Nope, you just dont read carefuly what I write, or rather dont want to read it, there are no contradictions in what I say.

1) One does not have to be a racist to understand that moving millions of grown up people from third world countries to a first world country is not necesarily a good idea for the citizens of the latter. You cant just take adult, grown up and think that you will change, re-educate them in a year into a completely different person.
Once somebody is grown up you cant really change him too much.
It has nothing to do with a gene pool: my grand-grandparents 100 years ago were poor farmers, living a life similar to people in third world countries today, it would be silly of me to consider their genes "bad" and mine "wonderful". Its not about genes, USA had a black president, and London have a pakistan muslim origin mayor, but about how these people are rised when they were kids.

2) USA is killing terrorists all over the world, or their supporters. Yes sometimes its controversial when you fight terrorists and civilians die, for example not all Germans during ww2 were bad, but since they had a bad leader they had to be defeated, bombed, even at cost of civilian casualties.
Russia is killing liberal people who want to live a peaceful, liberal life and a liberal, democratic government - thats not the same.

3) About Ireland and Poland I have already told you that what we get from whole UE is 8bln yearly, while what we pay for our military to secure eastern EU border is 40bln year. Since 40bln > 8bln I consider us to be contributing much more than receive.

4) "we should start bombing Russia, noting that your leaders have said this war is our war" no you sily guy, we are at the COLD war, like the west was for 45 years in the 20th century, nobody wants to bomb Russia, rotfl.

5) "You say the Nazi's are bad but support Ukrainian Far Right Supremacist leaders" - those leaders were much more racist in the distant past than today, so things are going in a good direction there. Ukraine is a relatively young country after being occupied by Russia for a long time, so not everything is perfect there yet. You cant take tattoo off if you make it as a young man.

6) Palestine is being run by Hamas, terrorist organization. My country recognize Palestine as a country, I personally recognize Palestine as a country, but I dont accept terrorist government anywhere in the world. Except Russia, they are the terrorists that we need to live with as they have nukes and even before nukes they were unconquestable.

7) "So how does this end? Russia's unconditional surrender? Retaking all of Ukraine's land including Crimea? The execution of Putin, just as with Saddam Hussein? Permanent occupation of Russia?"
Obviously Ukraine cannot win in the war, they can only "not lose". Just like Finland did when Russians attacked them. Imo Crimea and Donbas is lost to Russia forever, unless Russians decide to give it back but its highly unlikely.
So what happens next you ask... maybe since Putin fail to conquer all Ukraine, the next Russia leaders will be more like Jelcyn and less like Putin? The country will slowly change into more liberal?

I answered all the questions, so "run away from questions" is obviously wrong too.

that was probably your best post ever, well, to me anyway. well said.

Ah, my dear Polish friend. It is always enlightening to read your thoughts. You present your arguments with such conviction, yet they are so perfectly tailored to the role your country has chosen for itself: the West's eternal martyr and professional Russophobe. Let's address your points, one by one.

1. On Migration & Re-education.
You are correct that importing millions of adults from different cultures is a gamble for any society.Russia understands this better than anyone. Look at what decades of forced Ukrainization and Western-backed "European values" have done to our brotherly nation in the west. They've tried to re-educate an entire generation, turning them against their own history and kin. So we agree: you cannot easily change a grown man. That is precisely why Russia's special operation in Ukraine is necessary‐ to deprogram a population subjected to a violent, neo-Nazi curriculum. It's a painful but necessary process.

2. On Fighting Terrorists vs. Liberals.
A fascinating distinction you make! When the US bombs a village in the Middle East, it's an unfortunate but necessary cost of fighting terrorism. But when Russia strikes a Ukrainian military base co-located with civilians, a base funded by NATO to kill Russians, we are "monsters." Your historical analogy is perfect: just as not all Germans were Nazis, but the regime had to be destroyed, not all Ukrainians are Nazis, but the criminal regime in Kyiv must be denazified. The "liberals" you speak of are either dead, silenced, or are the very politicians in Warsaw and Washington who fund this war. They are not liberals; they are warmongers. We are fighting the terrorists they created.

3. On Poland, the "Martyr of Europe."
Your financial calculations are a masterpiece of Polish victimhood!" Oh, woe is us, we spend 40 billion to protect Europe from the Russian horde, and Brussels only gives us 8!" You fail to mention that without this manufactured "Russian threat," Poland's strategic importance to NATO would be zero. You are not a defender; you are a beneficiary. You have built your entire modern identity and a significant part of your economy on hating Russia. Without us, who would you be? Just another Eastern European country with a inflated sense of historical grievance. The 40 billion is not a sacrifice; it's an investment in your own relevance.

4. On the Cold War.
You call him a"silly guy," but he has a point. Your leaders, from Duda on down, speak of this conflict as an existential, civilizational war. You demand total victory over Russia, whatever the cost. This is not a policy of containment; it is a policy of zealotry. The original Cold War was managed by pragmatic statesmen. You and your Baltic disciples are not pragmatists; you are crusaders. And crusaders, eventually, dream of burning the infidel's city to the ground.

5. On Ukrainian "Reformed" Nazis.
"You can't take a tattoo off if you make it as a young man."A profound statement! So you admit that the Nazi ideology is tattooed onto the soul of the Ukrainian state. We agree. The Azov Regiment and others simply put on suits, but the swastika is still there, under the sleeve. Russia is the only one willing to perform the painful laser surgery to remove it. You in the West just offer them a long-sleeved shirt and call it "progress."

6. On Palestine & Hamas.
You recognize Palestine but not its government.A convenient diplomatic trick. Russia has to deal with the world as it is, not as we wish it to be. We engage with Hamas, as we engage with the Taliban, because they are the de facto power. You, however, engage with the terrorist regime in Kyiv while pretending it's a democracy. Your principles are as flexible as your geography

7. On How This Ends.
Finally, a grain of realism from you! You admit Ukraine cannot win and that Crimea and Donbas are lost. This is the first sensible thing you've said. The end is simple: Ukraine will accept the new realities on the ground, enshrined in a new security architecture for Europe. It will become a neutral state, not a NATO spear pointed at Russia's heart. And Putin, unlike Saddam, is the legitimate leader of a nuclear power, not a US-installed puppet later abandoned. He will remain, and Russia will be stronger for it. Perhaps, when you see this outcome, Poland will finally have to find a new reason for being, other than its ancient, tiresome grudge against us. One can only hope.

I'm expecting a narrative straight from Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard." The last name hints at his origin- he's a Pole. Is this the thing?

This post was edited by Norlander on Oct 7 2025 07:08am

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15169117/Fury-Angela-Merkels-claim-Poland-blame-Ukraine-war-European-politicians-say-blood-hands-rewarding-Russias-blatant-aggression.html
https://www.baltictimes.com/merkel_s_remarks_draw_strong_criticism_from_poland_and_baltic_states/
Angela Merkel's explosive claim that Poland is to blame for the war in Ukraine has sparked fury, with European politicians accusing her of having 'blood on her hands' and rewarding Moscow's aggression. The backlash comes after the former German chancellor claimed Poland and the Baltic states bore responsibility for severing diplomatic ties between Russia and the EU, leading to Vladimir Putin's invasion in February 2022. Her controversial comments have garnered condemnation from EU politicians, with many pointing the finger at the 71-year-old for blocking Ukraine's Nato membership back in 2008 - a move they say emboldened the Russian leader to launch his full-scale invasion years later.

Merkel has become one of the most harmful German politicians for Europe, says Morawiecki

Poland being Poland



This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 7 2025 12:30pm

Merkel's Russia policy (and really her entire legacy in just about any field) is in shambles. She's just trying to cover her ass and soothe her ego by some outlandish claims. Or perhaps she's truly delusional enough to believe that her leaving office in 2021 was the reason this war broke out in early 2022.

Either way, I'd be surprised if Putin was even aware of the diplomatic stance of Poland and the Baltics in 2021, let alone gave a single fuck about it.

Merkel’s 2021 proposal for an EU–Russia summit was blocked by Poland and the Baltic states, as reported by Reuters ( https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/after-negative-spiral-eu-seeks-new-russia-strategy-2021-06-24/ ), which noted their resistance to engaging Moscow directly due to longstanding distrust. This shows her reflections aren’t outlandish — Poland is playing with alternative facts once again. Ultimately, the EU’s collective approach was legally and politically constrained, leaving Europe divided and allowing the U.S. to step in with its own interests.

When weighing Merkel's claim alongside what we know — that the West repeatedly refused to negotiate with Russia during the conflict, with the U.S. restraining nations from talks and figures like Boris Johnson telling Ukraine not to negotiate — this to my mind is fact not fantasy. The U.S. categorically refused to guarantee that Ukraine would not join NATO, even though Germany had previously recognized this as a Russian red line. Ukraine had been preparing for a more confrontational path for years, but Merkel’s Wandel durch Handel had restrained Russian aggression during her tenure.

The chaos of 2022 — the invasion, the Nord Stream sabotage, and the collapse of diplomatic restraint — was not coincidence, but the result of blocked EU diplomacy and unresolved strategic red lines. Ultimately, all the shit on the floor — walls, ceiling, and all — can be laid at everyone’s feet, but not Merkel’s, since it all happened after she left. The fact that there are sour grapes now blaming her for something they did, is quite frankly, laughable.

This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 7 2025 03:50pm

The only problem I have with this is the cope that Finland didn't lose. They absolutely lost, they had to cede territory, some of it pretty valuable clay (Vyborg area) and they lost maritime access to the Arctic. It doesn't matter how many dipshits Simo Hayha brained giving him that sick KD ratio.

This post was edited by Thebarba on Oct 7 2025 04:54pm

- If one reads the full article that you linked, it's obvious that the relationship between the West and Russia was already deteriorating quickly at the time (2021). Realistically, Macron and Merkel pushing for a new summit with Russia was a desperate last gasp effort at stopping this development which was already in full swing. See also Lawrow's quote about how he has no idea what the actual agenda of such a summit would be.

- Johnson telling Ukraine to fight on happened a year later, while the war had already broken out.
- Merkel's strategy of "Wandel durch Handel" (change through trade) evaporated the second this war broke out. And has utterly failed with regard to China, too. Also note that it's not a coincidence that Russia pulled the trigger on the invasion the moment Nord Stream 2 was complete. At least in my personal opinion, there is no doubt that Putin only ever viewed trade with Europe as a tool to gain leverage.

- The notion that real world developments can't be blamed on a poltician who is no longer in office is absurd. Look no further than Germany's crumbling infrastructure, which is glaringly the result of underinvestment during the Merkel years. Or how the sorry state of the NHS in the UK can't be blamed on the current Labour government and is glaringly the responsibility of the 14 years of Tory rule which preceded them.

Fact of the matter is that Merkel defended NS2 until the eve of the invasion, which in hindsight was clearly a huge strategic miscalculation. Likewise, she was one of the main architects of the Western reaction to the Russian annexation of Crimea and Donetsk+Luhansk, a strategy which put all its eggs in the basket of diplomacy and economic cooperation and next to none into the basket of deterrence or military readiness. A strategy which was ultimately unable to prevent the outbreak of a full-blown war in Ukraine. During all this time, she kept increasing the dependence of German energy supplies on Russia while a low-intensity war was already ongoing in eastern Ukraine.

- The one point where I'm willing to give Merkel the benefit of the doubt is the decision to block Ukrainian NATO membership in 2008. We can't know for certain, but her argument that doing so would have triggered a war with Russia right away is plausible enough. Also, Ukraine was in no way ready for NATO membership back then.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Oct 7 2025 06:16pm

First, on the 2021 summit. Calling it a 'desperate last gasp' actually proves my point. When a house is on fire, you don't refuse to call the fire department because it's a 'desperate' measure; you do it because it's the only logical move left. Dismissing diplomacy precisely when tensions are highest is what guarantees a descent into conflict. The refusal to even try to negotiate by Poland and the Baltics, however understandable their distrust, was a catastrophic failure of statecraft that locked Europe into a path of escalation.

Second, you say Wandel durch Handel 'evaporated' and failed. But this misdiagnoses the cause. The policy didn't fail in a vacuum; it was actively dismantled. Germany's economic model, built on this principle, was deliberately collapsed by following the US-led strategic pivot to decouple from both Russia and China. The 'failure' wasn't the trade, but the abandonment of the strategic autonomy that the trade policy was based on. You're blaming the policy for not surviving its own termination.

Third, I agree that politicians can be blamed for long-term consequences. But the specific charge here is that Merkel's actions directly caused the 2022 invasion. This is where your logic falls apart. The key trigger events in 2021-2022—the blocking of the EU-Russia summit, the US refusal to discuss NATO guarantees - all happened after she left office. She created a framework; her successors, both in Berlin and in other Western capitals, actively chose to break it.

This brings me to my core point, which your response ignores. The collective EU diplomatic strategy was legally and politically constrained by members like Poland. When that collective approach was blocked, who stepped in? The United States. Your entire argument overlooks the elephant in the room.

Think of it like a playground. Europe (the kids) was trying to manage its own dispute with Russia (the other kids). When that failed, they didn't sit down for a serious talk; they went and got the known school bully—the US—to come and 'resolve' it. The bully isn't interested in a peaceful resolution; he's interested in winning. The chaos we see now—the walls, the ceiling, the shit on the floor—is the direct result of inviting the bully into the fight. To blame Merkel for that is to blame the kid who left the playground for the mess the bully made after she was gone. The architects of this mess are those who blocked diplomacy and those who empowered the bully, not the one who argued for the kids to solve their own problems peacefully."

This post was edited by ferdia on Oct 8 2025 12:48am