|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On October 13 2022 20:12 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 18:56 pmh wrote:On October 13 2022 18:49 KwarK wrote:On October 13 2022 18:34 pmh wrote:
Split the whole country alone ethnic lines. Or have the conflict going on forever.
This is the choice there is.
70-80% Ukraine 20-30% Russia
Now the thing is that all the resources are in the eastern part of Ukraine and the territorial waters. Which would make this a very bad deal for Ukraine.
So we split those resources as well with the same ratio. 70-80% Ukraine. 20%-30% Russia. And we then also agree that exploration of those resources will have to be done in a joint venture between Ukraine and Russia,again with these ratios.
Its wrong,it is bad,but this is the reality. The ethnic Russian population of Ukraine does want to be part of Russia. We can ignore this reality but it wont make this reality go away.
So we either make a deal like this or have the conflict go on forever.
Personally i would rather not have this conflict go on forever. It leads to a pointless and immense suffering where in the end neither side will gain anything.
The 3rd option,which is probably the most likely option.
A ceasefire without any agreement. Not all that beneficial for Ukraine because this would de facto put the resources under Russian control. But they can have hope for a better and more permanent solution years or decades later.
We have to get away from beeing stuck in an ideological position where only the very best outcome is acceptable. We have to move towards a more pragmatic position where we accept certain realitys.
And just to be clear:i do not support Russia. And i do think the situation should return to what is was before the war. But the reality is that this will not happen This assertion that “the reality is that the ethnic Russian population of Ukraine wants to be part of Russia” is unsupported by any evidence. People extrapolate far beyond their votes arguing that because they voted for one Ukrainian party over another they must desire the border to be changed. That’s not how any of this works. Right now we are seeing in real time that millions of ethnic Russians within Russia don’t want to live under autocratic Russian rule. The idea that Russians outside of Russia desperately crave it needs a significant amount of evidence. Ok this is a decent point. And i agree my assumption about this is not well founded and maybe even wrong. But i do think,that after everything that has happened,it would be better to split the population along ethnic lines. I cant imagine Russians beeing in a good position under a Ukraine government after all that has happend. And i cant imagine Ukrainians beeing in a good position under a Russian government after all that has happend either. The option to peacefully coexist i think is no longer there. It wasnt even there before the war because there was the seperatist movement in the east. So going by the reality (again my asumption,feel free to challenge this) that peacefull coexistence in wich both ethnic groups are equally treated and have equall opportunitys is no longer possible. A split along ethnic lines would be the pragmatic solution. I dont think this is a great solution,on the contrary. I think that in general this is a very bad solution that should be avoided (i would prefer peacefull co-existance and further integration). But i do think such a solution is better then having this conflict go on for many years to come. Then in the long run,maybe the 2 ethnic groups can come closer together and eventually a shared and peacefull co-existance is possible. The 2 ethnic groups are very close to eachoter. They are not enemies by nature. The groups have peacefully co-existed for most of modern history. Splitting really is a bad solution but i cant think of anything else unfortunatly. I tend to agree with most of what you write here, but there's one important matter: this war is not about ethnics, it is about civil allegiance. There are tons of ethnic Ukrainians fighting for Russian army and vice versa. And even more, Ukraine is heterogenous, but with the degree of ethhic origin changing gradually; many people in the center regions are of mixed origin. So I don't know any objective criterion to differ them ethnically other than self-determination
Civil aliance is not that bad of an description. It is supported by state actors but that goes for both sides.
Voting does make the situation complicated i think. Never in history has there been a peace treaty that was decided upon by public vote directly.
A line will have to be drawn somewhere eventually. And after that selfdetermination by allowing people to chose where they want to live.
Unfortunatly every one seems to be set on a continuation of the conflict for now.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On October 13 2022 22:57 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:46 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 17:40 Manit0u wrote:
[quote]
Just to clear that up: it's not a definition of racism. It would be categorized as hate speech and a form of xenhophobia but more specific. In this case being derogatory towards Russia would be rusophobia I think. It might be, if it weren't a well documented and objectively true phenomenon that is being described. Ok, tell what country you're from - and I'll play a role of KwarK for you by accompanying my posts by random stupid stereotypical statements about it - so you'd know a little better what racism is and what is not There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture. It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Trump broke US culture. Could end up being a true statement, I guess we will see. And he had no where near the power of stalin or the ruthlessness nor nearly the time in power. Sounds like it could be true.
-you here are insulting the US culture beyond belief, as you say that a single man nullifies all the cultural inheritance made by tens of thousends of American people through centuries
|
On October 13 2022 22:58 Mikau313 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:46 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 17:40 Manit0u wrote:
[quote]
Just to clear that up: it's not a definition of racism. It would be categorized as hate speech and a form of xenhophobia but more specific. In this case being derogatory towards Russia would be rusophobia I think. It might be, if it weren't a well documented and objectively true phenomenon that is being described. Ok, tell what country you're from - and I'll play a role of KwarK for you by accompanying my posts by random stupid stereotypical statements about it - so you'd know a little better what racism is and what is not There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture. It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Are you sure YOU went to university? That is not how falsifiability works. You don't disprove "X is part of Russian culture" by proving X is not a part of German culture. That might just be the dumbest justification you've tried to argue in this thread, and that really is saying something considering the competition.
His point isn't that proving that X is not part of German culture would prove that X is part of Russian culture; it's that you couldn't possibly prove or disprove the same claims you're making about Russia in regard to Germany.
|
On October 13 2022 23:00 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 22:57 JimmiC wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:46 Mikau313 wrote:
[quote]
It might be, if it weren't a well documented and objectively true phenomenon that is being described. Ok, tell what country you're from - and I'll play a role of KwarK for you by accompanying my posts by random stupid stereotypical statements about it - so you'd know a little better what racism is and what is not There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture. It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Trump broke US culture. Could end up being a true statement, I guess we will see. And he had no where near the power of stalin or the ruthlessness nor nearly the time in power. Sounds like it could be true. -you here are insulting the US culture beyond belief, as you say that a single man nullifies all the cultural inheritance made by tens of thousends of American people through centuries And? Before jan 6th the very concept of an attempted insurrection in the USA was unthinkable.
Didn't stop it from happening.
|
On October 13 2022 23:00 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 22:57 JimmiC wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:46 Mikau313 wrote:
[quote]
It might be, if it weren't a well documented and objectively true phenomenon that is being described. Ok, tell what country you're from - and I'll play a role of KwarK for you by accompanying my posts by random stupid stereotypical statements about it - so you'd know a little better what racism is and what is not There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture. It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Trump broke US culture. Could end up being a true statement, I guess we will see. And he had no where near the power of stalin or the ruthlessness nor nearly the time in power. Sounds like it could be true. -you here are insulting the US culture beyond belief, as you say that a single man nullifies all the cultural inheritance made by tens of thousends of American people through centuries
No, he isn't.
Pointing out something has permanent negative influence on a culture doesn't nullify a single great thing that culture does or has done.
Pointing out the parts of a culture that are obviously reprehensible doesn't mean that every part of that culture is reprehensible, nor does it imply anything about the morals of every single person who lives in that culture.
|
On October 13 2022 23:02 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 22:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:46 Mikau313 wrote:
[quote]
It might be, if it weren't a well documented and objectively true phenomenon that is being described. Ok, tell what country you're from - and I'll play a role of KwarK for you by accompanying my posts by random stupid stereotypical statements about it - so you'd know a little better what racism is and what is not There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture. It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Are you sure YOU went to university? That is not how falsifiability works. You don't disprove "X is part of Russian culture" by proving X is not a part of German culture. That might just be the dumbest justification you've tried to argue in this thread, and that really is saying something considering the competition. His point isn't that proving that X is not part of German culture would prove that X is part of Russian culture; it's that you couldn't possibly prove or disprove the same claims you're making about Russia in regard to Germany.
...Ofcourse you can.
|
On October 13 2022 23:05 Mikau313 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 23:02 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2022 22:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:
[quote]
Ok, tell what country you're from - and I'll play a role of KwarK for you by accompanying my posts by random stupid stereotypical statements about it - so you'd know a little better what racism is and what is not
There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture. It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Are you sure YOU went to university? That is not how falsifiability works. You don't disprove "X is part of Russian culture" by proving X is not a part of German culture. That might just be the dumbest justification you've tried to argue in this thread, and that really is saying something considering the competition. His point isn't that proving that X is not part of German culture would prove that X is part of Russian culture; it's that you couldn't possibly prove or disprove the same claims you're making about Russia in regard to Germany. ...Ofcourse you can.
Well, how do you construct verifiable proof that German culture isn't 'reprehensible' or whatever it is that you seem to believe Russian culture is?
|
On October 13 2022 23:00 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 22:57 JimmiC wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:46 Mikau313 wrote:
[quote]
It might be, if it weren't a well documented and objectively true phenomenon that is being described. Ok, tell what country you're from - and I'll play a role of KwarK for you by accompanying my posts by random stupid stereotypical statements about it - so you'd know a little better what racism is and what is not There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture. It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Trump broke US culture. Could end up being a true statement, I guess we will see. And he had no where near the power of stalin or the ruthlessness nor nearly the time in power. Sounds like it could be true. -you here are insulting the US culture beyond belief, as you say that a single man nullifies all the cultural inheritance made by tens of thousends of American people through centuries
Did Stalin, Hitler or Mao break their respective cultures? What about Napoleon or Alexander the great? They were one person as well, but with a system behind them.
We are discussing abstracts and definitions anyway, so there are no absolute truths.
|
On October 13 2022 23:06 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 23:05 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 23:02 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2022 22:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:
[quote]
There have been literal scientific papers on this very phenomenon in Russian culture.
It isn't just a baseless accusation, this is a thing that is verifiably true. I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence. Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Are you sure YOU went to university? That is not how falsifiability works. You don't disprove "X is part of Russian culture" by proving X is not a part of German culture. That might just be the dumbest justification you've tried to argue in this thread, and that really is saying something considering the competition. His point isn't that proving that X is not part of German culture would prove that X is part of Russian culture; it's that you couldn't possibly prove or disprove the same claims you're making about Russia in regard to Germany. ...Ofcourse you can. Well, how do you construct verifiable proof that German culture isn't 'reprehensible' or whatever it is that you seem to believe Russian culture is?
I didn't say that, and that's not what this conversation was about.
This conversation was about the idea that is ingrained in Russian culture that there is no longer such a thing as objective truths.
It would be very easy to disprove this is also the case for Germany, for example. All you have to do is talk to Germans.
|
On October 13 2022 23:09 Mikau313 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 23:06 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2022 23:05 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 23:02 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2022 22:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:
[quote]
I'm a scientist myself, and a specialist in empirical research. So just give me the name - and I'll find you some "scientifical" evidence.
Or I can bring you a paper by Wozniak and Spolaore, who argue that you're country's development rate is due to its genetic closeness to the US (absolute bullshit idea, but published in one of the top economics journals) You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you? Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Are you sure YOU went to university? That is not how falsifiability works. You don't disprove "X is part of Russian culture" by proving X is not a part of German culture. That might just be the dumbest justification you've tried to argue in this thread, and that really is saying something considering the competition. His point isn't that proving that X is not part of German culture would prove that X is part of Russian culture; it's that you couldn't possibly prove or disprove the same claims you're making about Russia in regard to Germany. ...Ofcourse you can. Well, how do you construct verifiable proof that German culture isn't 'reprehensible' or whatever it is that you seem to believe Russian culture is? I didn't say that, and that's not what this conversation was about. This conversation was about the idea that is ingrained in Russian culture that there is no longer such a thing as objective truths. It would be very easy to disprove this is also the case for Germany, for example. All you have to do is talk to Germans.
'Talk to a German' isn't verifiable proof, it's an anecdote.
|
Oh, well... Looks like this thread got overrun by Russians supporting their fascist government and completely diluting the conversation.
When reading about WW2 I always wondered how can the regular Germans, Italians etc. support their governments. Now I can see it with my own eyes.
|
On October 13 2022 23:11 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 23:09 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 23:06 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2022 23:05 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 23:02 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2022 22:58 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 22:53 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 22:19 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 20:31 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:58 Mikau313 wrote:
[quote]
You seriously just can't stop yourself from proving what Kwark is saying, can you?
Why should I care? He is a lost case imo, so I wont spend time on it. I've done my time proving stupid racial bullshit ideas to be false - some of which have even been published in top journals. All I'm simply saying is that you shouldn't involve yourself in accusations of whole nations. The easiest way to undestand that it is simply stupid - is to mirror the accusation to your own country, and see how falsifiable the claim is. ...what? Just because something is true for country A doesn't mean it has to also be true for country B. Have you not studied in university? K.Popper's falsifiability criterion is one of the basic ideas how to check whether a statement is just a random bullshit, that cannot be proved or proved wrong (like it is the case with "Stalin broke the culture"). Apply KwarK's statements to your country (to get more involved and informed), and think how you'd try to reason whether it could be right or wrong. If you find no way of even discussing the truthfuless of the idea - it is very likely that it has no actual value or meaning. Are you sure YOU went to university? That is not how falsifiability works. You don't disprove "X is part of Russian culture" by proving X is not a part of German culture. That might just be the dumbest justification you've tried to argue in this thread, and that really is saying something considering the competition. His point isn't that proving that X is not part of German culture would prove that X is part of Russian culture; it's that you couldn't possibly prove or disprove the same claims you're making about Russia in regard to Germany. ...Ofcourse you can. Well, how do you construct verifiable proof that German culture isn't 'reprehensible' or whatever it is that you seem to believe Russian culture is? I didn't say that, and that's not what this conversation was about. This conversation was about the idea that is ingrained in Russian culture that there is no longer such a thing as objective truths. It would be very easy to disprove this is also the case for Germany, for example. All you have to do is talk to Germans. 'Talk to a German' isn't verifiable proof, it's an anecdote.
I didn't say "talk to a German".
|
On October 13 2022 19:16 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 18:56 pmh wrote:On October 13 2022 18:49 KwarK wrote:On October 13 2022 18:34 pmh wrote:
Split the whole country alone ethnic lines. Or have the conflict going on forever.
This is the choice there is.
70-80% Ukraine 20-30% Russia
Now the thing is that all the resources are in the eastern part of Ukraine and the territorial waters. Which would make this a very bad deal for Ukraine.
So we split those resources as well with the same ratio. 70-80% Ukraine. 20%-30% Russia. And we then also agree that exploration of those resources will have to be done in a joint venture between Ukraine and Russia,again with these ratios.
Its wrong,it is bad,but this is the reality. The ethnic Russian population of Ukraine does want to be part of Russia. We can ignore this reality but it wont make this reality go away.
So we either make a deal like this or have the conflict go on forever.
Personally i would rather not have this conflict go on forever. It leads to a pointless and immense suffering where in the end neither side will gain anything.
The 3rd option,which is probably the most likely option.
A ceasefire without any agreement. Not all that beneficial for Ukraine because this would de facto put the resources under Russian control. But they can have hope for a better and more permanent solution years or decades later.
We have to get away from beeing stuck in an ideological position where only the very best outcome is acceptable. We have to move towards a more pragmatic position where we accept certain realitys.
And just to be clear:i do not support Russia. And i do think the situation should return to what is was before the war. But the reality is that this will not happen This assertion that “the reality is that the ethnic Russian population of Ukraine wants to be part of Russia” is unsupported by any evidence. People extrapolate far beyond their votes arguing that because they voted for one Ukrainian party over another they must desire the border to be changed. That’s not how any of this works. Right now we are seeing in real time that millions of ethnic Russians within Russia don’t want to live under autocratic Russian rule. The idea that Russians outside of Russia desperately crave it needs a significant amount of evidence. Ok this is a decent point. And i agree my assumption about this is not well founded and maybe even wrong. But i do think,that after everything that has happened,it would be better to split the population along ethnic lines. I cant imagine Russians beeing in a good position under a Ukraine government after all that has happend. And i cant imagine Ukrainians beeing in a good position under a Russian government after all that has happend either. The option to peacefully coexist i think is no longer there. It wasnt even there before the war because there was the seperatist movement in the east. So going by the reality (again my asumption,feel free to challenge this) that peacefull coexistence in wich both ethnic groups are equally treated and have equall opportunitys is no longer possible. A split along ethnic lines would be the pragmatic solution. I dont think this is a great solution,on the contrary. I think that in general this is a very bad solution that should be avoided (i would prefer peacefull co-existance). But i do think such a solution is better then having this conflict go on for many years to come. The conflict won’t go on forever. Putin is speedrunning the third Reich and we’re already at a point comparable to 1944. We’ve done Czechoslovakia and land for peace. We’ve done demands for lands occupied by Russian speakers to be transferred. We’ve done a sudden and unprovoked invasion. We’ve done an attempted blitzkrieg. We’ve done the country of Ukraine being designated as not real, it’s people reclassed as stateless. We’ve done the collapse of a rush that went past it’s supply lines. We’ve done a blitz. We’ve done a high water mark as the army ran out of resources. We’ve done the blaming and rotating of generals. We’ve done the dictator taking personal command and micromanaging units that exist only on paper. We’ve done the no retreat order. We’ve done the execution squads, the mass deportation of minorities into camps, the land grants to ethnic Russians to settle the lands taken. We’ve done US lend lease. Kherson will be the new Stalingrad, an occupied city that becomes encircled due to the Fuhrer’s refusal to acknowledge military reality. We’ll probably have a battle of the bulge at some point where Russia expends the last of its energy in a futile attempt to achieve something. We’re getting wunderwaffen claims on a continual basis, every day there’s a new Russian weapon that’ll definitely bring victory. We’re getting the American economy kicking into war production. The thing about speed running the fall of the third Reich is that it doesn’t take forever. You don’t end up with an unending conflict. You end up with a dictator dead in a bunker, and it’s surprisingly little time to get there. Regarding Russians and Ukrainians coexisting, Russia has been actively genociding minority populations for centuries. Mass deportations and relocations are how we get these large numbers of Russians in other people’s countries. The deliberate destruction of ethnic blocs was both Tsarist and Soviet policy. There is no historical basis for coexistence.
Where are evidences for your dump claim?
|
On October 13 2022 22:27 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 19:59 Simberto wrote:On October 13 2022 19:44 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:51 Simberto wrote:On October 13 2022 16:50 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 16:25 Slydie wrote:On October 13 2022 09:08 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 08:39 StasisField wrote:On October 13 2022 08:28 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 07:56 Sermokala wrote:
[quote]
Bro when you're trying to deny or deflect that you're not the facists Don't start making random unsupported suppositions about somehow the United states has Inferior genetics and thats why they went across the ocean.
They went to America because America has insane geography and was offering free land to whoever wanted some. My family was paid by Germany to go to America even. Oh you didn't like that? And is that ok when your countryman writes racist bullshit here? Btw, I'm interested, how a single person can be a "fascist"? Is that not something related to social order, or "fascist" is a curse word you learnt from some propaganda video on Youtube? 1. Kwark isn't from the US, he merely lives here. 2. Kwark wasn't being racist. Reading comprehension is hard though, I know. 3. Even if he was, Sermokala didn't put their stamp of approval on what Kwark said so don't be all uppity when they call you out like they're being a hypocrite or contradicting themself. 4. People who follow fascist ideology are fascists, just as people who follow communist ideology are communists. Not a difficult concept to grasp. 1. -ok, didn't know. 2. It was. Claims like "russians have no concept of truth" or "Stalin broke the culture" (meaning it is some kind of a persistent effect) are 146% racist gems worthy of Hitler himself. 3. in my offensive post I wrote that this is not how I truly think of Americans, just an example of a racist bs. Its interesting though, how you and Sermokala reacted. Did you even read the post till the end? 4. To follow a fascist ideology you have at least to be a nazi and to follow a rule of a dictator. At least the first quality is not met in the case of Russian society. And seeing how eager you are at blaming Russians in all sins, you're much closer to that title. It is very easy to argue that Putin is in fact a dictator, for example as there is no way to remove him in free and fair elections. But then again, Russia has never had a leader who was removed by an election afaik, so some version of dictatorship is the norm. Fascism is a very problematic word to define, but "at least to be a nazi" is a wrong place to start. The very word as a political term originated in Italy, not in Germany. Both "fascism" and "nazism" get thrown around at anything people don't like or fear. Russians eagerly uses "nazism" that way, not the least about Ukrainians. If you are not far right yourself, "fascism" tends to include any "authoritarian, anti democratic, right-wing movement", which can certainly include the January 6th congress storming. As such, it will look different in each country and each era, If you don't want to be called a fascist, you can choose a narrower definition and to point how you differ from the original fascists, Mussolini and Franco. -yes, one definition (in lines with U.Eco) is vague and could be applied too indiscriminately; the other definition ("dictatorship of nationalists") is due to a Soviet writer Boris Strugatskiy - and he argues that this is the necessary and sufficient condition to have all the other usual features of fascism. So, by nazi I meant not the orginal NSDAP ones, but all sorts of nationalists; sorry if that was misleading Use the word nationalist instead of nazi then, those two are not the same. And it sounds to me as if current Russia fits that definition. It is a dictatorship, since Putin is in power, and there is no way to remove Putin from power. And it is definitively nationalist. And which nation is hated in Russia in this case? Let me guess, the Ukrainians - 1.5 million (UN data) of whom has fled to Russia after the start of the war? Those should be true masochists, to intentionally come to the place where'd they'll be hated Nationalism does not require hate. According to Oxford dictionary, a nationalist is: a person who strongly identifies with their own nation and vigorously supports its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations. Nothing about hate in there. Just Russia, Russia above everything else. And this is definitively the case, as can be seen by basically all of the rhetoric around this. Nevertheless, the obvious nation that Russia hates is the US/Nato? It seems as if the US is at fault for everything according to Kremlin propaganda. Especially the insidious evil act of allowing other nations to collectively defend against Russia is absolutely horrific, evil and aggressive. -Never met in my life a nationalist who'd not into (secretely) hating some other nations. Or maybe I wouldn't even notice him being a nationalist in this case.. Russia above what? My university best friend is from Vinnitsa, Western Ukraine; recently I've become a godfather of his son (bad irony, as he asked me exactly on 23th of Feb). One of the groups where I teach math consists of students from former USSR countries - and I don't even know which exact one, as those guys speek Russian well - so I visually cannot distinguish them from Russians. With regards to Ukrainians wanting to have their own state - only an imperic-driven idiot in Russia would like to deny it. I even endorsed for the 2014 Maidan revolt in the first place - before the new government has started to stir hatred in the fragile country. With regards to the USA - I think that for a very long time it has been a true world leader in most of the sciences - so why'd I hate it, if it has given the world and my profession so much? >>Especially the insidious evil act of allowing other nations to collectively defend against Russia is absolutely horrific, evil and aggressive I cannot understand, whether my writing is so bad (probably), or you guys read what you want, not what is actually written. The problem is not with helping Ukraine to defend, but being slow, indecisive and malicious. Even covering the sky in the spring would likely suffice to stop the war, but your governments failed it (btw, compare to Russia moving troops to Serbia in 1999 to stop NATO bombings). 15bn of military aid in more than half-year is like boiling a live frog in water, and the cost is higher on Ukrainians, as they trade what they have comparative advantage in - the soldiers. But after NATO has failed to intervene, you have no courage to push to stop the war; and instead promoting continuation, perhaps hoping for a possible public uprising of Russians uncomfortable with the war. There certainly is some, but if you think that we differ a lot in this sense from Ukrainians, who've already withstood four waves of mobilization and even preparing to start mobilizing women (initially planned at October 1st, but was postponed\cancelled in September) - youre dead wrong.
Western guys like to act dump and wear the moral mask if it fits their interest. In the meantime the EU politicians acts as if they didn't know it before hand:
https://saharareporters.com/2022/10/11/ukraine-war-us-taking-advantage-energy-crisis-exploit-eu-selling-gas-four-times-price
EU economy especially industry is destined for continuing the downfall road with the new energy price standard. Don't worry though this is just a short-term issues because the EU capitalists will move their invesment and operation elsewhere very fast. Biden has been welcoming them.
|
I was wondering when we were finally going to get to "the US made Russia invade Ukraine"
|
United States42694 Posts
|
On October 13 2022 23:25 geod wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 19:16 KwarK wrote:On October 13 2022 18:56 pmh wrote:On October 13 2022 18:49 KwarK wrote:On October 13 2022 18:34 pmh wrote:
Split the whole country alone ethnic lines. Or have the conflict going on forever.
This is the choice there is.
70-80% Ukraine 20-30% Russia
Now the thing is that all the resources are in the eastern part of Ukraine and the territorial waters. Which would make this a very bad deal for Ukraine.
So we split those resources as well with the same ratio. 70-80% Ukraine. 20%-30% Russia. And we then also agree that exploration of those resources will have to be done in a joint venture between Ukraine and Russia,again with these ratios.
Its wrong,it is bad,but this is the reality. The ethnic Russian population of Ukraine does want to be part of Russia. We can ignore this reality but it wont make this reality go away.
So we either make a deal like this or have the conflict go on forever.
Personally i would rather not have this conflict go on forever. It leads to a pointless and immense suffering where in the end neither side will gain anything.
The 3rd option,which is probably the most likely option.
A ceasefire without any agreement. Not all that beneficial for Ukraine because this would de facto put the resources under Russian control. But they can have hope for a better and more permanent solution years or decades later.
We have to get away from beeing stuck in an ideological position where only the very best outcome is acceptable. We have to move towards a more pragmatic position where we accept certain realitys.
And just to be clear:i do not support Russia. And i do think the situation should return to what is was before the war. But the reality is that this will not happen This assertion that “the reality is that the ethnic Russian population of Ukraine wants to be part of Russia” is unsupported by any evidence. People extrapolate far beyond their votes arguing that because they voted for one Ukrainian party over another they must desire the border to be changed. That’s not how any of this works. Right now we are seeing in real time that millions of ethnic Russians within Russia don’t want to live under autocratic Russian rule. The idea that Russians outside of Russia desperately crave it needs a significant amount of evidence. Ok this is a decent point. And i agree my assumption about this is not well founded and maybe even wrong. But i do think,that after everything that has happened,it would be better to split the population along ethnic lines. I cant imagine Russians beeing in a good position under a Ukraine government after all that has happend. And i cant imagine Ukrainians beeing in a good position under a Russian government after all that has happend either. The option to peacefully coexist i think is no longer there. It wasnt even there before the war because there was the seperatist movement in the east. So going by the reality (again my asumption,feel free to challenge this) that peacefull coexistence in wich both ethnic groups are equally treated and have equall opportunitys is no longer possible. A split along ethnic lines would be the pragmatic solution. I dont think this is a great solution,on the contrary. I think that in general this is a very bad solution that should be avoided (i would prefer peacefull co-existance). But i do think such a solution is better then having this conflict go on for many years to come. The conflict won’t go on forever. Putin is speedrunning the third Reich and we’re already at a point comparable to 1944. We’ve done Czechoslovakia and land for peace. We’ve done demands for lands occupied by Russian speakers to be transferred. We’ve done a sudden and unprovoked invasion. We’ve done an attempted blitzkrieg. We’ve done the country of Ukraine being designated as not real, it’s people reclassed as stateless. We’ve done the collapse of a rush that went past it’s supply lines. We’ve done a blitz. We’ve done a high water mark as the army ran out of resources. We’ve done the blaming and rotating of generals. We’ve done the dictator taking personal command and micromanaging units that exist only on paper. We’ve done the no retreat order. We’ve done the execution squads, the mass deportation of minorities into camps, the land grants to ethnic Russians to settle the lands taken. We’ve done US lend lease. Kherson will be the new Stalingrad, an occupied city that becomes encircled due to the Fuhrer’s refusal to acknowledge military reality. We’ll probably have a battle of the bulge at some point where Russia expends the last of its energy in a futile attempt to achieve something. We’re getting wunderwaffen claims on a continual basis, every day there’s a new Russian weapon that’ll definitely bring victory. We’re getting the American economy kicking into war production. The thing about speed running the fall of the third Reich is that it doesn’t take forever. You don’t end up with an unending conflict. You end up with a dictator dead in a bunker, and it’s surprisingly little time to get there. Regarding Russians and Ukrainians coexisting, Russia has been actively genociding minority populations for centuries. Mass deportations and relocations are how we get these large numbers of Russians in other people’s countries. The deliberate destruction of ethnic blocs was both Tsarist and Soviet policy. There is no historical basis for coexistence. Where are evidences for your dump claim?
In the case of Crimea it's well documented. The tsars did it immediately after the Crimean war. The sovjets continued the process. I guess you'll probably object to wikipedia as a source, but I don't really care. The wikipedia pages are well sourced, so you can just click through yourself:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Tatarization_of_Crimea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars
|
It is not racist to point out specific societal trends prevalent in a country, as long as people don't expect everyone in that country to behave exactly that way and as long as people don't use those as pretense to hate on individuals.
I believe Kwark could have been less confrontational in how he applied the label "russian" and "believes everybody is lying" but ultimately, a_ch seems to be a good example of exactly this behaviour, that Putin and before him the Soviets used to stabilize their country with.
In regards to the discussion about the living standards in Russia, you guys seem to be discussing past each other. It's undeniable, that Russia on a macro level has a weaker economy and creates less wealth for its population. Compared to Ukraine, i wouldn't necessary say that Ukraine is already a good example of a more successful country. Russia is not a backwater where everything but the big cities is a rat infested hellhole, where people are dying of cholera and eat nothing but "potatoe" and beets. Quality of life is measured, and objectively, Denmark has more quality of life then Russia, but it is absolutely fair for Ardias to tell you, that he is living a normal happy life. Same as i am pretty sure, that germany is not a worse country to live in compared to the US, even though the US has a higher gdppp.
There were a lot of people when the war started that claimed that Russia did not want Ukraine to succeed because this would show the russian population how a western influenced society would be better then Russia. That argument makes some sense, but we seem to have shifted from this motivation to the much simpler one. Putin wanted Ukraine. Plus, Russia is already pretty aware of how much better live over the border can be, see Estonia. Maybe the discussion could be stopped if the one side recognizes, that Russia is not a dystopian hellscape where happieness cannot be achieved and the other side recognizes, that their country is suffering from corruption and poverty due to the action of it's elite.
|
On October 13 2022 23:49 geod wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 22:27 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 19:59 Simberto wrote:On October 13 2022 19:44 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 17:51 Simberto wrote:On October 13 2022 16:50 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 16:25 Slydie wrote:On October 13 2022 09:08 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 08:39 StasisField wrote:On October 13 2022 08:28 a_ch wrote:
[quote]
Oh you didn't like that? And is that ok when your countryman writes racist bullshit here?
Btw, I'm interested, how a single person can be a "fascist"? Is that not something related to social order, or "fascist" is a curse word you learnt from some propaganda video on Youtube?
1. Kwark isn't from the US, he merely lives here. 2. Kwark wasn't being racist. Reading comprehension is hard though, I know. 3. Even if he was, Sermokala didn't put their stamp of approval on what Kwark said so don't be all uppity when they call you out like they're being a hypocrite or contradicting themself. 4. People who follow fascist ideology are fascists, just as people who follow communist ideology are communists. Not a difficult concept to grasp. 1. -ok, didn't know. 2. It was. Claims like "russians have no concept of truth" or "Stalin broke the culture" (meaning it is some kind of a persistent effect) are 146% racist gems worthy of Hitler himself. 3. in my offensive post I wrote that this is not how I truly think of Americans, just an example of a racist bs. Its interesting though, how you and Sermokala reacted. Did you even read the post till the end? 4. To follow a fascist ideology you have at least to be a nazi and to follow a rule of a dictator. At least the first quality is not met in the case of Russian society. And seeing how eager you are at blaming Russians in all sins, you're much closer to that title. It is very easy to argue that Putin is in fact a dictator, for example as there is no way to remove him in free and fair elections. But then again, Russia has never had a leader who was removed by an election afaik, so some version of dictatorship is the norm. Fascism is a very problematic word to define, but "at least to be a nazi" is a wrong place to start. The very word as a political term originated in Italy, not in Germany. Both "fascism" and "nazism" get thrown around at anything people don't like or fear. Russians eagerly uses "nazism" that way, not the least about Ukrainians. If you are not far right yourself, "fascism" tends to include any "authoritarian, anti democratic, right-wing movement", which can certainly include the January 6th congress storming. As such, it will look different in each country and each era, If you don't want to be called a fascist, you can choose a narrower definition and to point how you differ from the original fascists, Mussolini and Franco. -yes, one definition (in lines with U.Eco) is vague and could be applied too indiscriminately; the other definition ("dictatorship of nationalists") is due to a Soviet writer Boris Strugatskiy - and he argues that this is the necessary and sufficient condition to have all the other usual features of fascism. So, by nazi I meant not the orginal NSDAP ones, but all sorts of nationalists; sorry if that was misleading Use the word nationalist instead of nazi then, those two are not the same. And it sounds to me as if current Russia fits that definition. It is a dictatorship, since Putin is in power, and there is no way to remove Putin from power. And it is definitively nationalist. And which nation is hated in Russia in this case? Let me guess, the Ukrainians - 1.5 million (UN data) of whom has fled to Russia after the start of the war? Those should be true masochists, to intentionally come to the place where'd they'll be hated Nationalism does not require hate. According to Oxford dictionary, a nationalist is: a person who strongly identifies with their own nation and vigorously supports its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations. Nothing about hate in there. Just Russia, Russia above everything else. And this is definitively the case, as can be seen by basically all of the rhetoric around this. Nevertheless, the obvious nation that Russia hates is the US/Nato? It seems as if the US is at fault for everything according to Kremlin propaganda. Especially the insidious evil act of allowing other nations to collectively defend against Russia is absolutely horrific, evil and aggressive. -Never met in my life a nationalist who'd not into (secretely) hating some other nations. Or maybe I wouldn't even notice him being a nationalist in this case.. Russia above what? My university best friend is from Vinnitsa, Western Ukraine; recently I've become a godfather of his son (bad irony, as he asked me exactly on 23th of Feb). One of the groups where I teach math consists of students from former USSR countries - and I don't even know which exact one, as those guys speek Russian well - so I visually cannot distinguish them from Russians. With regards to Ukrainians wanting to have their own state - only an imperic-driven idiot in Russia would like to deny it. I even endorsed for the 2014 Maidan revolt in the first place - before the new government has started to stir hatred in the fragile country. With regards to the USA - I think that for a very long time it has been a true world leader in most of the sciences - so why'd I hate it, if it has given the world and my profession so much? >>Especially the insidious evil act of allowing other nations to collectively defend against Russia is absolutely horrific, evil and aggressive I cannot understand, whether my writing is so bad (probably), or you guys read what you want, not what is actually written. The problem is not with helping Ukraine to defend, but being slow, indecisive and malicious. Even covering the sky in the spring would likely suffice to stop the war, but your governments failed it (btw, compare to Russia moving troops to Serbia in 1999 to stop NATO bombings). 15bn of military aid in more than half-year is like boiling a live frog in water, and the cost is higher on Ukrainians, as they trade what they have comparative advantage in - the soldiers. But after NATO has failed to intervene, you have no courage to push to stop the war; and instead promoting continuation, perhaps hoping for a possible public uprising of Russians uncomfortable with the war. There certainly is some, but if you think that we differ a lot in this sense from Ukrainians, who've already withstood four waves of mobilization and even preparing to start mobilizing women (initially planned at October 1st, but was postponed\cancelled in September) - youre dead wrong. Western guys like to act dump and wear the moral mask if it fits their interest. In the meantime the EU politicians acts as if they didn't know it before hand: https://saharareporters.com/2022/10/11/ukraine-war-us-taking-advantage-energy-crisis-exploit-eu-selling-gas-four-times-priceEU economy especially industry is destined for continuing the downfall road with the new energy price standard. Don't worry though this is just a short-term issues because the EU capitalists will move their invesment and operation elsewhere very fast. Biden has been welcoming them.
US companies are fleecing us at least as hard as their national customers, yes. Capitalism unfortunately. But Germanys economy will still grow this year and is projected to head into a slight recession of 0.4% gdp in 2023. The energy price will regulate itself, unless the Saudis/OPEC+ want total energy war.
|
Spain to supply HAWK air defense systems to Ukraine.
Also explosions reported in Belgorod, Russia were the result of a missile launch malfunction and hitting residental areas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
