "war crimes", etc.

Knock it off, Ken.

OK Josh. Point us to a single 2020 election denier who claims they were forced to vote for Biden at gunpoint in the 2020 election on an open ballot with soldiers watching and taking notes.

And yes, I will stand by my claim that when Russia forces people to vote at gunpoint on an open ballot (they have to check yes or no with Russian soldiers watching and taking notes) and then uses the results of such a referendum to justify annexation. Then Russia is indeed engaged in the most vile form of war propaganda. Whether you choose to repeat it is your choice.

[Josh]

OK Josh. Point us to a single 2020 election denier who claims they were forced to vote for Biden at gunpoint in the 2020 election on an open ballot with soldiers watching and taking notes.

And yes, I will stand by my claim that when Russia forces people to vote at gunpoint on an open ballot (they have to check yes or no with Russian soldiers watching and taking notes) and then uses the results of such a referendum to justify annexation. Then Russia is indeed engaged in the most vile form of war propaganda. Whether you choose to repeat it is your choice.

Western propagandists claim all kinds of ridiculous things, such as that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

There have been polls about referendums conducted before. Washington Post reported on this recently:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... c-opinion/

In short, even a neutral or Western-aligned observer like WaPo concludes that the people living in the Donbas for the past decade would vote to prefer to join Russia over stay in Ukraine. Complaining that "Well, people who left there would vote differently!" seems rather irrelevant; I don't have a right to participate in elections in Northern Ireland or Scotland, and it would be absurd to say that "free and fair" elections must include my participation just because my ancestors got driven out under very unfair circumstances.

[Falco Underhill]

Every referendum since then that was orchestrated by Russia was utterly fake and fraudulent with people being forced to vote at gunpoint on open ballots. The Russians actually used their 2014 referendum in Crimea and the ones from last month to generate enemies lists (voting no gets you put on a state enemies list). So that is hardly a fair election.

This is the same rhetoric people who think the 2020 U.S. election was unfair use.

To claim as you just did that majorities in those parts of Ukraine favor unification with Russia is to repeat the most vile form of Russian propaganda and to facilitate the ongoing genocide and war crimes that Russia is perpetrating in those regions.

Notice the language Ken uses here: if you do not fully support the West and whatever country it decides to invade and be at war with (Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, Luhansk, Donetsk), you are "vile", support "genocide", "war crimes", etc.

Knock it off, Ken.

OK Josh. Point us to a single 2020 election denier who claims they were forced to vote for Biden at gunpoint in the 2020 election on an open ballot with soldiers watching and taking notes.

And yes, I will stand by my claim that when Russia forces people to vote at gunpoint on an open ballot (they have to check yes or no with Russian soldiers watching and taking notes) and then uses the results of such a referendum to justify annexation. Then Russia is indeed engaged in the most vile form of war propaganda. Whether you choose to repeat it is your choice.

Get real, Ken. There were probably soldiers carrying guns to protect those who were taking the referendum, that's all. (They were in a war zone, remember?) Stop drinking the cool aid.