-
I don't know the answer to these points.
Why does opposing a war in Ukraine/calling for all parties to work towards de-escalation mean you support Putin?
Isn't this the position of Starmer, and indeed the UK government? Reading the Guardian piece from the stop the war convenor, you could be under the impression that Starmer is calling for war.
-
Why does opposing a war in Ukraine/calling for all parties to work towards de-escalation mean you support Putin?
It doesn't.
Why is this debate being had in the Corbyn thread? Starmer is the one who's attacked STW, and the post above was their response to him (perhaps that's why there's "only ten words" on Putin in the piece).
Because he has spoken at an even that was advised as being focused on NATO and not both parties or Putin which is suggestive of a view to casual observers.
Starmer is in full-on cynical mode with the flags, attacking stwc, JC but the US will make the decision to intervene not NATO. Starmer is just more noise, bit noise that plays less into the hands of Putin.
It feels like a sign of the postmodern/post-truth era that failure to show moral relativism and pragmatism is, ironically, taken to be a moral failing.
I think (and my thoughts may only be half formed) that not making sure you show perspective by acknowledging Putin's role in this as you criticise the west undermines (good) arguments as it leaves too much ambiguity. No real moralising here and I'd rather not have a war.
-
This whole thing is a mix of semantics and PR.
But this;
Why does opposing a war in Ukraine/calling for all parties to work towards de-escalation mean you support Putin?
is not what Starmer is referencing. The context is;
His comments, in an article for The Guardian, came as Corbyn addressed a Stop The War rally in London titled “No war in Ukraine - Stop NATO expansion.”
It's in the Corbyn thread because it's a slight derail from Corbyn speaking at the rally and because he's the deputy president of the Stop the War coalition.
I guess you could also say it forms part of one of the many problems with Corbyn. Personally I voted for him based on the manifesto - in particular the green policies and small business policies. However, to be frank, I was always concerned by his risk to national security. Ironically, I weighed up Johnson as likely to be a greater risk.
You are reading a single comment by @ and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
deleted
dst2
hugo7
@ 
Can someone explain a couple of things to me?
Why does opposing a war in Ukraine/calling for all parties to work towards de-escalation mean you support Putin?
Why is this debate being had in the Corbyn thread? Starmer is the one who's attacked STW, and the post above was their response to him (perhaps that's why there's "only ten words" on Putin in the piece).
It feels like a sign of the postmodern/post-truth era that failure to show moral relativism and pragmatism is, ironically, taken to be a moral failing.