Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Russian invasion of Ukraine [Official Thread]

Rate this topic


Message added by Haji 2003,

Recommended Posts

  • Forum Administrators
7 hours ago, iCenozoic said:

Anti Islamic television channels? Like what, TLC where gay men remodel homes? What are you referring to here? The US has many Islamic communities that individually stream their own activities all across the country. 

You know I am referring to the Pahlavist channels, whose view of state and religion and the relationship between the two is indeed anti-Islamic, in my view anyway.

As for Islamic communities streaming their own activities, this is what you get when you try and access hidayat.tv a channel run by and aimed at Urdu speaking aunties and uncles who have no geo-political ambitions whatsoever.

Screenshot 2022-02-26 at 11.53.06.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

Let's see how this plays out:

Quote

Poland will not play their World Cup play-off against Russia next month because of the invasion of Ukraine, the president of Poland’s Football Association, Cezary Kulesza, said on Saturday, a decision backed up by the team’s players, including their star forward, Robert Lewandowski.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/feb/26/poland-will-refuse-to-play-russia-in-world-cup-2022-playoff-robert-lewandowski

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
15 hours ago, Uni Student said:

If a Shia government is not able to exist without the support of a tyrannical, Yazid-like regime, then it is better off not existing at all. 

The following verses of quran are the answer to your query / thoughts:

And had there not been Allah's repelling some people by others, certainly there would have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques in which Allah's name is much remembered; and surely Allah will help him who helps His cause; most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty. (22:40)

 And were it not for Allah's repelling some men with others, the earth would certainly be in a state of disorder; but Allah is Gracious to the creatures. (2:251)

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Administrators
On 2/25/2022 at 12:11 PM, Abu Hadi said:

The only problem with that is that , at least from what I have read and seen, the vast majority of the people in Taiwan don't want to be part of China. So China would need to take the area by force, which would result in many casualties, and possibly the outbreak of a regional or world war if other countries got involved. When I say 'the vast majority of people in Taiwan don't want to be part of China', this is based on the information I have. I've never been to Taiwan, so the information is second hand. 

If every minority wanted to be a seperate country then Iraq would be 34 countries and Iran 98. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
9 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

As for Islamic communities streaming their own activities, this is what you get when you try and access hidayat.tv a channel run by and aimed at Urdu speaking aunties and uncles who have no geo-political ambitions whatsoever.

 

There might be upcoming solutions:

https://hackernoon.com/blockchain-domains-what-are-they-and-how-are-they-implemented-hi2b30hu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I just wanna inform you guys that many Arabs are not allowed to enter Romania or Poland from Ukraine because they are Arabs. See how racists they losers are, may allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) curse them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, Diaz said:

I just wanna inform you guys that many Arabs are not allowed to enter Romania or Poland from Ukraine because they are Arabs. See how racists they losers are, may allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) curse them.

And why should they ? polish and Ukrainian are cousins

You don’t treat non Arab Muslims as equals 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

You know I am referring to the Pahlavist channels, whose view of state and religion and the relationship between the two is indeed anti-Islamic, in my view anyway.

As for Islamic communities streaming their own activities, this is what you get when you try and access hidayat.tv a channel run by and aimed at Urdu speaking aunties and uncles who have no geo-political ambitions whatsoever.

Screenshot 2022-02-26 at 11.53.06.png

I know and have accessed plenty of Islamic live streams here in the US over the years, particularly when I was learning and attempting to practice the faith, I viewed live streams of the masjids that I attended and these channels are still accessible to this day. You can very easily go online and find plenty of streams of Islamic scholars all across the US. If the government seized a channel, no offense, but there was legal justification to do so. And I don't know what pahlavist channels are.

I'd say there's a difference between trying to censor Islam and trying to censor information that originates or holds ties to Iran (or Iranian backed militants, directly or indirectly) who has ran a covert nuclear weapons program and has a national holiday in which people burn American flags.To be fair, most Americans can't tell the difference between honorable and credible maulanas vs. radical ones and I wouldn't be surprised if this site of yours was bundled by association. 

Also, Christian missionaries are not government officials, so I wouldn't compare them to chinas uighur camps in which the government legally binds people beyond their will. I know many Christian missionaries who operate out of my church, some who are in the middle east, and they have no association with government, they're just following what scripture tells them to do. Most of them are just trying to teach people about Jesus (the Bibles version of Jesus of course) and I don't find anything wrong with this activity.

And lastly, some Muslims are in fact gay, just as gays are found in every religion. I don't see anything wrong with allowing them into the US if they are persecuted elsewhere if that's what you meant on that topic.

Edited by iCenozoic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Looks like Frontline made an episode on Ukraine. Seems about right:

https://youtu.be/urg1NTAo53k

 

Edited by iCenozoic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators

Aljazeera has a piece on the contrasting (racist) MSM coverage:

Quote

CBS News senior correspondent in Kyiv Charlie D’Agata said on Friday: “This isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan that has seen conflict raging for decades. This is a relatively civilised, relatively European – I have to choose those words carefully, too – city where you wouldn’t expect that, or hope that it’s going to happen.”

His comments were met with derision and anger on social media, with many pointing out how his statements contributed to the further dehumanisation of non-white, non-European people suffering under a conflict within mainstream media.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/27/western-media-coverage-ukraine-russia-invasion-criticism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
  • Advanced Member

Germany arming Ukraine. Interesting. Russia was already in a tense relationship with the west, and they wonder why...

Stock markets around the world are being hit. And that's not good for Russia. 

 

Edited by iCenozoic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Look at this fake news :hahaha: Landscape doesn't even look Ukrainian at all lol, and it doesn't look like winter. Braindead people who think that once you leave Europe everyone becomes black-haired.

 

Edit:- this girl is Palestinian btw, she was asking these Zionist dogs to leave her country.

 

 

FDCDCDFF-4BD4-40F9-B3E5-8D9870DD44BD.jpeg

Edited by Diaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators
1 hour ago, Diaz said:

Edit:- this girl is Palestinian btw, she was asking these Zionist dogs to leave her country.

Not saying that this is the case here, I recall deliberately mislabelling things myself. And once people with the 'opposite point of view' have had their say, only then revealing what a picture is actually about.

 

1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

I really don't understand do people think that pressuring Russia will make them to stop?

I think it's partly to do with making sure that they don't go after the Baltic states etc. next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

I really don't understand do people think that pressuring Russia will make them to stop? Stopping means, Nato and West have won and will influence Russia too. 

Would it be so wrong for Russia to become more politically aligned with the west (Germany in particular seems to be on the stage)? I don't think so. It sounded like they were gradually building ties through gasline projects and sales with the EU. But I don't really view this kind of activity as a negative influence of the west. But now these business deals, relations and trade are at risk. 

Ukraine never has been in a position to invade Russia. It's something that, for practical purposes, would never happen anytime in the foreseeable future, if at all, ever (they don't have nuclear weapons, they dismantled their arsenal under the pretext that Russia would respect their sovereignty). And yet despite this lack of a threat, Russia took action and is essentially further destabilizing the region. That's how I view the situation at least.

I'd understand their concerns about the expansion of NATO, but I'm not sure that the expanse of NATO justifies attacking countries outside of NATO. All Russia's invasion does is suggest to the west that a military alliance in the EU is even more necessary. Because unfortunately we still live in a world where people want to use brute strength to take down their competing neighbors. 

Edited by iCenozoic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators
Quote

Early mistakes have included Russia’s dramatic helicopter landing of airborne forces at Hostomel military airport just north-west of Kyiv, far ahead of the prevailing invasion and without any meaningful air support. Four days of fighting in the area ensued, with Ukraine able to drive out Russian forces from the nearby Bucha and Irpin towns just out the side the capital.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/27/russian-strategic-slips-ukrainian-morale-early-days

 

There are questions being asked about why the Russian army has been so rubbish. IIRC there was the idea floated previously that the Americans had sent CIA agents to bribe Saddam's generals not to put up much of a fight.

I would not be surprised if the same had not happened here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/27/key-questions-after-putins-nuclear-announcement

"Russian President Vladimir Putin’s order on Sunday to place Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert is part of a pattern of escalating tensions following his attack on Ukraine. But analysts suggest the move is likely a dangerous new bluff."

 

Maybe it's time for Putin to retire. It almost sounds like he's lost his mind, flexing his nuclear arsenal as if we still lived in the 1960s.

 

And if Russia is actually having difficulty advancing, despite it's military superiority, maybe that says something about the rationale of their decision to invade and maybe it says something about Ukraine's will to be free and sovereign.

https://youtu.be/UreR-qYgZwU

Edited by iCenozoic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, iCenozoic said:

Would it be so wrong for Russia to become more politically aligned with the west (Germany in particular seems to be on the stage)?

Not for you it is problem because you hold liberal western values. Nato is not just military help but it is more than that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Forum Administrators
2 hours ago, iCenozoic said:

"Russian President Vladimir Putin’s order on Sunday to place Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert is part of a pattern of escalating tensions following his attack on Ukraine. But analysts suggest the move is likely a dangerous new bluff."

The Russians are blaming the UK's Foreign Secretary Liz Truss for prompting the above:

Quote

Vladimir Putin put Russia's nuclear forces on high alert after comments by UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss and others, the Kremlin has said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60558048

 

Obviously people will say that the Russians are making up an excuse, but Truss does have form when it comes to saying stupid things, which then have to be retracted by others e.g.

Quote

Downing Street has publicly distanced itself from Liz Truss’s suggestion that Britons should be able to join the fight in Ukraine, saying this would contravene travel advice and people should instead consider making a donation instead.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/28/ben-wallace-distances-himself-from-truss-comments-on-uk-volunteers-for-ukraine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

Not for you it is problem because you hold liberal western values. Nato is not just military help but it is more than that. 

Well, I'm just curious what that even means. Is resisting western influence really so urgent that Putin would threaten to use nuclear weapons (Which would essentially, or could very well result in the complete annihilation of many nations across the planet and billions of people)? No posturing from any nation could ever warrant such an escalation.

Is it really about "western values"? What is Putin worried about, rated R movies on Netflix or a lack of dietary rules? He's worried about gay people remodeling houses on TLC? 

Russia was building its own influence with massive oil exports to the EU, so what really is the issue? 

I'm tempted to believe that Russia may just have underlying economic issues, and maybe their aggression is just some sort of desperate response to an internal collapse. Similar to Germany during world war II, maybe Russia wants to create a scapegoat or an enemy to blame for its own issues. It can't go after the US or France or the UK etc., so it targets little ol Ukraine. 

I see that Norway has cut off some oil and gas deals now, I'm sure Germany and the other countries are starting to limit those deals and financial gateways as well. The global stock market is taking a hit, and I'm sure Russia is taking the brunt of that. 

So what is Russia so upset about that is worth posturing about nuclear weapons (Which would do nothing except blow up millions of innocent people)? It feels like he's lost his mind. 

And invading the Ukraine can't even rationally be said to be self-defense, because ukraine would never invade or attack Russia. It would just never happen Because their military is a mere fraction of Russia's in power and size.

It's not like Hitler marching across Europe taking things over. It's just this relatively small and weak and arguably fragile country of Ukraine. If you have a problem with NATO, then take it out with NATO. Don't take out your anger on your little neighbor. 

And maybe someone can shed some light on this topic, because from what I can see Russia just appears to be off its chair. It's like Putin has gone a bit senile. If a US President ever threatened use of nuclear weapons in today's age, they'd be voted out of office in a heartbeat. 

Edited by iCenozoic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
11 hours ago, Diaz said:

Look at this fake news :hahaha: Landscape doesn't even look Ukrainian at all lol, and it doesn't look like winter. Braindead people who think that once you leave Europe everyone becomes black-haired.

 

Edit:- this girl is Palestinian btw, she was asking these Zionist dogs to leave her country.

 

 

FDCDCDFF-4BD4-40F9-B3E5-8D9870DD44BD.jpeg

Lot of restraint from Israeli soldier 

if he was Saudi or Egyptian he would be taking her as a slave girl 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, Marbles said:

Ukraine has brought this upon itself. 

A wise leadership would have paid attention to the geostrategic importance of their country and maintained some sort of neutrality that could have engaged both power blocs and avoided open hostilities. There are precedents of this kind of diplomacy. Several ex-Soviet states (in Central Asia) maintain good ties both with the West and the Russian Federation without creating strategic problems for either of them.

The rise of bigoted ethno-nationalism (enmeshed with neo-Nazism and anti-Russian sentiment) in Ukraine over the last decade has turned it into a puppet state of one bloc and in the firing line of the other. This, I believe, is a failure of their leadership. And the failure of people's imaginations if all they aspire to is to join the EU and NATO.

This war has thrown in sharp relief the hypocrisies and double standards of the standard-bearers of Freedom™ and Democracy™. Their response to invasion and violence perpetrated by themselves and their vassals vs the response against a war started by a country that is not them. Every single thing about it stinks of rank hypocrisy. 

Putin might have miscalculated the implications of the invasion and might not achieve his long term objectives in Ukraine or along his borders, but I still can't fault him for endlessly trying every diplomatic avenue for so many years to make himself heard in the palaces of US/EU/NATO but every time he was dismissed as a nuisance who just likes to run his mouth.

Ukraine is reaping the consequences of Western hubris and arrogance of post-cold war world order which only envisioned a weakened, dependent, and a subservient Russia quietly acquiescing to the Western military lordship over it. 

But this did not come to pass and now NATO will fight Russia to the last drop of Ukrainian blood.

 

Well said 

I agree like 95% 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Marbles said:

Ukraine has brought this upon itself. 

A wise leadership would have paid attention to the geostrategic importance of their country and maintained some sort of neutrality that could have engaged both power blocs and avoided open hostilities. There are precedents of this kind of diplomacy. Several ex-Soviet states (in Central Asia) maintain good ties both with the West and the Russian Federation without creating strategic problems for either of them.

The rise of bigoted ethno-nationalism (enmeshed with neo-Nazism and anti-Russian sentiment) in Ukraine over the last decade has turned it into a puppet state of one bloc and in the firing line of the other. This, I believe, is a failure of their leadership. And the failure of people's imaginations if all they aspire to is to join the EU and NATO.

This war has thrown in sharp relief the hypocrisies and double standards of the standard-bearers of Freedom™ and Democracy™. Their response to invasion and violence perpetrated by themselves and their vassals vs the response against a war started by a country that is not them. Every single thing about it stinks of rank hypocrisy. 

Putin might have miscalculated the implications of the invasion and might not achieve his long term objectives in Ukraine or along his borders, but I still can't fault him for endlessly trying every diplomatic avenue for so many years to make himself heard in the palaces of US/EU/NATO but every time he was dismissed as a nuisance who just likes to run his mouth.

Ukraine is reaping the consequences of Western hubris and arrogance of post-cold war world order which only envisioned a weakened, dependent, and a subservient Russia quietly acquiescing to the Western military lordship over it. 

But this did not come to pass and now NATO will fight Russia to the last drop of Ukrainian blood.

 

But why wouldn't the invasion of Ukraine by Russia demonstrate that Ukraine has been justified in seeking to join NATO all along? Same with Georgia or any other Baltic state. 

Poland joining NATO hasn't increased any danger to Russia because Poland would never go to war with or invade Russia. Same with Ukraine. Ukraine would never invade Russia. So why does Russia feel so threatened by Ukraine? Germany is part of NATO, Russia clearly isn't threatened by Germany's oil and gas contracts. 

The US wouldn't dare invade Russia and the US is currently of course the most powerful nation in the world. 

So why can't Russia just let it's territory remain what it is, and seek out diplomatic rather than military responses to NATO? 

It feels as though NATO expansion is justified by the continual posturing and periodic military invasions of Russia. It's not like Ukraine just woke up in the morning and randomly decided that it wanted to join a defense alliance. It felt threatened, and rightfully so, by it's aggressive neighbor. 

Russia could display it's concerns through diplomacy and dialogue. But instead it amassed troops and began steamrolling it's neighbor while threatening use of nuclear weapons. And people wonder why the Baltic states have been flocking, one after another, to the EU for protection.

Edited by iCenozoic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

This video is a must watch if you want to get an unbiased view on the conflict and have context on the conflict.

As background for the person being interviewed, the guy in the video is Scott Ritter, who is a former marine core intelligence officer in the US army and a former UN weapons inspector. The video was made on the second day of the conflict.

I suggest people to watch the video on it's entirety as this kind of conflict can't be explained in just 3 minutes.

 

 

To add, it's still the 5th day of the conflict, so it's too early to make a conclusive view on the conflict but these kind of videos help give a rough idea as to what is happening.

Edited by HusseinAbbas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, iCenozoic said:

But why wouldn't the invasion of Ukraine by Russia demonstrate that Ukraine has been justified in seeking to join NATO all along? Same with Georgia or any other Baltic state. 

Poland joining NATO hasn't increased any danger to Russia because Poland would never go to war with or invade Russia. Same with Ukraine. Ukraine would never invade Russia. So why does Russia feel so threatened by Ukraine? Germany is part of NATO, Russia clearly isn't threatened by Germany's oil and gas contracts. 

The US wouldn't dare invade Russia and the US is currently of course the most powerful nation in the world. 

So why can't Russia just let it's territory remain what it is, and seek out diplomatic rather than military responses to NATO? 

It feels as though NATO expansion is justified by the continual posturing and periodic military invasions of Russia. It's not like Ukraine just woke up in the morning and randomly decided that it wanted to join a defense alliance. It felt threatened, and rightfully so, by it's aggressive neighbor. 

Russia could display it's concerns through diplomacy and dialogue. But instead it amassed troops and began steamrolling it's neighbor while threatening use of nuclear weapons. And people wonder why the Baltic states have been flocking, one after another, to the EU for protection.

NATO is expanding not because Russia is aggressive. Russia has displayed aggression precisely because NATO is expanding without a thought to Russia's security concerns. There is a cause and there is an effect. 

Ironically, the very seeking to join NATO is what that brought on Russia's attack on Ukraine. They were safe and would have remained safe had they not sold out to the highest bidder. Like I said, a very unwise decision on the part of the ideological ethno-nationalists in power in Kyiv.

Russia accepted the eastward expansion with diplomatic protest only, including the inclusion of Baltic states at its border, but it reacted when strategically vital countries like Georgia and Ukraine were also primed to be subsumed into NATO. Why? Because Ukraine is absolutely fundamental to Russia geopolitical interests due to its proximity to the Black sea and Russian critical infrastructure passing through it. They don't want their future and strategic independence to be at the mercy of NATO's military machine, and I can totally understand and sympathise with their concerns.

Russia has displayed its concern through diplomacy and dialogue for years on end. The West's response was to tell him to shut up and continue with their policy of encircling Russia. 

 

Edited by Marbles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...