If these well intentioned people can't even stop talking to listen to each other, the possibility of these two countries at war coming to a negotiation seems ever so grim.

@ethreix800

Жыл бұрын

It's not that they don't want to listen to each other, it's that they're trying to solve different problems. If you come together to talk about solving one thing, but every participant has different goals, then it's almost certainly impossible to come to a solution everyone agrees upon. Peter speaks about protecting the UK. Konstantin speaks about stopping Russia, which is not the same thing. Edward, I think, speaks about making the life of Ukrainians better, but I'm not sure. And I'm sorry, Thomas's speech kinda glossed over my brain, even though I tried listening twice my brain just doesn't register it lol. I'll have to get back to it with more attention.

@andrewnorris5415

Жыл бұрын

A peace deal was ready to be signed early on in March. But Johnson flew in under orders from Biden and ended it. Ever since then, Zelensky insists he will not even come to the table unless Russia gives up Crimea first, which is madness. Since March, many more deaths occurred. The Crimea bridge and Nord Steam made Putin scale up his attack.

@daniel.lopresti

Жыл бұрын

That's what international diplomacy is for.

@iancormie9916

Жыл бұрын

One only has to look at what Russian troops did to the residents of the towns near Kiev during the initial phase of the invasion to see what will happen to the whole of Ukraine if Russia wins. One also has to understand that Putin cannot be trusted. Ukraine had a treaty with Moscow, yet they are now fighting an invasion. How many other regions have witnessed Russian expansion over the last 20 years and , if not for NATO, what would stop Russia from continuing its expansionist policies in the future?

@nikkylou1640

Жыл бұрын

​@@iancormie9916 oh thanks here I was thinking it was NATO moving east not Russia moving west

Thank you for doing this - wrangling a group of talkative people with strong opinions is not easy - Freddie did what he could and will surely improve from here! Hosting these debates is important

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

Nazi Germany didn’t surrender until their entire country was rubble and ashes. Ukraine has the chance to save most of what’s left. But to keep on sending arms piece by piece, will only antagonise Russia and make the need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Pls don’t misunderstand me though, perhaps there is justification for sending more arms for Ukraine? But not on the point that it will help to negotiate a more favourable peace, bc it won’t. Just as Nazi Germany trying to develop its wonder weapons and making risky outlandish offensives backfired. If Ukraine is to be helped at all, in my personal opinion, it must be a full NATO response, not a few tanks here and there, a patriot system and a few other token gestures, bc that’s all they are and they do nothing in the long term and overall strategy to help Ukraine. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@petercollingwood522

8 ай бұрын

@@flashgordon6670 You are ignoring the corollory which the other side seemed incapable of enunciating, which is not surprising, which is that absent the great battle field success, Ukraine is defeated, which means Putin wins. They should at least have had the guts to say what that means. Ukraine is subjugated. Aggressive war is back (you know, that stuff they went all ape about at the Nuremburg trials) and the European citizenry, all terrified as they are of war, are going to face a future where it's a lot more likely than it was during the cold war.

Peter Hitchens seems unable to answer simple questions, what a difference with his brother😪

@lairofhorrors1756

Жыл бұрын

Oh wow, I knew he looked familiar, Christopher was fantastic!

@alrightgeeze

17 күн бұрын

He's annoying as fuck tbh. Put pressure on the us, to do what Peter. We're not saying you're wrong, were saying that's not an answer. Still not seen any logical scenarios from anyone with that opinion. Is it pressure for the Ukraine to never be allowed into NATO and Russia cede a province or 2, not what I think but just 1 scenario. Wasn't difficult to think off 1

Absolutely love these heated yet informative debates!

@konfunable

10 ай бұрын

Not so informative since one side completely misinterpret, twist and sometimes even fake facts about what happened.

@ThomasDanielsen1000

10 ай бұрын

@@konfunable Yep, that's exactly what Hitchens and Fazi did.

It’s like stepping back forty years, to where we had genuine debates between people of opposing views.

@robertsmuggles6871

Жыл бұрын

so true - it was like Question time in the late 70s.

@TheWishp

Жыл бұрын

The true art of television based debate died with William F. Buckley Jr. This has been the KZread highlight of my year thus far.

@no.6123

Жыл бұрын

@@robertsmuggles6871 This is exactly what I was thinking Robert!

@BRM101

Жыл бұрын

It’s a rare occurrence these days, most people only get to listen to repeaters on main stream media.

@robertsmuggles6871

Жыл бұрын

@@BRM101 the media blithely repeat Russian/Chinese/Iranian talking points and appear to validate them. This is a major issue which blinds people to dangerous regimes.

To compare Ukraine with going illegally into Iraq is ludicrous... 13:36

@anglodoomer5995

Жыл бұрын

I totally agree. What a stupid argument.

@robertwilson214

28 күн бұрын

Why,the west started both

44:09 the war starded in 2014. It escalated into an open war in 2022. Russia was using proxies (which included their army men, FSB agents and traitor merceneries they hired on the ground)

@procinctu1

Жыл бұрын

Exactly

@robertholland7558

Жыл бұрын

The conflict started in 2008, if not in 1991 with the granting of Ukrainian sovereignty!

@procinctu1

Жыл бұрын

@@robertholland7558 ??? You mean when the Soviet Union agreed to the sovereignty and territorial borders of Ukraine? And, made security arrangements in return for Ukraine surrendering nuclear weapons? Right?

@robertholland7558

Жыл бұрын

@@procinctu1 Russia did the same with Kazakstan, and other previous Soviet states. What is your point? Ukraine clearly breached the “security agreement “, under the auspices of the USA. The USA is as much a predator as the Russians are and it is about time the two are brought back into line. The Ukraine sovereignty experiment has failed. It must be reviewed, and that will only be possible when the USA and Russia cooperate. Putin is all for peace talks, it is the USA that is the problem because they used Ukraine for illegal and questionable activities which can never be allowed to be shown the light of day. The USA empire is not just build on goody two shoes efforts.

@procinctu1

Жыл бұрын

@@robertholland7558 really? So, Russia is the “victim” in the war of agression they started in 2014. Nebulous “illegalities” by the USA or Ukraine does not justify Russia gobbling up the internationally agreed territory of Ukraine like a sow in heat. Is that why 141 countries voted for a resolution demanding Russia leave Ukraine in the UN on February 23rd? Russians are the “baddies” in this war. The calculus in this war is Russian Atrocities equals Western Support for Ukraine. How is that the fault of the USA. If Russia was actually “liberating” Ukraine the war would not be supported by the vast majority of the Ukrainian population. This war ends when Russia stops attacking, period. If Putin really wanted peace all he has to do is make one phone call. If you think different, you need to broaden your range of information services beyond Russian Propaganda sites.

It's a shame Christopher Hitchens is not here. He was always the sane one. Peter just talks over everyone. Even over his partner

@K1forMVP

4 ай бұрын

He’s an arrogant douche who talks down to everyone clear mad because Konstitin keeps picking apart his points piece by piece lie by lie, he can’t win on the substance/facts so he makes things personal.

@K1forMVP

4 ай бұрын

Kitchens is a smug arrogant douche, clearly mad because Konstantin keeps calling out his BS and articulately picking apart his lies piece by piece lie by lie. Hitchens can’t win on the substance/facts so he makes things personal and starts insulting Konstantin. . It always these Pro Russia propagandists love Russia so much but none of them want to live there, I wonder why

I'm surprised Nord stream was not mentioned at all

@bogdannila1478

Жыл бұрын

zelensky wasnt mentioned....many other things

@vitaliyt8571

Жыл бұрын

Nord stream was not mentioned because there no more Nord stream.

@fujohnson8667

Жыл бұрын

Wouldn’t fit KK and Edwards narrative. USA good , Russia bad.

@anglodoomer5995

Жыл бұрын

It never is

@proselytizingorthodoxpente8304

Жыл бұрын

Its no business of ours if Russia wants to blow up its own pipelines. Its not like its the first time they've done such a thing just before winter.

Thomas Fazi is unable to make a point without it being emotionally charged, convoluted or talking over someone else drowning them out.

@DieFlabbergast

Жыл бұрын

He's an activist: his entire career has been one long anti-US diatribe. You expect objectivity? (That's not to say he didn't make some good points.)

@jujutrini8412

Жыл бұрын

Every one of them talked over each other, apart from Edward Lucas (who asked the most stupid question of the debate - have you been to Ukraine?).

17:41 what "plunged a country into civil war" were groups of russian agents in coordination running around with weapons, taking charge of local government buildings, and declaring these regions independent without asking anyone around. They were paid by Russian Federation, they were supplied by Russian Federation, and they were transported and coordinated by Russian Federation from the start. It's hardly a "civil" war if you fight the forces of another country.

@ronan97

Жыл бұрын

Except that that isn’t true. Many people in Donetsk, Luhansk, Odessa, Kherson, Kharkiv, Mykolaiv, Zaporizhzhia, Melitopol, Mariupol, Kramatorsk and towns in other regions disagreed with their government being overthrown. That is the key issue before Russia even enters into it, and that was obvious as these protests and uprisings started immediately. Difference is the only movements that survived the brutal coup government crackdowns were in Donetsk and Lugansk, as the sentiments were held so strongly and by the overwhelming majority of the population, this is demonstrated as weapons and vehicles the separatists had at the beginning came from defecting police forces and military units. All before direct Russian involvement.

@kondziu1992

Жыл бұрын

​@@ronan97 Oh yeah! "MANY PEOPLE"... How many? Also - if some local group in a country starts to protest against their own gov't does it make it okay to take over this part of country by another country? Or do you want me to think that Russia taking over Crimea was because they wanted to protect russian speakng population? xDDD Dude! That's exactly the same reason USSR invaded Poland in September of 1939. "To protect" xD You're delusional. I may have some things wrong here and there (but not about my first post) but I can analyze FACTS! And there were lots of reports about being paid to appear on pro-Russian rallies in 2014. There were sociological studies to confirm that PART of population of Donetsk, Luhansk and other oblasts were supporters of AUTONOMY and breaking apart from Ukraine - and by part I mean around 25-30%. There were pro-Ukrainian AND pro-Russian protests and rallies in every big city of Ukraine. And weirdly - only those closest to russian border went BOOM! What a coincidence.

@ronan97

Жыл бұрын

@@kondziu1992 triggered 🤣 a lot of people like many so many too much to count. The Russians didn’t take Lugansk and Donetsk initially… and no one has stated anything “makes it okay” but using your own logic the euromaidan wasn’t okay either lol. Can you link these studies with Lugansk and Donetsk? And nah I don’t think they took Crimea to “protect the Russian population” I think they took it because they could and they wanted to, particularly because what was happening in Kiev meant that they knew keeping their fleet there wasn’t going to be a viable option and so they did what they did. Was convenient for them that over 90% of the population agreed with them. This can be shown in the 2 or three previous referenda that took place regarding crimea and it’s autonomy and separation from the Ukrainian state. And why are you talking about Poland like 80 years ago. Wipe the froth from your mouth you little monkey

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

“If you want peace then you must make ready for war.” 36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. But... Nazi Germany didn’t surrender until their entire country was rubble and ashes. Ukraine has the chance to save most of what’s left. But to keep on sending arms piece by piece, will only antagonise Russia and make the need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Pls don’t misunderstand me though, perhaps there is justification for sending more arms for Ukraine? But not on the point that it will help to negotiate a more favourable peace, bc it won’t. Just as Nazi Germany trying to develop its wonder weapons and making risky outlandish offensives backfired. If Ukraine is to be helped at all, in my personal opinion, it must be a full NATO response, not a few tanks here and there, a patriot system and a few other token gestures, bc that’s all they are and they do nothing in the long term and overall strategy to help Ukraine. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@LancesArmorStriking

11 ай бұрын

​@@kondziu1992 "If some local group in a country starts to protest against their own gov't does it make it okay to take over this part of the country by another country?" Does it make it okay for that local group to overthrow the entire government? And for an un-elected, interim government to be installed? For someone so focused on pointing out flaws of the other side's arguments, you're painfully unaware that the pro-Ukraine side breaks it's own rules all the time, too. By the way, only about 25-30% of the British colonies wanted independence, 30% were Loyalists and the rest were undecided. Does that mean that the entire American Revolution, by your logic, should have been snuffed out? Or is it okay when you do it?

Peter did say that absurd line about America would continue the conflict in Ukraine if the Ukrainians didn't fight. Absolutely mental.

@pplr1

Жыл бұрын

Correct, and before that point I thought the most ridiculous comment came from his partner who tried to say Ukrainians had a duty to Europe beyond their nation as an excuse for requiring Ukraine to give Putin what he wanted.

@DamianMoody

Жыл бұрын

No he didn't, he meant USA would push Zelensky to carry on even of the Ukrainian people didn't want to fight.

@pplr1

Жыл бұрын

Damian Moody are you trying to cover a bit here? The Ukrainian people largely didn't want this fight but Putin made that decision for them. Since he did they have fought hard to prevent him from making other decisions for them. When asked about ending the war the 1st question a Ukrainian politician asked is what are the security guarantees?

@DamianMoody

Жыл бұрын

@@pplr1 Sir, you address me with a sentence that ends in a question mark and yet do not clearly elucidate any question. I then fail to see what relevance the rest of your comment has to my previous one. However, there were easily achievable solutions and security guarantees available for 30 years before this happened. Find out for yourself why they weren't explored :) muting thread- have a nice weekend.

@pplr1

Жыл бұрын

@@DamianMoody The Ukrainian politician asked a reporter who asked what were the conditions for peace. Ukrainians know full well this is not the 1st time Putin has attacked their nation within 10 years and would likely again. Why is it that you have difficulty acknowledging that Putin is the aggressor in not only this specific situation but also repeatedly?

I thoroughly enjoyed that. Thank you SO MUCH Freddie and Unherd for allowing a real discussion. You give me hope.❤

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

Nazi Germany didn’t surrender until their entire country was rubble and ashes. Ukraine has the chance to save most of what’s left. But to keep on sending arms piece by piece, will only antagonise Russia and make the need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Pls don’t misunderstand me though, perhaps there is justification for sending more arms for Ukraine? But not on the point that it will help to negotiate a more favourable peace, bc it won’t. Just as Nazi Germany trying to develop its wonder weapons and making risky outlandish offensives backfired. If Ukraine is to be helped at all, in my personal opinion, it must be a full NATO response, not a few tanks here and there, a patriot system and a few other token gestures, bc that’s all they are and they do nothing in the long term and overall strategy to help Ukraine. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

The hubris and entitlement of Hitchens are hard to listen to. All while dodging hard questions. Amazing.

Hitchens and Fazi are kind of journalist or activists that once Lenin called 'Useful Idiots'.

@AhemLd

Жыл бұрын

In a Britain where an entire cadre of Marxist talking heads are spewing one singular monotone Party approved message, two lone counter-voices can hardly be likened to Lenin's useful idiots. See if, after reading a single book of Hitchens, you are still of the opinion that he is an idiot.

@coderentity2079

11 ай бұрын

On the other hand, you aren't useful.

Do those 2 people repeating Russian talking points, do think that normal western citizens like wars? Do I have to remind them of who invaded who? Who is the agressor? Who sent their tanks rolling through a foreign country borders?

Douglass Murray made a wonderfully insightful comment in a Munk debate the other day, about how groups of people could debate happily when they had [common facts but] differences of opinion, now they have different 'facts' and no intelligible debate is possible

@seanmoran2743

Жыл бұрын

Douglas fully supports Neo Con Action in the Ukraine Not surprising from a Globalist I guess

@gregorymoats4007

Жыл бұрын

Precisely what went on here

@amule1154

Жыл бұрын

It's only going to get worse in the future (esp. with AI on the loose)

@JustinFisher777

Жыл бұрын

I think that's right. But for me the facts are clearly on a certain side. In fact, (oof) it could be argued that each side either interprets the same facts differently or simply cherry picks certain facts to advance one's case and ignores others. Hitchens was unacceptable here, but he made a decent point when he said this wasn't a good place for getting to the bottom of things.

@2003Rooney

Жыл бұрын

👏👏👏👏 you hit the nail on the head. Exactly what happened here.

This was a remarkable debate despite the interruptions and speakers talking over each other. Thank you, UnHerd, for being a beacon in these dark times and for keeping it real.

@Pat121V

Жыл бұрын

Agreed, I'm a fan of speakers on both ides and it's not easy to chair a debate with emotions charged but Freddie did well letting everyone make their points.

@drjukebox

Жыл бұрын

Hitchens joins the dark side saying that Ukrainians have no say in their own destiny. That is a fascist world view. People have different worth, with Ukrainians at the bottom. Despiccable. Sorry.

@johnsmith1474

Жыл бұрын

You people who are constantly thanking youtube channels are so damned pitiful. There are tens of thousands of you hapless butt kissers wasting your time posting thanks. You never post an intelligent comment on the video, just babyish thanks yous. Just pitiful stuff. Grow some would you please?

@aregaynega5628

Жыл бұрын

Aq+!!qaq

@helmanticus8624

Жыл бұрын

@@johnsmith1474 An intelligent comment like yours?

“The bar is open.” A proper way to end a debate.

@dixonpinfold2582

11 ай бұрын

You could see in Konstantin's face the dread of having to face over there the man, Hitchens, whom by that time he surely despised.

Here in the US, there is no debate over Ukraine.

@mostevil1082

Жыл бұрын

There isn't really here. These two are outliers.

Hitchens was condescending to Kisen when he referred to the negations between the US and Noth Vietnam in Paris to broker a cease fire. The North Vietnamese repeatedly violated the truce and eventually invaded and conquered the South.

@angryengine9616

Жыл бұрын

Kisen is an ignorant comedian. No idea why he's there.

@derosa1989

Жыл бұрын

@@angryengine9616 Ad hominem attacks aren't facts

@angryengine9616

Жыл бұрын

@@derosa1989 he is a comedian, that is a fact lmao

@angryengine9616

Жыл бұрын

@@derosa1989 his ignorance on every single issue he speaks on is evident for all to see too. Nice try but wrong ;)

@zarni000

Жыл бұрын

@@derosa1989 ok he is ignorant

I’ve decided that it comes down to the fundamental belief of whether or not Putin will stop with Ukraine or continue out into other Eastern European countries. Those who favor continuing to support Ukraine with arms believe that Putin will continue west. Those who are in favor of peace talks and negotiations believe that Putin does not intent to expand the war further than Ukraine. There is, of course, evidence on both sides to defend both positions. So the debates will continue. Thank you, Freddy. I appreciate the opportunity to listen to both sides of the argument.

@Uppernorwood976

Жыл бұрын

That’s certainly part of it, but he should have ‘stopped’ at Russia.

@seanmoran2743

Жыл бұрын

The west says Russia is incompetent and weak and then in the next breath says it’s going to invade Europe You can’t have it both ways

@warner476

Жыл бұрын

We’ll said!

@G_Ozare

Жыл бұрын

Sure except when it's the Western Powers backing coups around the world, causing destabilization, death, and destruction around the world in the name of "democracy". Utter hypocrites.

@AlexanderSeven

Жыл бұрын

If you want to know the end goal of Russia, reading Russia's draft agreements to NATO in december 2021 may very well help. This is what will be acceptable for Russia's security, and it includes basically all eastern Europe, not just Ukraine.

Absolutely Ukraine should be supported in its fight against tyranny, for freedom. War is bad and you should make sure Russians understand before trying to preach that same point to the victims who are defending themselves against invaders.

I like how Konstantin said that "Russians invade Finland" even though that invasion was planned by Stalin, who was Georgian and done by general Tymoshenko who was Ukranian. But Konstantin will pretend that he doesnt know the word "Soviet" and will use "Russians" when he talks about this period.

@hellerase

Жыл бұрын

Just to understand your point better, what do you think of holodomor?

@doqille

Жыл бұрын

@@hellerase Same thing that i think about Famine in Povolzhye. Soviet crime against its own people.

@cheesemarine

Жыл бұрын

He also said they got to retain their sovereignty, which is true, albeit after conceding lots of land...

@jujutrini8412

Жыл бұрын

He is relying on British people not be educated in the history of the world. Thank you for pointing this out.

@russianbotstein1422

Жыл бұрын

Wait til he finds the ethnicity of the Bolshevik leaders like Trotsky!

These debates are ABSOLUTE gold. I'm hearing so many alternating views here that I wasn't aware of. The world needs much more of this kind of discussion on all topics or all we're getting is one side of the algorithm.

@Christmas-dg5xc

Жыл бұрын

Unsupervised expressions of opinions - are you serious? ;-)

@accountantthe3394

Жыл бұрын

Oh boy oh boy, this doesn't inspire much confidence in critical thought amongst democratic countries but it's certainly a start...I guess. Coups/regime changes have been a calling card by US for decades (see Mehdi hassan's Al jazeera's Head to Head w/ Otto Reich) to incite aggression thus funding arms industries as per Hitchens here. Hell, John bolton all but said it himself on numerous occasions. It's absolutely puzzling why people don't talk about it much on this side of the aisle when it's plain as day outside the neoliberal echo chamber. US is now trying to do the same in taiwan and sadly, NATO soldiers none-the-wiser primed by the media will be spilling blood to deepen Lockheed's pockets.

@annettemacdonald9192

Жыл бұрын

As a Canadian I wonder why U S media and our media are all in for Ukraine and any opposing opinion is not herd or also the British media that’s very suspicious isn’t it?? The Russia gate propaganda Was just proven to be a lie which will not be herd in our media in the West. Russia is hated by those people and they all have only selfish motives and we are being conned

@stereoreviewx

Жыл бұрын

And yes, this format is very revealing of opinions and personalities Hitchens, clearly doesn’t like it scribbling on his pad, which from what I can tell. He has written nothing trying to pretend he’s above it all. What a prick

@kevint1910

Жыл бұрын

@@Christmas-dg5xc some one please think of the children!!

Peter Hitchens is master at saying nothing for an extended period of time whilst complaining about not getting to speak.

@jonbaxter2254

Жыл бұрын

And interupting too, rude as hell.

Final statement of Peter and Thomas was honest and straightforward: we are afraid of war in western Europe, we have our own interests and problems and we do not care of eastern Europe. The rest of their arguments is just rationalisation of this perspective.

@ThomasDanielsen1000

11 ай бұрын

Exactly. Blatant self-interest masked as virtue!

Was Konstantin against the Iraq war ? Yes. Did he ask for the Iraqis to be armed to rebuff the American invasion ? No. I rest my case

@greg9079

Жыл бұрын

Whats your “case” exactly? Who was Iraqs allies at the time?.

@theartfuldodger8609

Жыл бұрын

Absurd comparison. Sadam Hussein was a thug with no political legitimacy. Americans were initially greeted as liberators before rival factions / power vaccum / religious civil war ensued. Also absurd to compare the US, a corrupted liberal democracy, to Russia, an authoritarian, one-man dictatorship.

@JoshWiniberg

Жыл бұрын

Pretty sure he was still in school then.

@N.i.c.k.H

Жыл бұрын

Unlike Ukraine, nobody, not even the Iraqis, thought that the Americans intended to annex Iraq. Iraq was not lead by an elected government.

@msfwhat

Жыл бұрын

I must agree.

Thank you Unheard for making this enlightening discussion available in full length

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@chiefkaha5650

Жыл бұрын

@@flashgordon6670 It’s different when Russia has nukes, you give Ukraine higher powered weapons and put Russia into a corner, they won’t concede, they’ll pull out their trump card and blow the world up with it.

I'd like to correct Mr. Fazi by saying that two major nuclear powers have lost long wars without using nuclear weapons to compensate for their losses. The first was America in the Vietnam War and the second was the USSR in the Soviet-Afghan War.

@dixonpinfold2582

11 ай бұрын

You mean Mr. Kisin.

@robertfennis6449

7 ай бұрын

This is true but i think he meant more specifically a war where people invade nuclear countries. If he really believed that there would be no point in even defending Ukraine.

@aaronpannell6401

6 ай бұрын

​@@dixonpinfold2582And the third was the US against the Taliban.

@dixonpinfold2582

6 ай бұрын

@@aaronpannell6401 It may please you to imagine so, but the US was never under any illusions about what was likely or even possible in Afghanistan. It turned out as they expected and they accomplished their actual goals, which were to: (i) forestall further attacks on the US, (ii) inflict heavy punishment on the Taliban, (iii) sear an unforgettable lesson into the collective Taliban consciousness (as well as that of other parties in the region and elsewhere) about just what would happen if something like 9/11 were ever attempted again, and (iv) leave unforgettable memories with the Afghan people of what things like increased human rights and education for girls might be like if they ever rid themselves of the Taliban. Thanks for your reply.

Hitchens & Fazi focused on seeking fault with the west rather than explaining their solutions to the current war. Their solution, as I understand, is Ukraine surrender to Russian occupation

@jonbaxter2254

Жыл бұрын

Also, no mention of Russia starting the invasion.

Peter 'Thoroughly Unimpressed' Hitchens. He's livid!

Freddie, Thank you so much for sponsoring this debate.

I could easily listen to this for three more hours

If you agree with Konstantin about the right of people to overthrow their government if the government if it act’s against a campaign pledge and with force (which I disagree they did), then we should have overthrown our own governments on their COVID policy when they used the police to enforce it

@tomo_xD

Жыл бұрын

There is a fundamental difference though. The police in the UK were legally entitled to enforce the covid regs. The police in Ukraine weren't entitled to shoot and beat up protesters.

@bobanrajowic

Жыл бұрын

Agree. Both Ukrainian government in 2014 and most western governments during lockdowns deserved to be overthrown. I would also respect Russian more if they have overthrown Putin during Russian lockdowns in 2020.

@nomnomyam9379

Жыл бұрын

@@tomo_xD wrong. the cvd regulations were based on false information so no one had any right to enforce them (like falsifying IFR stratification, or lying about mask effectiveness, or no informed consent about integrity of pseudouridine mrna, etc). As for the 2014 UKR protest, there were agent provocateurs - example: the 'sniper massacre' / shootings on protesters came from the hotels occupied by the protesters, which the public mistook it as if police shot them. And konstantin is lying about "overthrow" - it was clearly a coup by usa, we have recordings of Victoria Nuland planning this. this coup is the reason why pple in Donbass didnt recognize the new govt - and for that they got bombed by the new govt for 8 years.

@tomo_xD

Жыл бұрын

@@nomnomyam9379 Millions of people protesting to take down a government is not a coup, lol. Look up the definition.

@jwadaow

Жыл бұрын

@@tomo_xD what about the US state department planning them? You come across as if you don't believe people can be manipulated en masse after the earlier stated era of lockdowns. How many governments deposed by the USA do you know of? Everyone can name at least one.

44:02 "first war in Europe in my lifetime" Yugoslavia: yeah, yeah, forget about me.

@anglodoomer5995

Жыл бұрын

The migrant crisis was a war in Europe

@anasarac5238

Жыл бұрын

I'm thinking the same when I hear the speech about war free period and precedents

@saattlebrutaz

Жыл бұрын

Yugoslavia is another war resulting from Soviet stupidity.

A lot of know nothing 2nd rate armchair philosophers who've never been to Ukraine. Not having a Ukrainian in this debate was unconscionable.

One of the best I’ve listened to so far

A study said those in Ukraine who have family members fighting - wanted a peace deal. Question for Kisin - is his family fighting now? Are his male relatives of fighting age and likely to get called up? Are they in the country? All men of fighting age have not been allowed to leave the country since war broke out. Unless they could pay a bribe.

@davidwright5094

Жыл бұрын

It's a daft description: "wants a peace deal". *Everyone* (except some minuscule proportion of psychos) wants some peace deal. The real questions are: -which peace potential deals would one personally accept? -which peace potential deals does one believe would be signed by all parties? -which peace deals does one believe would be kept, after they had been signed? Those are where individual differ.

@irinaz9034

Жыл бұрын

Exactly my reaction when I heard his argument of" 91% of Ukrainians want to fight'! Really - it's why they are running from forced mobilization (many videos on KZread showing screaming women not letting their men to be taken by military /mobilization units ,by the thousands ? Its why mullions are in Europe and millions in Russia, left on their own accord btw?

@skadiwarrior2053

Жыл бұрын

@@davidwright5094 If ordinary people were consulted and invited to elaborate we might get an idea of where they agree. it seems the plebs are only good for fighting, being made homeless or dying for someone else's politics.

@justgivemethetruth

Жыл бұрын

Lots is not known, and lots of just hidden or lied about - on both sides such that - how do we ever know?

@VaIIark

Жыл бұрын

Where I can find about this study? Give some links

A debate of this import really deserves at least a few hours to properly unpack and discuss - I suspect a lot of the conflict came from time restrictions and not being able to speak at length on complex topics - I also understand Unherd is still learning how to do these effectively and probably wanted to keep it short for now - but please consider doing lengthier debates in future (at least 2 hours, possibly more)

@SanctusBacchus

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, one hour is just not enough.

@frankymacf

Жыл бұрын

I think this is a good point. However Hitchens and Fazi simply refused to cooperate with the chair which meant that much of the time that actually was available here was spent talking over each other.

@slavomirakrasna2111

Жыл бұрын

And why wouldn’t they refuse to obey the rules?? The rule of any debate is MENTIONED THE FACTS ONLY. If the opposition keeps bringing up lies, then the other side MUST to recalibrate the facts themselves🙄

@slavomirakrasna2111

Жыл бұрын

As for the “length” of the debate- what number of minutes, hours would satisfy you? Are you not able to search for the facts yourself? Of course, if you’re just interested in listening the men having an argument, then it is understandable🖤

@zaccrisp9988

Жыл бұрын

​@Slavomira Krasna for me I like to hear other people make arguments I've never heard and others refute those. Add the flavour of human cooperation and the ability to argue without killing one each other, I'm having a good time in this bleak picture.

Thank you for these sessions

Good to see Peter Hitchens is back in his fantasy world.

@pacohoratio

5 ай бұрын

Equally, Konstantin is so shamelessly inventive, a talented story teller indeed 😅

@eleveneleven572

4 ай бұрын

Your comment hasn't aged well 😁 Hitchens has been proven right.

@K1forMVP

4 ай бұрын

@@eleveneleven572No he hasn’t he sat there n made shit up. Kitchens is a smug arrogant douche, clearly mad because Konstantin keeps calling out his BS and articulately picking apart his lies piece by piece lie by lie. Hitchens can’t win on the substance/facts so he makes things personal and starts insulting Konstantin. . It always these Pro Russia propagandists love Russia so much but none of them want to live there, I wonder why

@ThomasDanielsen1000

Ай бұрын

@@eleveneleven572 He certainly has not. He claimed that if the US would stop supporting Ukraine, the war would end. Well the US shamefully hasn't supported Ukraine for half a year and the war is still on. Why? Because the Ukrainians understandably don't want to be under Russia's thumb again.

This was a thought provoking debate. I am so glad it was had. UnHerd is fast becoming my favorite You Tube Channel.

@wenterinfaer1656

Жыл бұрын

Theyre the same geeks that called pawgs racism.

@bunsdad4530

Жыл бұрын

Constantine says the Ukraine does not care about donbas If that’s the case then why do t they just let the new border go up.? That seems way better than risking a nuclear/biological/EM war!

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

Nazi Germany didn’t surrender until their entire country was rubble and ashes. Ukraine has the chance to save most of what’s left. But to keep on sending arms piece by piece, will only antagonise Russia and make the need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Pls don’t misunderstand me though, perhaps there is justification for sending more arms for Ukraine? But not on the point that it will help to negotiate a more favourable peace, bc it won’t. Just as Nazi Germany trying to develop its wonder weapons and making risky outlandish offensives backfired. If Ukraine is to be helped at all, in my personal opinion, it must be a full NATO response, not a few tanks here and there, a patriot system and a few other token gestures, bc that’s all they are and they do nothing in the long term and overall strategy to help Ukraine. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@bunsdad4530

Жыл бұрын

@@flashgordon6670 USA would not accept Chinese or Russian millitary bases in Mexico and Russia will never accept them on its flatland border. In the early 2000s massive additional resource discoveries were made in donbas and crimea. So if nato gets into the Ukraine they will move east through the Caucasus all the way to Kabul since this is also resource rich. This will also give nato a good flank on Iran through the caspian. The problem with modern war is risk. We are not far from the point where small groups can make a nuclear weapon and we are at the point where anyone with a book can insert dna into a virus or bacteria. Ukraine has been economically oppressed for a long time to create the conditions for this. However the Ukraines resource wealth can no longer be ignored. If the Ukraine declared neutrality tomorrow, as they have been asked, the Ukraine would easily become the richest nation on the planet and not only that but the richest nation on the planet with labour union tendencies

I had to look up the background on that pedantic comment from Hitchens about the 1917 election. The voting was apparently free and fair but the resulting government was immediately dissolved by the Bolsheivks after the first day. All opposition was outlawed and politicians elected from other parties were arrested when they arrived at the capital. Hitchens, you're a real effin piece of work.

@pedazodetorpedo

Жыл бұрын

Exactly, and KK's point was that there has never been a peaceful transition of power to real democracy. Hitchens failed to refute that.

@alexd3253

Жыл бұрын

He probably meant the February revolution of 1917. There were some riots in Moscow and St. Petersburg, but they weren't excessive, the Tsar abdicated, the parliament proclaimed a Russian Republic and elected the new Interim Government, pending new elections planned for autumn 1917.

@JustinFisher777

Жыл бұрын

@alexd3253 He said constituent assembly, though, which was different from the interim government, and the interim government wouldn't qualify for the point being made.

@alexd3253

Жыл бұрын

@@JustinFisher777 That was a reply to Konstantin, who said that there never was a democratic transition of power in Russia. But in February 1917 there was, from a constitutional monarchy to a parliamentary republic. Hitchens also admitted that the Bolsheviks ruined everything with their overturn of the new government.

@grymek737

Жыл бұрын

Listen to what he said but with a bit more attention

Hitchens has an impressive amount of historical knowledge, but his ability to extract reasonable conclusion from it is really poor. His only tools seem to be his deep commanding voice and a fierce penetrating gaze.

Peter H needs to listen to what Anne Applebaum thinks about 'negotiating' with Putin.

What I have yet to hear from Hitchens, when he claims that Russia needs to defend itself from NATO, is why? The border countries are Norway, the Baltics and Poland. Which of them are a threat to Russia? The purpose of NATO in the border states of Russia is defence only. There is zero potential for an offensive move into Russia. So this claim from Hitchens that this goes both ways is nonsense. Putin of course knows this as well, so the objective is to re-establish the Soviet empire where possible. Which is in the countries that are not NATO members.

@andre8844

Жыл бұрын

If NATO is truly defence for the west, why move to the east. You need to go back to history understand the motivations for their actions and talk from there. Eastern Europe should act as a border btwn Russia and the west of which any country crossing the other should be known as the aggressor.

@cjk8249

Жыл бұрын

Well for a good start he's defending Russians in East Ukraine who have called on him for help which has nothing to do with any Soviet Empire. it has to do with justice against an evil government commiting atrocties against his people.

@hofzichtlaan28

Жыл бұрын

@@andre8844 If NATO is truly defence for the west, why move to the east? Why should NATO be only for the defense of western europe? And since when is Turkey part of the west? Eastern Europe asked to join because indeed they know who the aggressor crossing borders is. Ukraine couldn't join NATO in time, that is their tragedy. And I know my history, and I am from Norway. It was always about defense, first from the communist world revolution (USSR), then we discovered things were not looking up with Putin either (Georgia, Krim, etc.).

@andre8844

Жыл бұрын

@@hofzichtlaan28 so we can safely agree that since the end of the ww2, NATO rather Russia has been the one crossing more borders. See basically all I see is security interests of main nations. This is exactly the Chinese case where they don't want American ships on its waters. People say a lot of bad things about Russia but all the bad stuff they say Russia will do, the USA backed by the EU have done it way worse. So all what westerners are promising us is that Western bad is better than Russian bad of which I don't believe that. So if everyone wants to truly be happy, then both Ukraine and Russia should Join NATO. Everyone should join NATO.

The people I know personally who most vehemently support the continued military aid to Ukraine, are people who are originally from former Soviet controlled or influenced parts of Europe.

@Nikolaievich9837

Жыл бұрын

What benefits is this having more deaths? longer war? rising prices? Relations between Russia and the west destroyed forever?

@mirmimi1

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, because they, as a society, are projecting their own crimes against their own, which happened under totalitarian communist ideology in the fight against evil (capitalist class) onto Russia... and now hate Russia with passion & a great amount of irrationality. So they don't have to deal with their own guilt. And take responsibility that they themselves were organizing societies like that, believing in a communist Utopia which never materialized.... its a easy way out. Same people who were the most rabid capitalists after the fall, were the same people who were in high positions within the communist parties... It is unfortunately simple as that.

@Nikolaievich9837

Жыл бұрын

@@mirmimi1 oh Russia is evil but the US invading Iraq killing a million civilians based on a fake accusation of mass weapons of destruction is not evil? It’s no surprise how hypocritical but through this year I came to expect this from Westerners.

@mirmimi1

Жыл бұрын

@@Nikolaievich9837 i never said that Russia is evil... That was not the point of my post. I said that communist ideology perceived the capitalists class as evil... and crimes were committed all over Eastern Europe by the people themselves, not "the russians".

@Nikolaievich9837

Жыл бұрын

@@mirmimi1 communist ideology has helped Eastren Europe. Ukraine was a thriving republic. It was after the callpose of Soviet Union many of the people in power fled the former Soviet republics with a lot of the wealth and oligarchs in the government started to rob from people. Communism is not an ideology that is meant to wipe out entire ethnic groups based on their background. Also tell me how many people have been killed by Western imperial ambitions? The Soviet’s helped 3rd world countries fight for there freedom.

The side that constantly appeals to my emotion rather than to my reason will not win either of the two.

It is a really good debate. Everyone provided their opinions and evidence, and the atmosphere is hot but not necessarily hostile. Well done, UnHerd; you deserve 20X more subscribers.

@o74769

Жыл бұрын

I would not debate on this topic because it ignores the suffering people and just saying oh yeah, lets stop supplying Ukraine, whats the worst that could happen? a few million dead ukrainians? heh i don't care as long as i can have a better life in UK... those people should move and live in that country for a few years not 3 days and coming home as experts.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@appledaddy4139

Жыл бұрын

​@@flashgordon6670If If we can accept the perspective that this is a proxy war (the US has been directing all of this), everything is uncertain now. At the beginning, I didn't think it is a proxy war and supported Ukraine fully, but now I have totally changed my mind. No one can deny that the Ukrainians' bravery and courage are respectful, which has moved me so many times.

@juniorjames7076

Жыл бұрын

Disagreed with many points made but...SUSCRIBED!!!! Finally, genuine intellectual exchange is back!! Are we actually civilized again?

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

I never said it wasn’t a proxy war. The point I made is that you can’t justify sending more weapons to Ukraine, on the basis that it will help to negotiate a favourable peace, bc it won’t. If anything it will make Russia’s need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Perhaps there is justification for sending extra arms for Ukraine? But that’s not it. I rest my case.

I don't care about Konstantin Kisin or what he says about his family. If they are in Ukraine his political stances have put their lives in danger. He's lied in virtually everything he has said. Yanukovych wanted Ukraine to be a neutral country that did business with both the EU and Russia - and the Americans would not have that.

@DieFlabbergast

Жыл бұрын

And you are?

It's amazing that no one expects Russia to behave like a good neighbour, the apologists on the panel act like Ukraine is a battered wife who is "asking for it". Hmm I wonder why Russia's neighbour's have security concerns.....? Russia has had centuries to get it's act together; creating a decent country worth living in takes a lot of hard boring work over generations, it's something the Russians appear to be incapable of doing - they'd rather just drag everyone else down to their level. From my antipodean perspective the anti-Americanism on the panel is a throwback to the Cold War. A lot of Europeans whine about the US but - as Ukraine has shown starkly - when things get serious the feckless Europeans are incapable of defending even their own continent and daddy US has to save the day.

@sbaumgartner9848

Жыл бұрын

Agree. I am half Russian, but this doesn't mean I relate to what Putin is doing. Unfortunately, Russia under each of its forms of rule, has never been ruled in a democratic fashion and its citizens and citizens of other countries have paid the price. There is no change in sight as Putin's ego and need to re-write history gets bigger. It's amazing me how many people commenting here are so sympathetic to Putin and Russia. I find it terrifying.

@freetrade8830

Жыл бұрын

@@sbaumgartner9848Catherine the Great tried and failed to enlighten Russia, if I’m not mistaken.

@okyouknowwhatever

Жыл бұрын

@@sbaumgartner9848 I think there's a large group of people in the West who just aren't familiar enough with Russia and understand well enough what it is and what people like Putin (and his likes) wants. They hate the leadership of the West so much (understandable to a large degree) that they somehow seem to think Russia is a viable antidote to that. But just because some things are a bit effed up in the West (immigration issues, trans hysteria, et cetera) doesn't mean Russia under Putin is some great alternative. What Putin essentially is (a bit simplified) is just a Russian version of a Western Neo-con imperialist, the same people these disgruntled people in the West claim they hate so much.

Thoroughly enjoyed this debate!

Kissin dominates this debate. Hitchens loses his temper early and afterwards seems to have lost his ability to think clearly.

@ThomasDanielsen1000

Жыл бұрын

Peter is completely unhinged here

@barakau

8 ай бұрын

Kissin looks at it from a very simplistic pov. USA and Russia couldn’t care less about it from a simplistic pov.

So glad to see people like Peter argue the case but slick operators like Konstantin are much better at debates.

@ThomasDanielsen1000

10 ай бұрын

Maybe because Hitchens position is just dumb.

@V12F1Demon

10 ай бұрын

@@ThomasDanielsen1000 Er..no, it isn't. He's just a poor debater. His brother Christopher though was brilliant and even as he supported the Iraq war eventually recanted his support for it just before he passed away.

@K1forMVP

4 ай бұрын

@@V12F1Demon Hitchens just sat there and tried to lie to make his points and then got mad and started throwing insults around. Kitchens is a smug arrogant douche, clearly mad because Konstantin keeps calling out his BS and articulately picking apart his lies piece by piece lie by lie. Hitchens take a small grain of truth and then twists it to the point of flatout lying. Hitchens can’t win on the substance/facts so he makes things personal and starts insulting Konstantin. . It always these Pro Russia propagandists love Russia so much but none of them want to live there, I wonder why

Love love love these debates please keep them coming unherd ❤️

@slavomirakrasna2111

Жыл бұрын

Yep, why not to listen to bunch of liars and two well read men, all the while USA&UK are financing the nuclear war👌 Brilliant idea🖤

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

Bit of a shitshow. I was less than impressed with the way Peter conducted himself. I usually respect his calmness and reason in debates.

@Uppernorwood976

Жыл бұрын

I get the impression that because Peter Hitchens changed his mind 40 years ago about communism, he thinks he doesn’t need to change his mind about anything, ever again.

@seanmoran2743

Жыл бұрын

Passionate is the word

@jimmyfaulkner5746

Жыл бұрын

Can't stand Peter he is a complete prick but he does have the habit of always being correct .

@sgjoni

Жыл бұрын

The way that Peter was using personal attacks and name droppings really turned me off… so much so that I have a hard time stopping myself writing personal attacks on him and and the pole that is keeping up his British upper middle class demeanour…. revealing my general attitudes to that segment of British society. The sad truth is that it wasn’t long since I would have shared his point of view (2014) but now I’m disgusted by my own naïveté.

@robbieelliot9491

Жыл бұрын

I thought Peter was reasonable and did wait. With regards to name dropping... he was trying to establish that he was also personally familiar with the ppl and history. Helps counter Konstanin who, understandably, uses his background card. Again the ppl of the Donbass are never considered Ukranian.

He lost me in his first statement - blaming NATO for Russian aggression. I’ve never heard a more stupid statement in my life.

@julianciahaconsulting8663

Жыл бұрын

NATO broke its promises to Russia about no eastern expansion. We gave our word and then reneged on it. Simple as that.

@devilgod136

Жыл бұрын

It's not stupid. It's true.

Why did no one on the pro-side point out this is a war of agression and conquest that Russia chose? It is a bit like a criminal calling the police because the residents of a house being broken into resisted the theft too much.

Not sure what’s up with all the pro hitchens comments. The decisive moment to me seems to be 54 mins ish, where Hitchens claims that if ukraine stops fighting america will continue the war. I don’t follow that. it came across to me more like Hitchens did not want to discuss what would happen from withdrawing support at this stage, and throughout was more interested in saying “I told you so” and digging into past mistakes. The idea that USA could snap fingers and end the war on ukraine’s behalf without ukraine losing all territory doesn’t seem reasonable. Or, if it is, great - let’s do it, but can someone simply explain how…?

@dungcheeseMORK999

Жыл бұрын

Hitchens fanboys will blindly agree with him whether or not he is right.

@RandomAussieGuy87

Жыл бұрын

Hitchens has been on this program several times and has built up quite a following.

@phoenixlegend2921

Жыл бұрын

It's not possible, the Russians will not stop if Ukraine ceases hostilities it will take another half a million Russian casualties before the Russians even think about seriously considering peace

This entire debate can be reduced to one very simple fact: There is not the slightest doubt that it could NEVER have occurred in Russia...or any of the poisoned countries that openly support it (Syria, Belarus, Iran, North Korea, etc.). IOW...we are fighting for something, something that matters...a lot! That fact seems to be COMPLETELY lost on Hitchens.

Yes, it is certainly good to see deep and spirited debate. That both ‘sides’ provided reasonable arguments for their points of view demonstrated the complexity of the question at hand. More such debates would be good for society. Perhaps how to stop algorithm bubbles from splitting society into easily marketable and influence-able splinters?

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@principleshipcoleoid8095

Жыл бұрын

No. Ukraine CAN win this. More support the west gives, less citizens of Ukraine will die untill the war ends. Simple as.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

Nazi Germany didn’t surrender until their entire country was rubble and ashes. Ukraine has the chance to save most of what’s left. But to keep on sending arms piece by piece, will only antagonise Russia and make the need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Pls don’t misunderstand me though, perhaps there is justification for sending more arms for Ukraine? But not on the point that it will help to negotiate a more favourable peace, bc it won’t. Just as Nazi Germany trying to develop its wonder weapons and making risky outlandish offensives backfired. If Ukraine is to be helped at all, in my personal opinion, it must be a full NATO response, not a few tanks here and there, a patriot system and a few other token gestures, bc that’s all they are and they do nothing in the long term and overall strategy to help Ukraine. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@principleshipcoleoid8095

Жыл бұрын

@@flashgordon6670 Russia does everything except using all specialists as cannon fodder, nukes, bio- and chemical warfare. I think full liberation from Russia is achievable if the Allies continue support. Be it because Russia choses to minimise casualties and reparation bill, or because they are forced out.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

The only thing that will force the pesky Ruskies out, is the overwhelming might of a combined NATO clout.

Unherd is providing such a vital service to political and cultural dialogue, and thus to our democracy

Excruciating from Hitchens issuing noises but no answers on precisely what he would have done after Putin invaded. He had literally nothing to say, but just pretended that he did.

@mrmr4622

Жыл бұрын

"People of the UK and US should do something to pressure their government" he said, like what kind of bs answer is that

Congratulations Freddie🎉🎉🎉 I really appreciated your comment right before the end of the debate…regardless the differences in opinion between us it is absolutely vital to have them and be able to discuss them freely without any fears of being denied or smeared… I really enjoyed this and hope to have much more of it. Well done!!!👏👏👏

@stereoreviewx

Жыл бұрын

Yes, it was good up close and personal. I think Peter Hitchens really didn’t like it.

@tonywilson4713

Жыл бұрын

You are absolutely right. Tom Walker the actor who plays the fictional TV presenter Jonathan Pie said this great thing about public debate. At times no matter how much you disagree you have to listen to the other side. There's a lot of what Peter Hitchens says here that's nonsense, like his notion that we can just change how our governments work, which I am staggered anyone would suggest. *BUT* he makes this point that has been lost that has been lost in public discussion about the American Neocons. Starting at 43:34 _"The public opinions of all the free countries in North America and Western Europe should be mobilizing to put an end to this cretinous, uh, Wolfowitz Doctrine strategy pursued by a foreign policy faction in the United States which is determined to prevent what it fantastically believes will be the return of Russia as a great power has been pursued since the 1990s and has led us to this. It's a crazy policy. It's done nothing but good except to Arms manufacturers and it has caused this terrible War the first war in Europe in my lifetime and I am nearly 72."_ That part of American Foreign Policy about "Regime Change" has been forgotten. So I might not agree with much of what Peter Hitchens says *but he is so right on the point.*

@madamesaundere

Жыл бұрын

@@tonywilson4713 Before we go too far, that point he made that you quoted... is total nonsense.

@tonywilson4713

Жыл бұрын

@@madamesaundere Are you claiming the bit about Paul Wolfowitz is nonsense? Because if you are then you really need to go check you facts. Paul Wolfowitz was Donald Rumsfeld's number 2 and basically instigated with others the Invasion of Iraq. He was part of a gaggle of neo-cons who saw that regime change, by any means, was the way for America to get what it wanted in a bunch of countries. On Iraq, he ignored the advice of military experts who didn't go along with his narrative. In the documentary ""Rumsfeld's War" there's footage of him before congress claiming military experts like Eric Shinseki didn't know what they were talking about. Shinseki was a 4 star general with three Bronze Star Medals for valor and two Purple Hearts and Wolfowitz said he didn't know what he was talking about. A couple of years later Wolfowitz got booted from his job at the world bank for giving his girlfriend a cushy job that she wasn't qualified for. Wolfowitz did his PhD in poly-sci at the University of Chicago and if you don't understand what that means I'll be happy to oblige. But before you do ask - in some circles UC is simply referred to as "Sociopath U."

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

@Tony Wilson: Have neither you or Hitchens, heard of the war in the former Yugoslavia? Or of radical Islamic terrorism? Or the troubles with Ireland and the IRA terrorism? And what about wars and conflicts that European nations were involved in that weren’t on Europe’s soil? You can’t be that ignorant surely?

I'm for people putting their foot & money where their mouth is. Send your own money &/or go to Ukraine to fight. Don't advocate to send other people's money while other people's children are dying in that war Western elite keeps burning.

I think we need a round 2. And before round 2, I’d like to see the couple historical facts they disagreed about determined (US-led coup?, US/UK killed the agreement in beginning of war, etc). Also, Peter’s style is so much like his brothers. Albeit, they would probably have been completely opposite positions in this matter. PS. He did say “US will keep the war going if Ukrainians stop”… Konstantine was right. Maybe Peter regrets being so flippant, but he def said it.

@dixonpinfold2582

11 ай бұрын

No, Christopher Hitchens' style was polite even when it was acid. Charming also, and on the whole respectful. Moreover his argumentation was more thoughtful, penetrating and balanced overall. No one could fail to notice his considerable panache, nor to remember it. Thus even in death he is his brother's superior, which fact probably explains the latter's awful personality.

@AH-qk9ms

11 ай бұрын

those "facts" cannot be "determined", so they themselves need to be debated. for example, Konstantin said that Yanukovych's move away from EU was corrupt - it cannot be debated that he moved away from the deal, but the "corruption" of it was debatable considering the terms of the IMF package that would have essentially imposed austerity on the peoples of Ukraine just to trade with Europe. he also said that police beat up students during the riots and this was why Yanukovych was deposed - while they did beat up those students, it is a lot more complicated than that. there were agitators at the riots (not the students) who came specifically to invoke a brutal reaction from the police (who originally showed up unarmed)... most of this footage was suppressed by the press coverage of the Maidan protests as well as the connections with CIA influence over those agitators - not to mention the more alarming footage where Nuland spoke to those who could have been the pro-Maidan snipers, telling them what the "head count" would need to be (the 100 protestor death toll) to successfully decapitate the Yanukovych Presidency. as for the "fact" about US/UK killing the agreement at the start of the war - it's hard to find conclusive evidence however at a conference of African leaders, Putin recently presented a treaty he claims he had made with Zelenskyy which he subsequently tore up after Putin's men backed off from Kiev (which he says was part of the agreement)... and there is reason to believe that Johnson's presence in Ukraine after the Ankara negotiations was the influencer behind this decision.

@petercollingwood522

8 ай бұрын

@@dixonpinfold2582 Yes. Christopher was by far the smarter of the two.

@petercollingwood522

8 ай бұрын

@@AH-qk9ms If you're prepared to believe the bs an ex KGB goon tells a bunch of African leaders I'm sorry for you.

I didn’t hear China’s posture toward Taiwan mentioned. Backing the failure of territorial aggression in 2023 is more important than many people realize, apparently.

@mrmr4622

Жыл бұрын

True, if Ukraines borders dont matter, then Taiwan is up for grabs apparently

@jhhhjgfds

Жыл бұрын

Most countries recognize Taiwan as a part of China. Is the recent shift by the West in which they no longer consider Taiwan as part of China surprising? It seems that the West often makes decisions based solely on their own interests. This change in stance is one of the key reasons why Russia cannot afford to lose the ongoing war, and China has committed to providing assistance for as long as necessary. Additionally, the situation appears to be escalating once again, with protests gaining momentum in Georgia at the time of writing. It seems like the conflict is being further inflamed, so let's keep adding fuel to the fire.

@Killer1260

Жыл бұрын

@@jhhhjgfds no it's not true that most countries recognize Taiwan as part of China, what are you on about?? If you're referring to the UN not recognizing Taiwan as independent, I wonder if China being a part of the security council has anything to do with it. Hmmmm ... No I don't agree that China has shown it is committed to significantly helping Russia, neither in the short nor long term. Verbal sweet-talk isn't enough, and China abusing low russian prices doesn't prove much either. You disagree?

@andre8844

Жыл бұрын

​@@Killer1260 yes, most countries do including the US in a way.

@Killer1260

Жыл бұрын

@@andre8844 That might very well be true. That would also be a reason why simply saying, a state isn't recognized by UN therefore they shouldn't exist, is a bad argument. If all it takes is for ONE security council member to say no to acknowledging the nation. Agreed? On the other hand, the nations that are recognized gain a lot of legitimacy, given that all security members agreed, right? So that doesn't change my position.

Great discussion. Would love to see a part 2 (in a year?)

@DanHowardMtl

Жыл бұрын

In a year humankind won't exist anymore.

@lee4171

Жыл бұрын

If we're all still here!

@EyeGodZA

Жыл бұрын

@@DanHowardMtl maybe you won’t, but I’ll be here. 🫡

@DanHowardMtl

Жыл бұрын

@@EyeGodZA Haha. No, you won't.

@EyeGodZA

Жыл бұрын

@@DanHowardMtl heh, I’m in the global south, bud, so even if what you say DOES come to pass, we MIGHT get some fallout, so the joke’s on you. But just relax & take a deep breath; see you next year.

End NATO! Get the Americans out of Europe and let the Europeans take care of themselves. btw, it's always enjoyable to watch Peter Hitchens at his most cantankerous and passionate.

Kinda refreshing to see a 2x2 debate on a serious topic, instead of the typical american TV "debate" where it's 5 people from the side the network supports, and 1 on the other side.

Amazing. Well done organising this Freddie!

Better than anything on the BBC or any msm, more please

@freedomm

Жыл бұрын

The BBC is a joke. Absolutely unwatchable.

@intello8953

Жыл бұрын

You mean on the BBC currently? There are plenty of great BBC documentaries let’s not be troll weirdos

@freedomm

Жыл бұрын

@@intello8953 Nothing but government talking points. The BBC is the propaganda arm of the British government, quite understandably as they rely on funding from taxpayers. The news is biased and one-sided.

@DAN_ZEMAN

Жыл бұрын

@@intello8953 (says the troll weirdo)

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

I am slightly surprised by Hitchens, that he can use his Christian faith as a justification for allowing evil to triumph over good. I am an atheist and don't have a full grasp of this faith thing, but that wasn't how I thought it worked.

@thegeneral333

Жыл бұрын

It is a kind of pacifism which is an entirely reasonable position. Peter Hitchens himself isn't starting any wars and has since his conversion more or less opposed all wars that Britain has participated in abroad. When bad things happen what do you do about it? Should Britain send a standing army to Ukraine? Should they nuke all of Russia out of "justice"? Should the CIA/MII6 go kill putin? f you are rooting for nations to fail be careful what you wish for. As Lucas and Hitchens both agree that if Russia loses than the person replacing Putin will be most likely worse. Hitchens correctly keeps bringing up the past because the pro Ukraine position wants to act like this happened out of nowhere in a kind of garden of eden where Russia is the sole aggressor. This is very much in line with the take the stick out of your own eye before doing it to your neighbor. Peter hitchen has written a whole blog post on how this doctrine is at times simply is dismissed as "whatabousim" or "ad hom." Hitchens is also entirely correct that Britain should look out for its own interests first. Britain cannot afford this kind of "charity" or entanglement. Neither can the US. As Mearsheimer would point out China is the real peer competitor to the US/west.

@RADVIX313

Жыл бұрын

It depends how out of touch you are with reality. He hasn't been brainwashed. He knows who the real terrorist are. It is critical to feed propaganda to people and at all costs percent them from questioning the true motives. support from Canada to Russia. The truth will prevail

@anchovy2764

Жыл бұрын

@@RADVIX313 as a Russian who has witnessed many horrible and evil things my government has done to Russians and other countries I am disgusted with your comment. Do not support Russia. It’s a corrupt hellhole, where the police in my experience is more likely to beat you up than come and help you when you’re in trouble, where most of the money is stolen at every project, governmental or private.

@RADVIX313

Жыл бұрын

@@anchovy2764 You have clearly not witnessed any american horrible things, or rather not aware of the reality of the situation. I find the confidence in the lack of truth quite disgusting, to be honest...

If I can't speak out of turn, my voice will be suppressed. What a self proclaimed victim

Two pro ukranian speakers totally ignore failure to honour minsk agreements, shelling of donbass, nazis and democratic will of east ukranians.

@sola4393

Жыл бұрын

Now they are moving to east Asia causing troubles, where they have no business in. Installing puppets and marketing is what they do best. Already see how ambitious their plan is. Forget about them honouring the deal, those people are liars.

@paulkington8380

Жыл бұрын

Literally parroting kremlin propaganda

Peter really let himself down with the temperament he brought to this.

@mechanicom

Жыл бұрын

He feels like a Putin Apologist

@locusmortis

Жыл бұрын

Peter gets cranky when he knows he's wrong but he's stuck himself in a position he can't back out of.

More of this please...

Edward Lucas got the best of this debate. Konstantin's whippersnappery got under Hitchens' skin and he never regained his composure, Thomas Fazi was a crybaby. Chalk this up as an Edward Lucas win.

Kissin is a quizling puppet.

Excellent content folks. Well done!

Also interesting it Peter's implicit recognition that Russia has some kind of claim to Eastern Europe. Talks only about 'Western Europe', and operates on the assumption that any Eastern European country has no agency of their own and are just pawns of the west or Russia. That these countries are their own countries with their own agency is completely lost on some arrogant western Europeans who see the east as inherently inferior.

@birchstudio2900

Жыл бұрын

yeah it does feel so. As if we really have no idea what we are doing.

@nicholasfry4253

9 ай бұрын

But they are just pawns. Like what makes you think Ukraine gets to decide it's own fate when they're literally the poorest country in Europe?

Konstantin Kisin has no choice of the side in this dicussion just like his grand-grand-father in the soviet-finnish war.

The side for continuing the war: "Russia would never accept Ukraine NATO membership." Also: "Ukraine must join NATO." 🤡

@jakubklis6797

Жыл бұрын

So it need to be done without Russia accepting it.

@saattlebrutaz

Жыл бұрын

The side for stopping the war: "Ukrainians should accept mass murder and domination by Russians and shut up about it"

@tystone4834

Жыл бұрын

The side for letting Russia take over Ukraine: "we must pressure our governments for peace." Also: Never explains how stopping giving them arms results in peace

@privaatsak

Жыл бұрын

@@tystone4834 What side for letting Russia take over Ukraine? Don't see anyone here arguing for that 🤷‍♂ Surely it should be on those advocating for more and more weapons to be pumped into the region to explain how that results in peace? We've heard much already on peace talks having had water poured all over them by Western leaders, yet the majority of pundits seem to think escalation of the war would make Putin more amenable for negotiation, it's really quite bizarre.

@stuartwray6175

Жыл бұрын

​@@privaatsak The Wolfowitz/Bush doctrine is in play. Peace was never a priority for the US.

I come away none the more convinced either way of what should happen now - however, this was a passionate, lively debate, what we've not had since the war broke, and the very fact you have four experts (and they are, each of them, in their own way experts in this subject) with four different takes is in itself exemplary of the problematic situation and never-satisfactory-outcome of any war. Thank you Unherd. p.s. things like Mr Hitchen's demeanour, the frosty (no pun intended) relationship between him and Mr Kisin, and mics sometimes not working the best all contribute to the live atmosphere and spontaneity - no issues from this subscriber.

@vboch1

Жыл бұрын

Very well put. You summed it up pretty straight forward.

@kaimanyu586

Жыл бұрын

Answer is easy, war should stop.. Unfortunately there are no nations in the West who have even considered this, all they talk about is more war and weapons.. Zelensky has literally said he won't talk to Russia unless Putin is removed.. What kind of dumb demand is that? Meanwhile, Ukraine will never win this war, sending more weapons only means more death and destruction and for what? They can't win.. NATO couldn't even defeat the Taliban after 20 years of war... If NATO can't defeat some goat herserd on sandals who only have ak47, then what change dies NATO have against Russia... But I wouldn't be surprised if Western leaders need another 20 years of war before they understand... The West just loves war, there's always war and the West is always involved... And look how all these nations look like after the West leaves? None of them are better of.. But whatever, you will always find Westerners supporting war.. Now for once war has come to their own soil and look at the state of panic they are in... Normally Westerners do not care at all if 100.000s of people die because of western invasions.. Just tell me how many western nations have been punished for their illegal invasions? None, that's the West, pure hypocrites... And in the mean time they are lecturing the world about human rights and freedom... My God, the West makes me puke, I've never seen bigger hypocrites and pretenders than Westerners...

@slavomirakrasna2111

Жыл бұрын

If two so called “experts” positioned on the left side of your screen are TRUE experts, then they must be liars, hun. Since the debate is about CERTAIN FACTS DESCRIBED by the two experts positioned on the right side of your screen🙄

@gandydancer9710

Жыл бұрын

There weren't enough sides to the debate. Someone needed to say that if Kyiv can't win even with all the weapons the US and it allies can give it then the debated issue isn't ultimately terribly important. Kisin said Crimea is a done deal and the Donbas isn't terribly important (which makes sense, given that mostly Russians and not Ukrainians live there) so the real question is how to end the war before the Kyiv regime collapses. Putting NATO boots on the ground but with a commitment to NOT changing the current allocation of lands is the unaddressed option. If Zelensky (or Hitchens!?!) wants the 2013 borders back, too bad. And if Putin doesn't want Kyiv's remit area in NATO, too bad.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. But... Nazi Germany didn’t surrender until their entire country was rubble and ashes. Ukraine has the chance to save most of what’s left. But to keep on sending arms piece by piece, will only antagonise Russia and make the need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Pls don’t misunderstand me though, perhaps there is justification for sending more arms for Ukraine? But not on the point that it will help to negotiate a more favourable peace, bc it won’t. Just as Nazi Germany trying to develop its wonder weapons and making risky outlandish offensives backfired. If Ukraine is to be helped at all, in my personal opinion, it must be a full NATO response, not a few tanks here and there, a patriot system and a few other token gestures, bc that’s all they are and they do nothing in the long term and overall strategy to help Ukraine. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

Can we have more debates please. They're great.

Hitchens somehow conveniently starts with Suez and avoid to mention UK foreign policy to Nazi Germany in years leading up to war. Not all wars are the same.

Important points made by all. Thank you for this debate.

Peter has one point that he shouldnt be interrupted whilst interrupting everyone else.

@Archibald_von_Munch

Жыл бұрын

I love Peter Hitchens - he does apparently have things to say, and will say them, whether anyone else is talking or not 😂.

@Mike-fx4nu

Жыл бұрын

One person talked for essentially 15 minutes, interruptions were inevitable.

@mostevil1082

Жыл бұрын

​@@Archibald_von_Munch he spoke a lot, but didn't say much of anything here.

@andrew_l1900

Жыл бұрын

He also resorts to vague personal criticisms when he starts loosing the argument. It’s kind of sad

How do we reintroduce this format and standards into the Educational System ?

One more question to the opposition: Why should we value the feelings of a country's elites above international law? The UN charter gives the right to every country to enter or stay out of alliances, why should this be overruled by the feelings of the Russian elites?

@johnmknox

Жыл бұрын

It shouldn't. It is none of Russia's business whether Ukraine joins NATO or the EU. It is a decision for Ukrainians to make.

@fujohnson8667

Жыл бұрын

Ok so by that token…should the USA accept Chinese military bases in Mexico? If that’s what the Mexican government wanted. You already know the answer so your point is invalid in practice.

@mrmr4622

Жыл бұрын

@@fujohnson8667 Cant imagine a world where Mexico agrees to that Also it still wouldnt warrant US invading Mexico if they did

@blazingkhalif2

Жыл бұрын

@@fujohnson8667 You know we allowed Russian weapons in Cuba right? until they put nukes and even then that was more political than the actual threat of nukes so your point is invalid. Also also why compare to America? america's an outlier in terms of having friendly neighbors and two oceans separating it from enemy nations. no other country in the world is as lucky as America when it comes to borders.

@fujohnson8667

Жыл бұрын

@@blazingkhalif2 I compare it to America because America wouldn’t accept a hostile military alliance on its border but all the Ukraine flag shaggers think Russia should have to accept the same. Hypocrisy look it up.

Great discussion. Better than anything on TV or radio.

Regardless what side you are on, this is great conversation and there shall be more of this.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

36 minutes in and Edward Lucas makes the point that Ukraine, needs to have decisive military strength, in some battle victories. So they can negotiate peace, from a position of strength and that’s why the West, should be increasing, military support to Ukraine. This is exactly what kept World War 2 going on, for longer than was necessary. The Germans knew mathematically 100% that WW2 was lost, after the battle of Kursk and with a high degree of certainty, after their defeat at Stalingrad. Yet they continued to fight on, bc they needed to negotiate peace, from a position of strength. How many millions of lives, were frittered away during Germany’s decline and downfall that could’ve been spared? And why did Germany make the decision to be so stubborn and piss against a hurricane force wind? The mathematical superiority of the Allies, was beyond any reasonable doubt and we would have to recognise that the weight of Ukraine’s military power, versus the Russians, is an obvious parallel. Germany at the point of the battle of Kursk, had a lot more pluses in its favour, from all their prior successes and technological advancements, than Ukraine today, has against Russia. I’m absolutely certain that Edward Lucas would agree that Germany should’ve sued for peace, after losing the battle of Kursk and probably earlier than that. Yet with Ukraine’s case today against Russia, he’s advocating for the opposite of this logic. I just thought I’d make this point now and I hope that Hitchens and Fazi will respond along this line. An excellent debate so far. @37:25 “What would that point be, where sufficient military strength is reached, so that a negotiated peace can happen?” Konstantin: “Well no one knows.” End of debate. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

Nazi Germany didn’t surrender until their entire country was rubble and ashes. Ukraine has the chance to save most of what’s left. But to keep on sending arms piece by piece, will only antagonise Russia and make the need to conquer Ukraine that much more urgent. Pls don’t misunderstand me though, perhaps there is justification for sending more arms for Ukraine? But not on the point that it will help to negotiate a more favourable peace, bc it won’t. Just as Nazi Germany trying to develop its wonder weapons and making risky outlandish offensives backfired. If Ukraine is to be helped at all, in my personal opinion, it must be a full NATO response, not a few tanks here and there, a patriot system and a few other token gestures, bc that’s all they are and they do nothing in the long term and overall strategy to help Ukraine. I rest my case and I hope this helps.

@masas19

Жыл бұрын

​@@flashgordon6670 Ukraines war efforts are supported by the West, which have much bigger combined economy than Russia. It is only up to political will how much of that economy is harnessed to help Ukraine. So comparing Ukraine to Germany during ww2 is inaccurate.

@cynicalpenguin

Жыл бұрын

​@@flashgordon6670 Apples and oranges. As you say, the Germans knew they were doomed after Kursk; in this instance on the other hand Russia has not yet demonstrated that they can conquer Ukraine.

@flashgordon6670

Жыл бұрын

@@masas19 No it isn’t inaccurate, bc Germany in WW2 was against France, The British Empire, The USSR and the USA. This is like me going into a boxing ring against Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis, Mohammed Ali and the Klitchko brothers. Not a very sensible thing for me to do and no surprise what the result would be. You failing to see the obvious, only shows what a truly ignorant fool you are. Thanks for showing the whole world what you’re like and well done for defeating yourself, albeit unwittingly. Checkmate asswipe.

Excellent debate. Great contributions from everyone on the panel. Thank you 👏🏽

@ThomasDanielsen1000

11 ай бұрын

Except from Hitchens and Fazi.

The trouble with this debate is all the panelists have major flaws in their arguments. It's a bugger of an issue for sure. Fazi has not even stepped foot in Ukraine. The Hitch can never be wrong. Kisin hangs everything on the fact he's Russian and Lucas plays with his mic!

@MacakPodSIjemom

Жыл бұрын

You must never forget, that Kisin is "a Russian" only for the gullible British or in general Western audience. He's not really a Russian (by ethnicity)...and that speaks volumes to those who have any deeper knowledge about Russian interethnic relations.

@Simon53188

Жыл бұрын

What is a Fazi? Apologies for the question. I don't know what it means.

What an excellent debate. Much needed. Gained a lot of insight.

Why is no one mentioning Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt leaked phonecall 2014?

@user-wm5rt9pw5l

Жыл бұрын

Because perhaps, unlike you, others know the context of this call.

@MyMared

Жыл бұрын

@@user-wm5rt9pw5l "Context" go ahead please, explain the "context to me".

@user-wm5rt9pw5l

Жыл бұрын

@@MyMared Nuland Payat's call happened during third round of negotiations between opposition and Yanukovych on the formation of a new government. A week before the call, Yanukovych officially offered Yatsenyuk position of prime minister...

@MyMared

Жыл бұрын

@@user-wm5rt9pw5l alright so this tells me that the US had direct influence on ukrainian politics right? Why is the person or politicians from the country allowed to play such a major role in the internal politics of a foreign country that is almost half russian and at the same time campagning at the Maidan protests to get the country into the EU?

@maryanchabursky9148

Жыл бұрын

@@MyMared they aren’t suggestions from a major ally are not the same as direct control you idiot.

Fantastic debate

Edward Lucas "Can you chair this please?" Too right, terrible job moderating this debate.

Imagine if Great Britain decided to restore the Empire instead of granting independence to the colonies and fostering the development of the Commonwealth. Empires fade, and the end can be peaceful and dignified. Or not.

@sbaumgartner9848

Жыл бұрын

Exactly! Where does it end and how far back in history does an aggressor be allowed to go?