Ukraine–Shades Of Gray

This is an article from the Libertarian Institute….please see that it is not my op-ed…..

I have posted several posts that shines some light on the whole story of the Ukraine-Russia conflict most are not even covered by our crackerjack mainstream media….there is always more to the story than the media cares to report…..

If you’re looking for morality tales – clashes between the clearly good and the clearly bad – I suggest you look elsewhere than the geopolitical theater. There we find only conflicts between shades of darker gray.

This seems to have been the case throughout history. Empires and would-be empires vied with rival empires and would-be empires for territory, resources, taxpayers, and soldiers. No surprise: governments will be governments, and that’s not good. This is not to say the shades of gray did not differ at all, perhaps even significantly on occasion, but the objective was always, first and foremost, booty and control of people. The interests of commoners were rarely if ever the cause.

We see this in Russia’s war on Ukraine. Let’s be clear: Vladimir Putin and his Russian government freely chose to send military forces across the border into Ukraine. Their military personnel complied. They ultimately are responsible for their choices and therefore the death, injury, and mayhem that is taking place. (I make an exception for proven false-flag operations on the Ukrainian side, should any come to light.)

Now that the issue of primary culpability is out of the way, we can go on to talk about contributory culpability. I hope I’ve left little room for anyone to argue assigning contributory culpability to others is intended to let the Russian government personnel off the hook.

What sort of culpability do I have in mind? It’s on the order of setting a trap and loading it with bait in order to lure a target. Russia had to choose to step into it, but those who set the trap did not have to do what they did. Hence, they contributed to a terrible situation.

Many experts analysts have long pointed out that the U.S. government at least since the late 1990s has knowingly been provoking Russia by expanding NATO up to the country’s western border, incorporating most of the allies and some of the republics of the late Soviet Union. For years the US government and other NATO officials have talked publicly about inviting the former republics Ukraine and Georgia to join. Everyone knew that Ukraine was an especially sensitive matter because it had long been a buffer between Russia and states to the west, Poland in particular. The Soviet Union had been invaded three times in the 20th century, twice by Germany and once by Poland, both NATO members since the demise of the USSR.

Shades of Gray in the Russia-Ukraine War

I know you have your opinion on this conflict….all I ask is that you read the opinion and not just go off on some rant by reading the title (it is a lot to ask I know)…..

I believe inquiring minds want to know…..the problem is that Americans NO longer have an inquiring mind…..they have social media.

Any thoughts?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

14 thoughts on “Ukraine–Shades Of Gray

  1. Yeah, yeah .. we know the story about how poor old innocent Russia has been provoked by the West and by NATO by inviting potential victims of Russian aggression to join NATO for their own defense …I also know that if nobody invited these poor little countries to join NATO it would only be a matter of time before they were entertaining their own Mariupols too. So yes, let’s make Russia the real victim here.

    1. John nobody is saying that only there is more to this saga than the crap your news gives you….I will not worship at the altar of Zelensky for anyone for that matter. chuq

      1. Zelenskyy is not seeking to be worshipped. He is trying to save his country. I wish we had a few politicians of his caliber in our so called Congress.

      2. John I have no doubt that he cares for his country….but keep in mind he is an actor and has several PR firms at his beck and call…..all the right terms for the script he follows. chuq

  2. It’s a good article, chuq, and well-balanced too. I would like to see more about this reported on the mainstream news, but I doubt that will ever happen.
    Best wishes, Pete.

    1. It will not….I try to pass on as much stuff as I can find….but it is falling on deaf ears and blind eyes for most have bought the kool-aid of propaganda. chuq

  3. It was an interesting opinion piece that had some fair assumptions, but lacked a measure of context. Essentially, it was a “whataboutism”.. “why is America leading some charge against Putin’s Russia when our own history makes us just as bad” kinda thing. So I suppose that makes America.. and NATO… having to share the blame for Putin invading Ukraine… and their soldiers killing and raping civilians along the way. I suppose a decade from now some activists will ask our children when they end up running the political show about paying reparations for us making the Russians do that.
    So soon we forget post-WW2.

    1. Doug that sounds like deflection…because it does not conform the PR that is being spread it must be a lie…..BTW most of the news is still unverified….I will prefer real facts and news….so far we have one side. chuq

      1. I understand the reluctance to believe anything in the media. I then ask, in the absence of media who do you wish to believe to get “factual” news to you? Then we have to ask, who determines if/when news IS factual… and factual to what degree? If one only wishes to see “balanced” news reporting where does one go?
        Let’s say there’s a video segment showing a reporter walking down a street in Mariupol and laying in the street is the body of a dead woman in civilian clothes, presumably shot in the head by Russian soldiers.. Is the body in fact real and not a mannequin? Can we see the bullet hole in her head and the blood flowing? How do we know that bullet hole in the real head was fired by Russians? After all, everyone there uses the same weapons. Maybe a Ukrainian soldier picked up a Russian gun to kill the woman to make it look like Russians killed her. Maybe she was actually a Ukrainian spy discovered by the Russians.
        I mean.. the idiocy can go on and on. At some point we have to accept a media with the best track record, never expect them to be perfect, and always falling back on our own critical thinking skills to fill in the blanks.

      2. If a source states it is breaking news then says it has not been verified then I look beyond….which is never easy. but we should never accept one source if we wants to be informed….especially any that is said to be unverified……which is a lot of the reporting….like I have said often hearsay is not news. chuq

      3. That’s what I always do before commenting.Learned that very quick when I started to comment on for a.

        It is always wise to look beyound the publisher of news etc.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.