General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPope Francis says Ukraine war was 'perhaps somehow provoked'
Pontiff condemns cruelty of Russian troops while warning against perception of conflict as good v evil
Pope Francis has said Moscows invasion of Ukraine was perhaps somehow provoked as he recalled a conversation in the run-up to the war in which he was warned Nato was barking at the gates of Russia.
In an interview with the Jesuit magazine La Civiltà Cattolica, conducted last month and published on Tuesday, the pontiff condemned the ferocity and cruelty of the Russian troops while warning against what he said was a fairytale perception of the conflict as good versus evil.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/14/pope-francis-ukraine-war-provoked-russian-troops
Um, yes, it is good fighting fucking evil, please don't try to sugarcoat it while Ukrainians are being slaughtered
Gore1FL
(21,132 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,376 posts)Stuart G
(38,436 posts)mucifer
(23,554 posts)Phoenix61
(17,006 posts)Interesting he remembers the conversation but not who it was with.
Pope Francis has said Moscows invasion of Ukraine was perhaps somehow provoked as he recalled a conversation in the run-up to the war in which he was warned Nato was barking at the gates of Russia.
usajumpedtheshark
(672 posts)oioioi
(1,127 posts)malthaussen
(17,205 posts)Don't legitimize Russian paranoia. It's like an abusive spouse saying "look at what you made me do." I guess the reflexive defense of authoritarian tyrants is hard to shake off, when one is an authoritative tyrant by trade.
-- Mal
Beatlelvr
(619 posts)How was Nato barking at Russia? Second, I wish these guys carrying on the "big lie" about some phantom up in the sky would just shut up about world affairs.
SoonerPride
(12,286 posts)You see, it was the boys' fault for being cute. They provoked them.
And Ukraine's fault for being there. They provoked Russia.
Fuck the pope specifically and the fuck the catholic church in general.
PortTack
(32,779 posts)llashram
(6,265 posts)go inside the Vatican church...pray and stay out of the politics of war IF he's going to lay blame on the Ukrainians for "provoking" the Russian barbarian Putin. I just don't get that.
48656c6c6f20
(7,638 posts)Wash more feet and talk less.
vimeo.com/140059003
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)maxsolomon
(33,345 posts)He constrains the rabid RW US Bishops - to a degree.
But he's still the leader of the Roman Empire's Ghost.
onecaliberal
(32,873 posts)Lovie777
(12,295 posts)they illegally are occupying in Crimea? Which country sat at the Ukrainian border with full gear of soliders and weapons? Which country waited until after the Olympics because China ask them to and attacked shortly thereafter? Who is commiting genocide?
World War 2 the Pope sided with Hilter.
dlk
(11,572 posts)Something the Catholic Church excels at.
2naSalit
(86,660 posts)The best they can ever come up with is bothsiderisms.
Fuck that, the rest of the west needs to just eliminate the problem and move forward to trying to avoid self imposed extinction.
C_U_L8R
(45,004 posts)If there is evil in this world, it's bothsider-ism
spooky3
(34,461 posts)Emile
(22,810 posts)spewing fascist remarks.
Zambero
(8,965 posts)Let's not forget to be extra nice to the bad guys of the world as they go about doing their bad stuff. In the face of weakness, they'll simply back off!
OnDoutside
(19,962 posts)I hope he "clarifies".... after all, none of us are infallible
no_hypocrisy
(46,133 posts)Your Holiness, that's stretching Logic.
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)Youre coming across as a Putin apologist. This was unprovoked aggression, and your NATO argument is a strawman.
You can and should do better.
FSogol
(45,493 posts)The Pope is both siding the hell out of the war.
Irish_Dem
(47,160 posts)He sounds like he is siding with Russia, and blaming the victims for what is happening in Ukraine.
And hell yes, this is a battle between good and evil.
I like Pope Francis, but on this issue he needs to shut up and not make a bad situation worse by taking the side of pure evil.
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)This is the guy that speaks to his good eh?
Bucky
(54,027 posts)... you'll recognize from the Bible that the Creator of the Universe has utterly ludicrous and deficient communication skills. Talking to God is actually quite easy. But figuring out His messages are pretty much a confusing and hopeless enterprise.
"Oh look, here's a dove coming out of the sky. What do you suppose that means?"
"Oh no, frogs are raining down all over Egypt. What the hell is my takeaway supposed to be?"
"Here's a book full of God inspired wisdom. We're calling it The Bible. Let's start with a chapter where lady gets turned into salt for looking over her shoulder and so her daughters get her husband drunk so they can sleep with their own father. It's about morality"
isn't it all obvious?
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)sarisataka
(18,679 posts)If we elected one of those people President?
lapucelle
(18,282 posts)sarisataka
(18,679 posts)It's an opportunity to bash the Pope, Catholics and religion. Context might just ruin the outrage.
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)lapucelle
(18,282 posts)its really quite easy.
1. After reading a headline that catches your attention, read the story thats under it. The story might provide clues in the form. of a primary source.
2. Using a search engine like Google, see if you can find the primary source.
3. When you find that primary source, read the whole thing.
You can even practice with the link in the OP!
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)Honestly, it is amazing I've managed to muster the cerebral fortitude necessary to meander my way here through the vicissitudinary corridors of the vast, undulating interwebs. Or at least I think it is amazing... but then someone as stupid as me must ipso facto be rather easy to amaze. One can't possibly expect I am possessed of the requisite mental alacrity to click on links and then read, much less comprehend, articles written for a general audience.
Or, you know, I did read the interview and was asking you why you feel this quote was taken out of context. Because I don't see the preceding or succeeding paragraphs as significantly altering the meaning of: We do not see the whole drama unfolding behind this war, which was, perhaps, somehow either provoked or not prevented.
lapucelle
(18,282 posts)Here's what you quoted from the article:
Now here's the headline of the OP/linked story:
Noticing all the words that came before and and all the words that came after the three words that the Guardian plucked out the middle of one sentence of a very long interview is the first step in understanding what partial and decontextualized mean.
As for me and what I feel, thank you for asking, but my post was a simple statement of fact concerning a clickbait headline.
And you yourself verified it.
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)The headline didn't include a complete quote. Headlines rarely do. That in and of itself doesn't make a headline misleading.
As I said, I don't see the entire quote as being significantly different in its semantics than the words cherry-picked for the headline. You think there's nuance there that I'm missing? Then step up to the plate and take a swing.
lapucelle
(18,282 posts)eShirl
(18,495 posts)EndlessWire
(6,538 posts)state of exhaustion over the war. What an appalling statement. As stated upthread, this is blaming the victim. Certainly, Ukraine was not "barking at the gates of Russia." They aren't even a member of NATO, having been soundly rejected when they begged to join. Had they actually been a member of NATO, we would not be having this discussion. There was no provoking of Russia.
Instead, we have Russia land grabbing bits and pieces of Ukraine, as has been demonstrated by Russia before. Putin's naked aggression and desire to control the Azov and Black Sea is the provocation here. It is Russia who is provoking war, and conducting war, and who loves war. Better for the Pope to keep praying for peace. How far away is Italy? I'm thinking that if Russia wanted to provoke Italy, they could shoot over the water and hit a part of Italy. Maybe that is why this appeasement is being tossed out there.
But, to what purpose is the Pope's appeasement statement aimed, and why doesn't he leave politics out of his religious statement? Change Putin to Hitler, and see how it flows, eh? All the begging to Russia done at the UN did not change the thrust of the war, and all Putin accomplished was to hurry other nations up in their scramble for protection by NATO, for which they can hardly be blamed.
Giving comfort to Putin and his ambition in appeasement is hardly the studly thing to do, Pope. Disappointment plus.
lapucelle
(18,282 posts)as its lede, all in the service of clicks and the ratio.
Bucky
(54,027 posts)Both the US and Ukraine made conciliatory gestures to Russia before the invasion. They had entirely back burnered any talk of joining NATO and it was essentially never going to happen as long as Putin had maintained the status quo.
Now Putin is not only killing civilians of his own accord, but he's also laying tracks for the economic balkanization of his own country--plus he's made some kind of relationship between NATO and Ukraine almost inevitable.
Calculating
(2,955 posts)More like the antipope
sarisataka
(18,679 posts)Was he not elected by the College of Cardinals? Was the election stolen? Who is the true Pope?
lapucelle
(18,282 posts)whisper about, Steve Bannon and Bill Barr among them.
Caliman73
(11,740 posts)Russia has been the aggressor in this scenario for many years. Since the seizure of Crimea, to the backing of "separatists" in Eastern Ukraine, to the invasion by the "green men", to this blatant invasion. Russia was not provoked. Russia feared being "checked" in its desire to regain the glory of the Russian Empire by Ukraine moving closer to the EU and NATO.
NATO is a defensive alliance. While I am sure that people will argue that NATO invaded Iraq, or Bosnia in the 1990's, the fact is that NATO has not invaded countries to take over territory. There have been military interventions, usually as a result of aggressions by warring factions, but not to gain territory or exert dominance, in the way the Russia did with Georgia, Chechnya, and is trying to do with Ukraine.
There aren't "two sides" with valid perspectives here. There is one sick dictator who fears losing power and influence, who invaded a sovereign country for his own gain, and the response of the rest of the world to his actions. It isn't as simple as good and evil, but Putin has definitely shown that his actions are closer to "evil" then simply trying to help a country defend itself from invasion.
usajumpedtheshark
(672 posts)NCLefty
(3,678 posts)What else explains the ongoing coverups and secret payments?