EPTRusso-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 618
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18240 Posts
On November 04 2023 00:55 GreenHorizons wrote: Longer than Ukraine without the US dumping money and weapons on them. Hard to say really. Ukraine seems to be less wasteful with their stuff than Russia is. The big factor is going to be artillery and missiles. whoever runs out of those is in big trouble. Russia can ramp up their own production, but doesn't seem to be keeping pace with their demand. Ukraine seems to have an edge there with European factories scaling demand up, but also maybe not enough to keep pace. Still, the f16s will help, allowing for the use of missiles that there are large stockpiles of. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23734 Posts
On November 04 2023 01:50 Acrofales wrote: Hard to say really. Ukraine seems to be less wasteful with their stuff than Russia is. The big factor is going to be artillery and missiles. whoever runs out of those is in big trouble. Russia can ramp up their own production, but doesn't seem to be keeping pace with their demand. Ukraine seems to have an edge there with European factories scaling demand up, but also maybe not enough to keep pace. Still, the f16s will help, allowing for the use of missiles that there are large stockpiles of. Ukraine needs billions in US support just to pay for social welfare, salaries of first responders and government officials, meet pension obligations, and operate hospitals. The stalemate won't last long without it. | ||
|
sertas
Sweden890 Posts
Either way it's obviously worth it to support democracy, in the long run especially | ||
|
schaf
Germany1326 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23734 Posts
The conversations have included very broad outlines of what Ukraine might need to give up to reach a deal, the officials said. Some of the talks, which officials described as delicate, took place last month during a meeting of representatives from more than 50 nations supporting Ukraine, including NATO members, known as the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, the officials said. They began amid concerns among U.S. and European officials that the war has reached a stalemate and about the ability to continue providing aid to Ukraine, officials said. Biden administration officials also are worried that Ukraine is running out of forces, while Russia has a seemingly endless supply, officials said. Ukraine is also struggling with recruiting and has recently seen public protests about some of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s open-ended conscription requirements. Officials also have privately said Ukraine likely only has until the end of the year or shortly thereafter before more urgent discussions about peace negotiations should begin. U.S. officials have shared their views on such a timeline with European allies, officials said. "Manpower is at the top of the administration’s concerns right now,” one said. The U.S. and its allies can provide Ukraine with weaponry, this person said, “but if they don’t have competent forces to use them it doesn’t do a lot of good” www.nbcnews.com | ||
KwarK
United States43730 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6336 Posts
On November 03 2023 22:48 2Pacalypse- wrote: Yeah, that was a very interesting interview. I liked Anders Puck Nielsen's review of that article: I watched the video and to be honest... Eh, it was a let down. He has maybe one minute of actual opinion/content thats padded out to 11min of pro-Kiev mental gymnastics. He should have actually talked about what was written in the article piece by piece instead of saying 'i wont go into specifics', seems like he barely talked about the article at all On November 04 2023 13:41 KwarK wrote: There can be no peace with a nation bent on conquering yours. In 2014 they allowed Crimea to be taken and it did not earn them peace, only a shadow invasion of the Donbas as a precursor to a later full invasion. You forgot to mention the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government in Kiev by groups that immediately abused their new power to suppress minorities that made up the majority in large areas like Crimea. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11786 Posts
On November 04 2023 14:52 zeo wrote: You forgot to mention the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government in Kiev by groups that immediately abused their new power to suppress minorities that made up the majority in large areas like Crimea. Dude. We know that zeo-world is weird. Try living in the same world as everyone else. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22147 Posts
On November 04 2023 14:52 zeo wrote: There can be no peace with a nation bent on conquering yours. In 2014 they allowed Crimea to be taken and it did not earn them peace, only a shadow invasion of the Donbas as a precursor to a later full invasion. You forgot to mention the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government in Kiev by groups that immediately abused their new power to suppress minorities that made up the majority in large areas like Crimea.[/QUOTE]No, we didn't forget something that never happened | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8243 Posts
On November 04 2023 14:52 zeo wrote: You forgot to mention the violent overthrow of the democratically elected government in Kiev by groups that immediately abused their new power to suppress minorities that made up the majority in large areas like Crimea. And any time Zeo tries to pretend anything he says is even remotely related to the truth, we can just bring up shit like this and reconfirm that he actually lives in complete Narnia. Even Russia themselves don't bother pretending any of this is true, yet you keep perpetuating them ad nauseam. | ||
|
Wings of Liberty
1 Post
| ||
2Pacalypse-
Croatia9530 Posts
On November 04 2023 14:52 zeo wrote: I watched the video and to be honest... Eh, it was a let down. He has maybe one minute of actual opinion/content thats padded out to 11min of pro-Kiev mental gymnastics. He should have actually talked about what was written in the article piece by piece instead of saying 'i wont go into specifics', seems like he barely talked about the article at all Well, his opening statement in the video was (after promoting his book of course): About Zaluzhny's interview. I will not go through all the things he said. You can find summaries online, because it really has created a lot of attention. So what I want to do instead is to say a few words about the context, and how I think we should think about the interview. So I'm not sure why you're criticizing him for not breaking down the interview piece by piece, when he specifically said he wants to provide a higher-level overview of the interview and its broader context. Personally, I find that much more valuable than someone offering play-by-play commentary of each sentence. But to each their own I guess. And just because I'm pretty sure you haven't actually understood his point, or maybe skipped over it, I'll try to summarize here. The first two sections of his video after the above statement are a preamble to the Zaluzhny's interview. He's setting the scene, which is talking about the now-over Ukraine's summer offensive and the Russia's new offensive around Avdiivka. Then he starts providing context for the interview itself. Which is that Ukraine's summer offensive has been disappointing, especially compared to the lofty goals it might've set for itself before it started. And how the attritional approach to the war is the new reality, which means that the Ukraine and the West need to shift their thinking to accepting this long term reality. He also says that Russia has adopted this reality much sooner, which makes sense to me. And now we come to the crux of the Zaluzhny's interview. Or better said, it's timing. Key quote from the video: And of course Zaluzhny is not sharing his thoughts on this just to contribute to an academic understanding about what's going on. When he makes an interview like that, then it's because he wants to achieve something. So we should ask ourselves, what is it he hopes to get out of this interview. And I think it's pretty clear: We should understand this interview as a call to action for the West. This is Zaluzhny telling us that "ok, we now understand that this will be a long war. So while you're technically right that he hasn't talked about the specific Zaluzhny's statements in that interview, the video does a great job of providing the broader context in which the interview was conducted and how to think about it. And I think that's much more important to understand than dissecting each of Zaluzhny's sentences. That might just be me though. On November 04 2023 14:58 Simberto wrote: Dude. We know that zeo-world is weird. Try living in the same world as everyone else. On November 04 2023 17:58 Gorsameth wrote: No, we didn't forget something that never happened On November 04 2023 21:22 Excludos wrote: And any time Zeo tries to pretend anything he says is even remotely related to the truth, we can just bring up shit like this and reconfirm that he actually lives in complete Narnia. Even Russia themselves don't bother pretending any of this is true, yet you keep perpetuating them ad nauseam. Even though I like to pile on zeo as much as the next guy (see above ^^), these are particularly weak replies to his statement. Sure, he didn't write that statement with exact purpose of fostering a good faith discussion so I can't blame you all for not indulging him, but I'd really like to come down to the bottom of the disagreement here, just so I have a better understanding of the situation. Let's first split up zeo's statement in two parts:
On the face of it, the first statement seems technically correct to me. What I mean by that is that Euromaidan was violent, and it did overthrow democratically elected government. However, the nuance here would be how that violence came about (e.g. was it violent from the start? or was the violence initiated by the then government? was it both? etc.), and how democratic the government actually was (were the elections legitimate? did the government enact the will of the people? etc.) The second statement I'm less informed about. What kind of suppression was done upon the people in Crimea (and Donbas I assume?) by the post-maidan government? Was it economical? Was it cultural (e.g. banning of Russian language)? Was it physical? Was it all of the above? Was it none of the above? @zeo care to clarify? | ||
|
KwarK
United States43730 Posts
| ||
|
2Pacalypse-
Croatia9530 Posts
On November 05 2023 01:24 KwarK wrote: Zeo is attempting to imply the current government is the one that overthrew the democratic one. It isn’t. The current one is the democratically elected successor to the one that faced those popular protests. The Maidan simply isn’t relevant after a new democratic election is held. I understood him as saying that the president Yanukovych (and co.) was democratically elected and (violently) overthrown in the Euromaidan. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43730 Posts
On November 05 2023 01:36 2Pacalypse- wrote: I understood him as saying that the president Yanukovych (and co.) was democratically elected and (violently) overthrown in the Euromaidan. And Bush illegitimately took power in the 2000 election after losing Florida to Gore. But that has no relevance to anything today. There's an implicit assumption in debates that you only bring up things that wouldn't be completely dumb and irrelevant. So if, in reference to current affairs, you bring up the "overthrow" of a previous democratic government then you're implicitly stating that this is a relevant fact, that the current government is illegitimate because of this. We can infer that Zeo is attempting to make this argument. Therefore it is important to clarify that there has been a subsequent democratic election and that the Maidan has no relevance to this. Zeo didn't specifically make the argument that the Maidan makes the current government illegitimate, presumably because he knows that it doesn't, but he did implicitly make that argument. It's like how Jordan Peterson goes on lobster tangents and leaves the other person in the position of guessing that he is attempting to make some sort of comparison with humans. You have to assume that they're implicitly making the argument because that's the only charitable assumption to make. Either Zeo thinks that the current government is illegitimate because of the Maidan, in which case that should be specifically refuted because it's not, or he doesn't think that and just has some sort of disorder where compulsively brings up irrelevant things from history. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23734 Posts
On November 05 2023 01:56 KwarK wrote: And Bush illegitimately took power in the 2000 election after losing Florida to Gore. But that has no relevance to anything today. The Middle East begs to differ. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43730 Posts
It has no relevance to the legitimacy of the Biden administration. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23734 Posts
On November 05 2023 02:01 KwarK wrote: It has no relevance to the legitimacy of the Biden administration. I mean I could make the argument that it does, but I read it as talking about how the violent overthrow of their democratically elected leadership triggered Russia annexing Crimea rather than a comment on Zelenskyy's legitimacy. Obviously, the longer Zelenskyy refuses to hold elections, the less legitimate he appears though. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43730 Posts
On November 05 2023 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote: I mean I could make the argument that it does, but I read it as talking about how the violent overthrow of their democratically elected leadership triggered Russia annexing Crimea rather than a comment on Zelenskyy's legitimacy. Obviously, the longer Zelenskyy refuses to hold elections, the less legitimate he appears though. He’s not refusing to hold elections. What are you talking about? There are two electoral cycles, presidential and legislative. The legislative one has nothing to do with him. The legislative elections are constitutionally suspended during martial law, he’s not not holding elections, the legislature enacted legislation to declare martial law which conditionally prevents that election. It wasn’t him, it wasn’t up to him, and it wasn’t for elections for his job. The presidential election is every 5 years and the last one was 2019. See if you can work out for yourself why he has “refused” to hold another. Please refrain from making things up. | ||
| ||
