Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has reaffirmed his stance that countries should push for peace talks to resolve the war in Ukraine after coming under harsh criticism from the US for his position.
During a recent visit to China, Lula said the US should stop “encouraging” the war in Ukraine and “start talking about peace.” The White House slammed the Brazilian leader in response, accusing him of “parroting Russian and Chinese propaganda.”
In Portugal on Saturday, Lula again called for peace talks. “We are not in favor of war. We want peace,” he said at a press conference with Portuguese President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa. “Russia does not want to stop, and Ukraine does not want to stop. And if you don’t talk about peace, you are contributing to war.”
Lula said he understood the position of European countries that want to keep arming Ukraine and said he was trying to convey Brazil’s position. “Brazil does not want to participate in the war, Brazil wants to find a group of people who are willing to spend a little time talking with all the people who are willing to make peace,” he said.
The US and most of its European allies have discouraged peace talks throughout the war. Most recently, the US came out against China’s potential role as a mediator between the warring sides. Ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s trip to Moscow in March, the White House said it opposed a ceasefire in Ukraine.
Lula deserves a cigar! Smoke ‘um if you’ve got ‘um….
“Brazil’s Lula Reaffirms Ukraine Position After US Criticism The US accused Lula of ‘parroting Russian and Chinese propaganda’ for calling on countries arming Kyiv to push for peace talks”
The US is the only country spewing propaganda at a horrendous
rate.
China has been Brazil’s biggest trading partner for years.
This is not a new flirtation like the US press is trying to portray this friendship.
Nor will Washington’s admonishments to Brazil really matter to them given how much business/money China is bringing to them.
The White House slammed the Brazilian leader in response, accusing him of “parroting Russian and Chinese propaganda.”
“Russia does not want to stop, and Ukraine does not want to stop. And if you don’t talk about peace, you are contributing to war.”
“Brazil does not want to participate in the war, Brazil wants to find a group of people who are willing to spend a little time talking with all the people who are willing to make peace”
To the White House, talking peace is propaganda. And Russian and Chinese propaganda at that. Must be that democracy vs. autocracy thingy again.
“To the White House, talking peace is propaganda. And Russian and Chinese propaganda at that. Must be that democracy vs. autocracy thingy again.”
Pretty sure it’s the Iraq invasion “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists” thingy again – keep yr mouth shut about diplomacy, or yr a Putin loving appeaser.
There can be multiple thingys.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
CNN’s latest “analysis” notes the US and EU have led in providing Ukraine with “defensive arms”, even while touting this as prep for an offensive (which Intel leaks divulge are not expected to succeed). The critique of Lula claims he “places the attacker and the attacked on the same level.”
Ukraine attacked its democracy in 2014 and its disenfranchised former citizens in the east ever since. The US attacked Russia by egging on and probably organizing from the start the 2014 coup plotters, supporting endless NATO expansion to Russia’s borders, withdrawing from arms control treaties, and having a vast and growing military budget that demonstrates an intention to aggressively maintain global dominance, which the US govt calls defense. And Russia finally did resort to invading Ukraine.
So if parsing the pettiness of who started it really matters one bit, now you know.
I think it was way more aggressive of Russia to invade Ukraine than anything nato did tbh.
You do know the “offensive” is to retake land that was invaded less than a year ago right? This war is actually about Russia and Ukraine. If you listen to what Putin and Russian media are saying, it’s that Ukraine is not a real country with a right to exist and should belong to Russia. We don’t have to speculate on their motivations. They say it all the time.
So many ifs.
If the Euromaidan coup had not replaced the elected government of Ukraine with a bunch of nationalists who couldn’t get 5% of the vote in the previous election.
If the US had not spent 8 years training and arming the nationalist regime in preparation for an invasion of the independent Republics.
If Russia had played the same game the US is playing by providing the DPR and the LPR with training and arms instead of sending its own troops to fight alongside theirs.
If the people who signed the Minsk agreements had sincerely tried to honor them in good faith.
This war would not have happened.
Should the US allow Mexico to host Russian biolabs and nuclear weapons on their sovereign territory? Russia had every right to stop the Neo Nazi infested Ukraine government from committing continued mass murder in the Donbas, and to thwart NATO’s intention of making Ukraine a nuclear bulwark against Russia. The US commercial media is nothing more that a liars paradise.
Russia and the US literally signed the Budapest memorandum to disarm Ukraine. It’s insane to think Ukraine shouldn’t try to defend itself when Russia literally invaded and took over part of it in 2014.
And even if Mexico did that, invading would not be justified!
Wait what!? Russia invadef Ukraine in 2014? First I m hearing of this. And before you mention Crimea, I suggest you read up on its status as an autonomous region but other than that, yeah please elaborate.
Russia allowed the Crimeans to vote on who they wanted to go with. I don’t recall Wash. in the past allowing the Mexicans, Indians and others they conquered that right.
Usually with simpletons who make such light arguments, you try to catch them and run into a rabbit hole of a debate and hope they might come out the other end a little bit more informed. Otherwise if they are of the ignorant brainwashed kind, you raise your hands up in the air in as a sign of surrender and chuck them the deuces, no point in lowering yourself to their level, mighy fvck around and get stuck down there.
not so autonomous now that russian troops took over by force lol. Russian troops were literally in the parliament when they voted to oust the PM and replace it with a guy whose party got 4% of the vote last election.
Pretty interesting stuff. I’m actually more convinced after reading it all through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation
Wikipedia. Seriously? There have been a Russian base there for over 20 years. There was no invasion. Its like claiming Americans invading Turkiye when they have always been at Incirlik. Look if you have drank the coolaid and go around looking for justification then by all means, have at it. There are millions like you who tow the line, must accept the narrative. You just gotta have that blue pill at all cost. I relent.
I know the US has a base in Turkey. If they occupied the parliament and forced a vote to turn Turkey into a US state, that would be bad!
That mon ami is misinformation. Talking points inserted to push the narrative. Are seriously that naive. You still haven’t learnt to differentiate it when the DC/Nato establishment parrot something relentlessly it should be ample reason to give a pause. You really are just lapping it up aren’t you. I suppose you also believe Russia invaded Ukraine ‘unprovoked’, Putin wants to restore U.S.S.R. or Russian Empire and Ukraine is what…an exercise for this eventuality. Maybe you believe Russia is running out of shells, missiles, and tanks, probably its economy is in shambles after the sanctions from hell, Russia makes nothing and is just a gas station masquerading as a country, its soldiers are dying in numbers far more horrific than SVR and Ukraine is better trained (Nato) and better warriors and will push back and retake every inch including Crimea and sevastopol, just after they receive all the aid they have been promised. I mean at this point I gotta get a proper reading of who I m chatting with here because I may be outta my depth if the brainwash is that severe.
IDK exactly what you’re calling misinfo, and calling something a talking point doesn’t mean it isn’t true. You can understandably think the US has done bad things or is even the worst country in the world. That doesn’t mean other countries can’t do bad things. If it helps just pretend that all the weapons are coming from Poland.
Those are details that can vary depending on your sources, interpretation, optimism and pessimism, and gut instincts. I mean Russia’s economy is weaker and down a million productive people who have fled or been killed but it’s not going to collapse. You’re just doing the exact opposite of what you’re accusing me of doing which is thinking everyone on TV is lying to you 100% of the time, when usually the bias is more about what they leave out or don’t say rather than outright lies.
But those are details and we’ll see how Ukraine does in the next few months, no one knows for sure. My point is that Russia invading is morally bad and it’s very understandable that Ukraine would want to defend itself. I’m going to guess you believe that 2014 was a coup so let’s not argue about that. Since then they’ve had a number of indisputably legit elections and peaceful transfers of power trying to improve their country, which is good. If they are invaded and conquered like Zap and Kherson then they’re stuck with Putin for as long as he lives, which is bad.
You made some good valid points key amongst them being lets see how it all ends. For now lets agree to disagree.
Also. I don’t know what your referring to, Crimea conducted a referendum to join Russia. Unless I am missing something let me be the first to admit it..their status as a self governing autonomous region allowed them to do so unlike Donbass had to first secede then declare themselves independent. Stop rummaging through the internet blindly looking for sources to justify your coolaid. Get some proper perspective first. It would help if you could talk with people with varying views on the matter, then read up on them and THEN form an opinion. As of now, you just sound like CNN.
“Should the US allow Mexico to host Russian biolabs and nuclear weapons on their sovereign territory?”
The US doesn’t get to “allow” or “not allow” that. That’s what “sovereign” means.
I don’t agree, Thomas. The US would undoubtedly, and justifiably, consider Russian biolabs and nuclear weapons in Mexico as a threat to US security. Same with the US biolabs and nuclear weapons in Ukraine which the Russians undoubtedly, and justifiably, consider as a threat to their security. (If there were nuclear weapons in Ukraine)
“I think it was way more aggressive of Russia to invade Ukraine than anything nato did tbh.”
True. But if US/NATO didn’t do what it did, does and will continue to do, this wouldn’t be happening. Inevitability keeps coming to mind.
Try paying closer attention to what the Russian government is saying about Ukraine. I would recommend that you get news about Russia from Russian journalistic outlets instead of western outlets and governments involved in Biden’s proxy war.
Sound point OB1.
“If you listen to what Putin and Russian media are saying, it’s that Ukraine is not a real country with a right to exist and should belong to Russia. We don’t have to speculate on their motivations. They say it all the time.”
“They say it all the time”? Great – should be a cinch for you to link to two quotes supporting an otherwise worthless claim:
1/ one quote where Putin states that “Ukraine is not a real country with a right to exist and should belong to Russia;” and
2/ the other quote where Putin “say[s]” this was his “motivation” for invading.
btw – Great you “listen to what Putin and Russian media… say…all the time”! Where’d ya’ pick up Russian?
Here’s what Putin had to say. And it’s considerably more nuanced than “Ukraine is not a real country with a right to exist and should belong to Russia. ”
https://www.c-span.org/video/?518097-2/russian-president-putin-statement-ukraine
“it’s considerably more nuanced than “Ukraine is not a real country with a right to exist and should belong to Russia.”
‘considerably more nuanced’? yea, as in, ‘to the extent that he’s actually saying something else’…
btw – thx fr link, but, at this point, w/major statements in text form, i expect this interlocutor to provide written quotes – specially considering their declared familiarity with what’s said “all the time.”
There’s a transcript below the video in the link, but not a very good one and since I don’t speak Russian I can’t vouch for its accuracy.
thx again…i did read putin’s two major speeches, pre- and post-invasion justifications, at time – and what mainstream press made of them…
…right now, this poster made a claim, so it’s first on him/her to back it up…i’ll go back into the texts, as necessary, after that…
1. The annexation of kherson + zap besides the dnr/lnr shows he literally just wants to conquer as much of ukraine as possible. Those two were not “independent republics”. That kyiv convoy was not for show, he was actually trying to take over the whole country.
“I want the Kyiv government and their real bosses in the west to hear me (…) residents of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson are becoming our citizens forever,” he said.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/putin-says-four-annexed-ukrainian-regions-will-be-russian-forever/
There’s lots of other quotes that get close to what I paraphrased. like
“I recall that long ago, well before 2014, the U.S. and EU countries systematically and consistently pushed Ukraine to curtail and limit economic cooperation with Russia. We, as the largest trade and economic partner of Ukraine, suggested discussing the emerging problems in the Ukraine-Russia-EU format. But every time we were told that Russia had nothing to do with it and that the issue concerned only the EU and Ukraine. De facto Western countries rejected Russia’s repeated calls for dialogue.” http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
And one of his continued preconditions for peace is that Ukraine not join the EU. He is still trying to undermine Ukranian sovereignty outside of his “security concerns”
And a lot is double talk. From that same link
“We respect the Ukrainian language and traditions. We respect Ukrainians’ desire to see their country free, safe and prosperous.
I am confident that true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia.
… For we are one people.”
He’s just saying that if his definition of a free prosperous Ukraine is only one that he controls, no matter how many hundreds of thousands of them he has to kill.
Here’s a bonus link with tons of state media saying that they must kill and occupy the ukranians for years to Russify them https://cepa.org/article/morality-shouldnt-get-in-the-way-russias-genocidal-state-media/
Yes the offensive is to retake land Russia annexed a year ago after referendums of varying quality. This war is about Russia having exactly 1 warm water port and the US wanting them to have none. I think the ‘not real country’ rhetoric is about the deep historical and cultural roots Russia has in Ukraine, and a Monroe doctrine type attitude that Russia has the right to dominate its immediate neighborhood, and must for its security with an alliance opposed to them advancing towards the heart of their country.
The US wanted this war. It never wanted peace.
It wanted the war to engineer regime change in Russia, not for anything that could be done in Ukraine, so there is nothing to talk about regarding Ukraine.
The US meant to get Putin, and de-colonize the Russian Federation in order to buy up its assets as it began to do under Yeltsin.
It was about big money, eliminating Russia once and for all, not anything about this little matter of Ukraine. So don’t think about peace in Ukraine. That is not even the subject, not remotely the real reason for any of this. Just listen to Victoria Nuland and her crew.
“The US wanted this war. It never wanted peace.”
Yea…looking at statements, bet you can make the case that the worst of the worst were spoiling for war…but for other militarists, domination by NATO-ization and increased military industry/military budget weapons procurement was just as acceptable – so war vs. military footprint were seen as ‘win-win.’
Upshot here…brinkmanship: some may not have WANTED war…but they were fine with it as one outcome, in the likely event Russia bridled at the expansion.
At a certain point, US intelligence told Z. Russia was going to invade – but I’d bet, in inner circle discussions, it was recognized as extremely likely, based on US refusal to take NATO off the table, considerably earlier.
At least another leader is trying, but he might as well talk to the wall, he’ll get the same results.
He has a strong point. If Lula can demonstrate the isolation of the US position with many impacted nations not just sitting the war out but calling for peace and prosperity, that could make a difference.
Lula is expressing the position everybody not US ally ir dependency, can agree with.
Everybody is supporting initiative leading to peace. Everybody agrees that US and UK and their dependent East European states, are against peace.
US and allies are thus beligerants both as militarily and politically.
Only countries not participating in the conflict can act as brokers. He never said anything that the majority of the world does not agree to,