|
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 November 22 2024 03:42 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 02:58 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 02:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 00:44 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2024 00:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 23:32 sertas wrote:On November 21 2024 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 07:56 KwarK wrote:On November 21 2024 04:47 ZeroByte13 wrote:
One requirement for the war to last until 2028 is Ukraine being able to hold for 4 more years.
This requires at least current level of economic/material support from US and EU, but even then there might (and probably will) be a personel problem - will there be enough people to replace killed/wounded ones for 4 more years?
It's a year more than entire duration of the war so far.
Same thing about personel problem can be said about Russia - but this also why I don't think it will last until 2028. The losses are far from existential while the war is existential. Ukraine can sustain this indefinitely. Not happily but they only have to like it more than they like Russian occupation. A majority would already rather negotiate a negative peace + Russian occupation (of some portion of Ukraine) than keep fighting. After more than two years of grinding conflict, Ukrainians are increasingly weary of the war with Russia. In Gallup’s latest surveys of Ukraine, conducted in August and October 2024, an average of 52% of Ukrainians would like to see their country negotiate an end to the war as soon as possible....38% believe their country should keep fighting until victory. news.gallup.comI think you guys are also underestimating how quickly Russia will be begrudgingly welcomed back into international trade with the West after Trump drops a bunch of the sanctions and Europe is unwilling to cut off their nose to spite their face. I just said the polls show that 88% of ukrainians think they will win, it's overwhelming majority. And give russia an inklin of weakness and they will not stop until they take whole ukraine, so a peace deal from weakness will mean ukraine no longer exists Then I showed polling demonstrating a majority of Ukrainians want to negotiate a deal ASAP, rather than continue fighting. Presumably the "inkling of weakness" was Crimea and that ship sailed about a decade ago. Ukraine no longer existing was a possible consequence of their violent overthrow of their democratically elected government. Their reliance on the US to protect them from Russia's response to that was predictably shortsighted and their negotiating position gets weaker by the day. I think the war will be winding down within ~a year even if some contingent of Ukrainians hold out as insurgent/terrorist style opposition. GH why do you seemingly root for Russia in this war? I didn't/don't? I do think Ukrainians are inarguably and objectively worse off today than they were before they violently overthrew their democratically elected government with the US's support/encouragement. Also that as Manit0u put it: "Sure, we'll help you fight for your freedom, have some guns and money" and then later "We helped you fight for your freedom but now we kinda want you to just give up." is typical US foreign policy and could/should have been expected. It doesn't seem like Ukrainians anticipated that and the consequences are/will likely be catastrophic. Why are they worse off GH? What consequence of their actions has made them worse off and why was that triggered? I'm not sure what you want/expect me to say, but Putin's/Russia's realpolitik in response to Ukrainians violently overthrowing of their own democratically elected government has made Ukrainians worse off by nearly every metric, including their own democracyDespite that, libs/Dems still find themselves supporting the continuation of all this violence, death, and suffering instead of negotiating a negative peace as a lesser evil (which it objectively was for millions of Ukrainians prior to Euromaidan). So, you would argue that if the opposition is dangerous and evil enough, one would be best of just surrendering in general, and hope for more lenient treatment? So if, for example, there was a government in the US which was pretty shitty and bad for a lot of people and the environment, but one would have to fear civil war if one opposes it (which would be very bad for a lot of americans), one should best just accept the shitty government?
Obviously not, that's libs/Dems. They just reject their argument when it is presented to them in this context and petulantly lash out at me for confronting them with that contradiction.
|
On November 22 2024 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 03:42 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2024 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 02:58 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 02:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 00:44 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2024 00:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 23:32 sertas wrote:On November 21 2024 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 07:56 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The losses are far from existential while the war is existential. Ukraine can sustain this indefinitely. Not happily but they only have to like it more than they like Russian occupation. A majority would already rather negotiate a negative peace + Russian occupation (of some portion of Ukraine) than keep fighting. After more than two years of grinding conflict, Ukrainians are increasingly weary of the war with Russia. In Gallup’s latest surveys of Ukraine, conducted in August and October 2024, an average of 52% of Ukrainians would like to see their country negotiate an end to the war as soon as possible....38% believe their country should keep fighting until victory. news.gallup.comI think you guys are also underestimating how quickly Russia will be begrudgingly welcomed back into international trade with the West after Trump drops a bunch of the sanctions and Europe is unwilling to cut off their nose to spite their face. I just said the polls show that 88% of ukrainians think they will win, it's overwhelming majority. And give russia an inklin of weakness and they will not stop until they take whole ukraine, so a peace deal from weakness will mean ukraine no longer exists Then I showed polling demonstrating a majority of Ukrainians want to negotiate a deal ASAP, rather than continue fighting. Presumably the "inkling of weakness" was Crimea and that ship sailed about a decade ago. Ukraine no longer existing was a possible consequence of their violent overthrow of their democratically elected government. Their reliance on the US to protect them from Russia's response to that was predictably shortsighted and their negotiating position gets weaker by the day. I think the war will be winding down within ~a year even if some contingent of Ukrainians hold out as insurgent/terrorist style opposition. GH why do you seemingly root for Russia in this war? I didn't/don't? I do think Ukrainians are inarguably and objectively worse off today than they were before they violently overthrew their democratically elected government with the US's support/encouragement. Also that as Manit0u put it: "Sure, we'll help you fight for your freedom, have some guns and money" and then later "We helped you fight for your freedom but now we kinda want you to just give up." is typical US foreign policy and could/should have been expected. It doesn't seem like Ukrainians anticipated that and the consequences are/will likely be catastrophic. Why are they worse off GH? What consequence of their actions has made them worse off and why was that triggered? I'm not sure what you want/expect me to say, but Putin's/Russia's realpolitik in response to Ukrainians violently overthrowing of their own democratically elected government has made Ukrainians worse off by nearly every metric, including their own democracyDespite that, libs/Dems still find themselves supporting the continuation of all this violence, death, and suffering instead of negotiating a negative peace as a lesser evil (which it objectively was for millions of Ukrainians prior to Euromaidan). So, you would argue that if the opposition is dangerous and evil enough, one would be best of just surrendering in general, and hope for more lenient treatment? So if, for example, there was a government in the US which was pretty shitty and bad for a lot of people and the environment, but one would have to fear civil war if one opposes it (which would be very bad for a lot of americans), one should best just accept the shitty government? Obviously not, that's libs/Dems. They just reject their argument when it is presented to them in this context and petulantly lash out at me for confronting them with that contradiction.
So, the position you have been argueing for regarding Ukraine is not actually your position regarding Ukraine, but you trying to convince people about stuff in the US?
Because to me and to others, your position here seems strangely incongruent to your other positions in general. You seem to be mostly in favor of idealism and revolution against oppression instead of realpolitik on other topics, yet here you make a completely different argument that is very realpolitik-based.
|
On November 22 2024 05:18 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 03:42 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2024 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 02:58 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 02:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 00:44 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2024 00:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 23:32 sertas wrote:On November 21 2024 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:[quote] A majority would already rather negotiate a negative peace + Russian occupation (of some portion of Ukraine) than keep fighting. [quote] news.gallup.comI think you guys are also underestimating how quickly Russia will be begrudgingly welcomed back into international trade with the West after Trump drops a bunch of the sanctions and Europe is unwilling to cut off their nose to spite their face. I just said the polls show that 88% of ukrainians think they will win, it's overwhelming majority. And give russia an inklin of weakness and they will not stop until they take whole ukraine, so a peace deal from weakness will mean ukraine no longer exists Then I showed polling demonstrating a majority of Ukrainians want to negotiate a deal ASAP, rather than continue fighting. Presumably the "inkling of weakness" was Crimea and that ship sailed about a decade ago. Ukraine no longer existing was a possible consequence of their violent overthrow of their democratically elected government. Their reliance on the US to protect them from Russia's response to that was predictably shortsighted and their negotiating position gets weaker by the day. I think the war will be winding down within ~a year even if some contingent of Ukrainians hold out as insurgent/terrorist style opposition. GH why do you seemingly root for Russia in this war? I didn't/don't? I do think Ukrainians are inarguably and objectively worse off today than they were before they violently overthrew their democratically elected government with the US's support/encouragement. Also that as Manit0u put it: "Sure, we'll help you fight for your freedom, have some guns and money" and then later "We helped you fight for your freedom but now we kinda want you to just give up." is typical US foreign policy and could/should have been expected. It doesn't seem like Ukrainians anticipated that and the consequences are/will likely be catastrophic. Why are they worse off GH? What consequence of their actions has made them worse off and why was that triggered? I'm not sure what you want/expect me to say, but Putin's/Russia's realpolitik in response to Ukrainians violently overthrowing of their own democratically elected government has made Ukrainians worse off by nearly every metric, including their own democracyDespite that, libs/Dems still find themselves supporting the continuation of all this violence, death, and suffering instead of negotiating a negative peace as a lesser evil (which it objectively was for millions of Ukrainians prior to Euromaidan). So, you would argue that if the opposition is dangerous and evil enough, one would be best of just surrendering in general, and hope for more lenient treatment? So if, for example, there was a government in the US which was pretty shitty and bad for a lot of people and the environment, but one would have to fear civil war if one opposes it (which would be very bad for a lot of americans), one should best just accept the shitty government? Obviously not, that's libs/Dems. They just reject their argument when it is presented to them in this context and petulantly lash out at me for confronting them with that contradiction. So, the position you have been argueing for regarding Ukraine is not actually your position regarding Ukraine, but you trying to convince people about stuff in the US? Because to me and to others, your position here seems strangely incongruent to your other positions in general. You seem to be mostly in favor of idealism and revolution against oppression instead of realpolitik on other topics, yet here you make a completely different argument that is very realpolitik-based.
I haven't even really been arguing anything. I've been describing what is happening using their framing. They should probably do some introspection about why that upsets them so much.
|
I dont get it. What framing are you using? Gaza?
|
United States43263 Posts
"You disagree with the fundamental assumptions underpinning my point but trust me bro, if you didn't then this would be devastating for you right now"
|
On November 22 2024 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 05:18 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2024 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 03:42 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2024 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 02:58 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 02:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 00:44 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2024 00:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 23:32 sertas wrote:
[quote]
I just said the polls show that 88% of ukrainians think they will win, it's overwhelming majority. And give russia an inklin of weakness and they will not stop until they take whole ukraine, so a peace deal from weakness will mean ukraine no longer exists Then I showed polling demonstrating a majority of Ukrainians want to negotiate a deal ASAP, rather than continue fighting. Presumably the "inkling of weakness" was Crimea and that ship sailed about a decade ago. Ukraine no longer existing was a possible consequence of their violent overthrow of their democratically elected government. Their reliance on the US to protect them from Russia's response to that was predictably shortsighted and their negotiating position gets weaker by the day. I think the war will be winding down within ~a year even if some contingent of Ukrainians hold out as insurgent/terrorist style opposition. GH why do you seemingly root for Russia in this war? I didn't/don't? I do think Ukrainians are inarguably and objectively worse off today than they were before they violently overthrew their democratically elected government with the US's support/encouragement. Also that as Manit0u put it: "Sure, we'll help you fight for your freedom, have some guns and money" and then later "We helped you fight for your freedom but now we kinda want you to just give up." is typical US foreign policy and could/should have been expected. It doesn't seem like Ukrainians anticipated that and the consequences are/will likely be catastrophic. Why are they worse off GH? What consequence of their actions has made them worse off and why was that triggered? I'm not sure what you want/expect me to say, but Putin's/Russia's realpolitik in response to Ukrainians violently overthrowing of their own democratically elected government has made Ukrainians worse off by nearly every metric, including their own democracyDespite that, libs/Dems still find themselves supporting the continuation of all this violence, death, and suffering instead of negotiating a negative peace as a lesser evil (which it objectively was for millions of Ukrainians prior to Euromaidan). So, you would argue that if the opposition is dangerous and evil enough, one would be best of just surrendering in general, and hope for more lenient treatment? So if, for example, there was a government in the US which was pretty shitty and bad for a lot of people and the environment, but one would have to fear civil war if one opposes it (which would be very bad for a lot of americans), one should best just accept the shitty government? Obviously not, that's libs/Dems. They just reject their argument when it is presented to them in this context and petulantly lash out at me for confronting them with that contradiction. So, the position you have been argueing for regarding Ukraine is not actually your position regarding Ukraine, but you trying to convince people about stuff in the US? Because to me and to others, your position here seems strangely incongruent to your other positions in general. You seem to be mostly in favor of idealism and revolution against oppression instead of realpolitik on other topics, yet here you make a completely different argument that is very realpolitik-based. I haven't even really been arguing anything. I've been describing what is happening using their framing. They should probably do some introspection about why that upsets them so much.
"It was all a ruse" is some weak-ass backtracking given your history of anti-Ukraine insinuations that don't fit into that framing in any way. And you always scuttle away behind some excuse afterwards because you're ashamed to own it.
|
Putin is free to fuck around and find out.
ps.
Yes its funny to see GH say that Ukraine is just suffering the consequences of their overthrowing the government while he himself advocates for overthrowing the government in the US. But woe to you if you say people might be worse off if they try, despite him literally making that argument for Ukraine...
|
Canada11372 Posts
Not to mention GH is peddling outright Putin propaganda.
There is no evidence that America was behind Euromaidan. Quite the opposite. Obama clowned on Romney for saying Russia was America's greatest geopolitical threat. "The 1980s, they're now calling to ask for their foreign policy back." You can see it also with his attempts to normalize relations with Cuba. He wanted to turn the page on Cold War politics. Turns Obama was wrong and Romney was right because Russia is led by a Cold War diehard that wants to drag as all back. So not only is there no evidence but it was also out of keeping with American foreign policy of the day.
|
Northern Ireland26088 Posts
On November 22 2024 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 03:42 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2024 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 02:58 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 02:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 00:44 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2024 00:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 23:32 sertas wrote:On November 21 2024 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 07:56 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The losses are far from existential while the war is existential. Ukraine can sustain this indefinitely. Not happily but they only have to like it more than they like Russian occupation. A majority would already rather negotiate a negative peace + Russian occupation (of some portion of Ukraine) than keep fighting. After more than two years of grinding conflict, Ukrainians are increasingly weary of the war with Russia. In Gallup’s latest surveys of Ukraine, conducted in August and October 2024, an average of 52% of Ukrainians would like to see their country negotiate an end to the war as soon as possible....38% believe their country should keep fighting until victory. news.gallup.comI think you guys are also underestimating how quickly Russia will be begrudgingly welcomed back into international trade with the West after Trump drops a bunch of the sanctions and Europe is unwilling to cut off their nose to spite their face. I just said the polls show that 88% of ukrainians think they will win, it's overwhelming majority. And give russia an inklin of weakness and they will not stop until they take whole ukraine, so a peace deal from weakness will mean ukraine no longer exists Then I showed polling demonstrating a majority of Ukrainians want to negotiate a deal ASAP, rather than continue fighting. Presumably the "inkling of weakness" was Crimea and that ship sailed about a decade ago. Ukraine no longer existing was a possible consequence of their violent overthrow of their democratically elected government. Their reliance on the US to protect them from Russia's response to that was predictably shortsighted and their negotiating position gets weaker by the day. I think the war will be winding down within ~a year even if some contingent of Ukrainians hold out as insurgent/terrorist style opposition. GH why do you seemingly root for Russia in this war? I didn't/don't? I do think Ukrainians are inarguably and objectively worse off today than they were before they violently overthrew their democratically elected government with the US's support/encouragement. Also that as Manit0u put it: "Sure, we'll help you fight for your freedom, have some guns and money" and then later "We helped you fight for your freedom but now we kinda want you to just give up." is typical US foreign policy and could/should have been expected. It doesn't seem like Ukrainians anticipated that and the consequences are/will likely be catastrophic. Why are they worse off GH? What consequence of their actions has made them worse off and why was that triggered? I'm not sure what you want/expect me to say, but Putin's/Russia's realpolitik in response to Ukrainians violently overthrowing of their own democratically elected government has made Ukrainians worse off by nearly every metric, including their own democracyDespite that, libs/Dems still find themselves supporting the continuation of all this violence, death, and suffering instead of negotiating a negative peace as a lesser evil (which it objectively was for millions of Ukrainians prior to Euromaidan). So, you would argue that if the opposition is dangerous and evil enough, one would be best of just surrendering in general, and hope for more lenient treatment? So if, for example, there was a government in the US which was pretty shitty and bad for a lot of people and the environment, but one would have to fear civil war if one opposes it (which would be very bad for a lot of americans), one should best just accept the shitty government? Obviously not, that's libs/Dems. They just reject their argument when it is presented to them in this context and petulantly lash out at me for confronting them with that contradiction.
What is the contradiction in this particular example in your opinion?
|
If you read "news" that is funded by Russia you will end up parroting their points without realizing it. Does not matter if you are left or right, both have their MAGA, just the right one is way bigger because the right is much bigger in the US. When you think that they or them are behind the worlds problem vastly oversimplifying extremely complicated problems you are an easy target. Pretty easy to package the message in both groups preferred branding.
|
On November 20 2024 01:31 Billyboy wrote:
Rayza's super burn about me joining the UA army was great.... when obviously you can support in many ways and I'm not even medically eligible. Maybe if he thinks it is such a burn maybe he can join the Russian army to bring peace or something? And for me not caring about nukes because I'm in Canada, is hilarious because I'm in the danger zone on the maps you see, and obviously nukes anywhere are a global problem.
But I do get his point about Russia being so much worse than the rest of Europe that Europe has so much more to lose. I just think he's forgetting that that Putin and his Power brokers only care about themselves, they have it very good and are not going to want to get vaporized.
20 Red lines crossed (at least) no nukes. Still feeling super confident.
Bolded - Funny thing is it wasn't even meant as a burn. I also sort of suspected that you are "not even medically eligible", I am pretty sure that every single person in this thread "supporting" Ukraine in this conflict have similarly valid issues with putting their actual life (c'mon I am not asking for putting your money on the line) where their mouth is. I am however glad that you lads are ready to defend Ukraine to the last Ukrainian alive.
Italic bolded - Didn't wanna hurt the feelings of Ukrainian family who lived in my home in Poland rent free for circa 9.5 month.
Bolded 2 - I explicitly stated that all Putin have to do is nuke Europe, how the f...k are you in danger zone???
Italic 2 - In shocking turn of events I agree with you on this one.
Bolded 3 - I think you are the one forgetting who are we dealing with. If by "coincidence" Putin and his best buddies will be visiting Shanghai a the time Nukes are launched.
As for anyone suggesting that any nuclear exchange between EU and Russia not including US is in any way, shape, or form close to even - I am sorry, your education system failed you. (*if he recalibrate his nukes to explode on the ground rather, than in the air, it is quite "GG No Re" setup)
On November 22 2024 02:53 Sent. wrote:
I don't understand why the Russian story focuses so much on the "CIA coup" angle.
Ukrainians kicked Yanukovych out on their own. They didn't ask the US to do that for them or protect them from the consequences of that action.
Just... dunno? best Troll ever?
|
On November 22 2024 07:09 Falling wrote:
Not to mention GH is peddling outright Putin propaganda.
There is no evidence that America was behind Euromaidan. Quite the opposite. Obama clowned on Romney for saying Russia was America's greatest geopolitical threat. "The 1980s, they're now calling to ask for their foreign policy back." You can see it also with his attempts to normalize relations with Cuba. He wanted to turn the page on Cold War politics. Turns Obama was wrong and Romney was right because Russia is led by a Cold War diehard that wants to drag as all back. So not only is there no evidence but it was also out of keeping with American foreign policy of the day.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john-mccain-ukraine-protests-support-just-cause
Here is John McCain handing out bread to Euromaidan protesters in Kyiv. He literally said 'We are here to support your just cause'
How would you feel if Russian senators were handing out bread to protesters in Canada that were looking to distance themselves from the US and get closer to Russia?
Would you then say, "that is fair game, there is no evidence of Russian interference in these protests."
I can't be bothered to look them up, but there are also pictures of Lindsey Graham and John McCain talking to Poroshenko (who took over after Euromaidan). Victoria Nuland is on record pushing for revolution...
You live in a fantasy world that has been concocted for you by the media that you consume.
PS. Putin is an authoritarian thug and he should be guillotined for sending Russian teenagers into war and forcing Ukrainian teenagers to do the same. But that does not mean that the US did not interfere in Ukrainian politics.
But no one will see this message, because it will get nuked.
|
On November 22 2024 10:28 vova_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 07:09 Falling wrote:
Not to mention GH is peddling outright Putin propaganda.
There is no evidence that America was behind Euromaidan. Quite the opposite. Obama clowned on Romney for saying Russia was America's greatest geopolitical threat. "The 1980s, they're now calling to ask for their foreign policy back." You can see it also with his attempts to normalize relations with Cuba. He wanted to turn the page on Cold War politics. Turns Obama was wrong and Romney was right because Russia is led by a Cold War diehard that wants to drag as all back. So not only is there no evidence but it was also out of keeping with American foreign policy of the day. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/john-mccain-ukraine-protests-support-just-causeHere is John McCain handing out bread to Euromaidan protesters in Kyiv. He literally said 'We are here to support your just cause' How would you feel if Russian senators were handing out bread to protesters in Canada that were looking to distance themselves from the US and get closer to Russia? Would you then say, "that is fair game, there is no evidence of Russian interference in these protests." I can't be bothered to look them up, but there are also pictures of Lindsey Graham and John McCain talking to Poroshenko (who took over after Euromaidan). Victoria Nuland is on record pushing for revolution... You live in a fantasy world that has been concocted for you by the media that you consume. PS. Putin is an authoritarian thug and he should be guillotined for sending Russian teenagers into war and forcing Ukrainian teenagers to do the same. But that does not mean that the US did not interfere in Ukrainian politics. But no one will see this message, because it will get nuked.
They will  .
|
On November 22 2024 09:46 Billyboy wrote:
If you read "news" that is funded by Russia you will end up parroting their points without realizing it. Does not matter if you are left or right, both have their MAGA, just the right one is way bigger because the right is much bigger in the US. When you think that they or them are behind the worlds problem vastly oversimplifying extremely complicated problems you are an easy target. Pretty easy to package the message in both groups preferred branding.
You really love talking about the complexity of politics as a concept, but every time you actually talk about politics you're making an extremely simple point.
Politics are extremely simple when you use the correct prism to understand them, which is social hierarchies and more generally systemic relationships of oppression.
The same thing applies to this conflict as anything else. Is it some complex issue where you have to have a nuanced understanding of all the factors at play? Well you could have that sure, but ultimately no, it's just fascism. Some far right imperialist is trying to expand its land to renew the former glory of a fantasized past empire. Russia is very clearly attacking, Ukraine is very clearly resisting, the mechanic of oppression is obvious. Complexity is manufactured.
|
On November 22 2024 07:18 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 03:42 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2024 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 02:58 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 02:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 00:44 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2024 00:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 23:32 sertas wrote:On November 21 2024 23:24 GreenHorizons wrote:[quote] A majority would already rather negotiate a negative peace + Russian occupation (of some portion of Ukraine) than keep fighting. [quote] news.gallup.comI think you guys are also underestimating how quickly Russia will be begrudgingly welcomed back into international trade with the West after Trump drops a bunch of the sanctions and Europe is unwilling to cut off their nose to spite their face. I just said the polls show that 88% of ukrainians think they will win, it's overwhelming majority. And give russia an inklin of weakness and they will not stop until they take whole ukraine, so a peace deal from weakness will mean ukraine no longer exists Then I showed polling demonstrating a majority of Ukrainians want to negotiate a deal ASAP, rather than continue fighting. Presumably the "inkling of weakness" was Crimea and that ship sailed about a decade ago. Ukraine no longer existing was a possible consequence of their violent overthrow of their democratically elected government. Their reliance on the US to protect them from Russia's response to that was predictably shortsighted and their negotiating position gets weaker by the day. I think the war will be winding down within ~a year even if some contingent of Ukrainians hold out as insurgent/terrorist style opposition. GH why do you seemingly root for Russia in this war? I didn't/don't? I do think Ukrainians are inarguably and objectively worse off today than they were before they violently overthrew their democratically elected government with the US's support/encouragement. Also that as Manit0u put it: "Sure, we'll help you fight for your freedom, have some guns and money" and then later "We helped you fight for your freedom but now we kinda want you to just give up." is typical US foreign policy and could/should have been expected. It doesn't seem like Ukrainians anticipated that and the consequences are/will likely be catastrophic. Why are they worse off GH? What consequence of their actions has made them worse off and why was that triggered? I'm not sure what you want/expect me to say, but Putin's/Russia's realpolitik in response to Ukrainians violently overthrowing of their own democratically elected government has made Ukrainians worse off by nearly every metric, including their own democracyDespite that, libs/Dems still find themselves supporting the continuation of all this violence, death, and suffering instead of negotiating a negative peace as a lesser evil (which it objectively was for millions of Ukrainians prior to Euromaidan). So, you would argue that if the opposition is dangerous and evil enough, one would be best of just surrendering in general, and hope for more lenient treatment? So if, for example, there was a government in the US which was pretty shitty and bad for a lot of people and the environment, but one would have to fear civil war if one opposes it (which would be very bad for a lot of americans), one should best just accept the shitty government? Obviously not, that's libs/Dems. They just reject their argument when it is presented to them in this context and petulantly lash out at me for confronting them with that contradiction. What is the contradiction in this particular example in your opinion? Realpolitik lesser evilism.
Libs/Dems exploit a realpolitik lesser-evil framing to rationalize their counterrevolutionary positions against socialists while rejecting realpolitik lesser-evil framing in order to rationalize their pro-revolutionary stance regarding Ukraine.
Unless of course you count their support for avowed Neo-Nazis as long as they point their guns the right direction. They definitely used a 'lesser evilism" to rationalize that part.
|
On November 22 2024 05:18 Simberto wrote:
...you have been argueing... about... the US?
I think you've cracked the code XD
|
On November 22 2024 10:11 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2024 01:31 Billyboy wrote:
Rayza's super burn about me joining the UA army was great.... when obviously you can support in many ways and I'm not even medically eligible. Maybe if he thinks it is such a burn maybe he can join the Russian army to bring peace or something? And for me not caring about nukes because I'm in Canada, is hilarious because I'm in the danger zone on the maps you see, and obviously nukes anywhere are a global problem.
But I do get his point about Russia being so much worse than the rest of Europe that Europe has so much more to lose. I just think he's forgetting that that Putin and his Power brokers only care about themselves, they have it very good and are not going to want to get vaporized.
20 Red lines crossed (at least) no nukes. Still feeling super confident. Bolded - Funny thing is it wasn't even meant as a burn. I also sort of suspected that you are "not even medically eligible", I am pretty sure that every single person in this thread "supporting" Ukraine in this conflict have similarly valid issues with putting their actual life (c'mon I am not asking for putting your money on the line) where their mouth is. I am however glad that you lads are ready to defend Ukraine to the last Ukrainian alive.
I fucking hate this statement, because it takes all agency from Ukraine. We are not "ready to defend Ukraine to the last Ukrainian alive", we are ready to support Ukraine defend itself for as long as it is willing.
If Ukraine decides that russian occupation is preferable to fighting, it can decide that. But as long as it has the will to fight, giving them weapons to do so is not such an evil action as you paint it.
|
On November 22 2024 14:32 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 10:11 Razyda wrote:On November 20 2024 01:31 Billyboy wrote:
Rayza's super burn about me joining the UA army was great.... when obviously you can support in many ways and I'm not even medically eligible. Maybe if he thinks it is such a burn maybe he can join the Russian army to bring peace or something? And for me not caring about nukes because I'm in Canada, is hilarious because I'm in the danger zone on the maps you see, and obviously nukes anywhere are a global problem.
But I do get his point about Russia being so much worse than the rest of Europe that Europe has so much more to lose. I just think he's forgetting that that Putin and his Power brokers only care about themselves, they have it very good and are not going to want to get vaporized.
20 Red lines crossed (at least) no nukes. Still feeling super confident. Bolded - Funny thing is it wasn't even meant as a burn. I also sort of suspected that you are "not even medically eligible", I am pretty sure that every single person in this thread "supporting" Ukraine in this conflict have similarly valid issues with putting their actual life (c'mon I am not asking for putting your money on the line) where their mouth is. I am however glad that you lads are ready to defend Ukraine to the last Ukrainian alive. I fucking hate this statement, because it takes all agency from Ukraine. We are not "ready to defend Ukraine to the last Ukrainian alive", we are ready to support Ukraine defend itself for as long as it is willing. If Ukraine decides that russian occupation is preferable to fighting, it can decide that. But as long as it has the will to fight, giving them weapons to do so is not such an evil action as you paint it.
You want to talk about taking agency from Ukraine?
When the Ukrainian president came to the European Union in 2013 and asked for a diplomatic solution to the problem that is now being fought over, the EU told them "fuck off, we'll wait for the US to work with your opposition to throw you out and then we'll get what we want."
Not in those exact words, of course, but that's what it came down to. And I don't know what the extent was of the US involvement, but simply their presence would motivate Russia to act, and they must have known this. It was incredibly reckless at best.
When the EU rejected trilateral talks, they basically threw Ukraine under the bus.
Ukraine, at that time, also asked for financial support for their defense in light of the threat that Russia posed. So you can call the then Ukrainian president a "Russian puppet" but it seems to me he had Ukraine's best interest at heart. And I think that his PRIMARY motivation for this was selfish: he didn't want want to lose his position. I don't think the guy is a saint or anything, it was in his self-interest to find a diplomatic solution. He only failed because the EU rejected him. And then Ukraine was left to mercy of Russia because it did not receive support from either the EU or the US.
I don't approve of Russia's action, but I also have zero expectations from Russia. I don't expect them to play nice if they can't get their concerns addressed through talks. I do have expectations from my European representatives. And the way they handled this situation is beyond absurd.
None of this justifies the Russian invasion. But there was no reason for Europe to reject the request of the Ukrainian president.
Simultaneously, President Yanukovych stated that he still intends to sign the Association Agreement at a later date "once we get down to work and find solutions for economic problems, when we get the opportunity to sign a strategic partnership agreement with Russia and everything else that we need to do, so that normal relations can be established between the European Union, Russia, and Ukraine… this is our responsibility"
THAT (the above) would have been the solution. Ukraine could have been in a similar position as Northern Ireland is between Britain and the EU. But no. No talks possible. For whatever bullshit reason.
Fuck Putin and the Russian government, fuck the European Union, fuck the United States. Fuck everyone. All politicians should be put into a single cage and LET THEM FIGHT IT OUT. Or maybe then they can be bothered to talk all of a sudden?
STOP THROWING PEOPLE UNDER THE BUS.
STOP LETTING TEENAGERS FIGHT OVER YOUR STUPID NONSENSE.
When the EU rejected trilateral talks "because we will not give in to talks under the threat of war", they were basically saying, "OK, if Russia makes war, we will send our own young men to fight but we can't be bothered to talk about it to prevent such a thing." And now it turns out they're not even doing that, they're just letting Ukrainians do all the fighting.
Absolute scum, all of them.
|
On November 22 2024 10:11 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2024 01:31 Billyboy wrote:
Rayza's super burn about me joining the UA army was great.... when obviously you can support in many ways and I'm not even medically eligible. Maybe if he thinks it is such a burn maybe he can join the Russian army to bring peace or something? And for me not caring about nukes because I'm in Canada, is hilarious because I'm in the danger zone on the maps you see, and obviously nukes anywhere are a global problem.
But I do get his point about Russia being so much worse than the rest of Europe that Europe has so much more to lose. I just think he's forgetting that that Putin and his Power brokers only care about themselves, they have it very good and are not going to want to get vaporized.
20 Red lines crossed (at least) no nukes. Still feeling super confident. Bolded - Funny thing is it wasn't even meant as a burn. I also sort of suspected that you are "not even medically eligible", I am pretty sure that every single person in this thread "supporting" Ukraine in this conflict have similarly valid issues with putting their actual life (c'mon I am not asking for putting your money on the line) where their mouth is. I am however glad that you lads are ready to defend Ukraine to the last Ukrainian alive. Italic bolded - Didn't wanna hurt the feelings of Ukrainian family who lived in my home in Poland rent free for circa 9.5 month. Bolded 2 - I explicitly stated that all Putin have to do is nuke Europe, how the f...k are you in danger zone??? Italic 2 - In shocking turn of events I agree with you on this one. Bolded 3 - I think you are the one forgetting who are we dealing with. If by "coincidence" Putin and his best buddies will be visiting Shanghai a the time Nukes are launched. As for anyone suggesting that any nuclear exchange between EU and Russia not including US is in any way, shape, or form close to even - I am sorry, your education system failed you. (*if he recalibrate his nukes to explode on the ground rather, than in the air, it is quite "GG No Re" setup) Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 02:53 Sent. wrote:
I don't understand why the Russian story focuses so much on the "CIA coup" angle.
Ukrainians kicked Yanukovych out on their own. They didn't ask the US to do that for them or protect them from the consequences of that action.
Just... dunno? best Troll ever?
A Vanguard class submarine has 16 tubes with each missile having 8 warheads.
That is 128 warheads per sub. If it launches 100 missiles at the top 100 cities in Russia every city with over 180k population gets nuked and it still has 25% of the payload left to make sure the big cities are hit multiple times.
That's one submarine, the UK has several. And France has their own program.
It doesn't matter that Russia can probably nuke even villages if it want because one submarine worth of weapons is still enough to ruin you completely.
|
On November 22 2024 10:43 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2024 07:18 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 03:42 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2024 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 02:58 WombaT wrote:On November 22 2024 02:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 22 2024 00:44 Sadist wrote:On November 22 2024 00:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 21 2024 23:32 sertas wrote:
[quote]
I just said the polls show that 88% of ukrainians think they will win, it's overwhelming majority. And give russia an inklin of weakness and they will not stop until they take whole ukraine, so a peace deal from weakness will mean ukraine no longer exists Then I showed polling demonstrating a majority of Ukrainians want to negotiate a deal ASAP, rather than continue fighting. Presumably the "inkling of weakness" was Crimea and that ship sailed about a decade ago. Ukraine no longer existing was a possible consequence of their violent overthrow of their democratically elected government. Their reliance on the US to protect them from Russia's response to that was predictably shortsighted and their negotiating position gets weaker by the day. I think the war will be winding down within ~a year even if some contingent of Ukrainians hold out as insurgent/terrorist style opposition. GH why do you seemingly root for Russia in this war? I didn't/don't? I do think Ukrainians are inarguably and objectively worse off today than they were before they violently overthrew their democratically elected government with the US's support/encouragement. Also that as Manit0u put it: "Sure, we'll help you fight for your freedom, have some guns and money" and then later "We helped you fight for your freedom but now we kinda want you to just give up." is typical US foreign policy and could/should have been expected. It doesn't seem like Ukrainians anticipated that and the consequences are/will likely be catastrophic. Why are they worse off GH? What consequence of their actions has made them worse off and why was that triggered? I'm not sure what you want/expect me to say, but Putin's/Russia's realpolitik in response to Ukrainians violently overthrowing of their own democratically elected government has made Ukrainians worse off by nearly every metric, including their own democracyDespite that, libs/Dems still find themselves supporting the continuation of all this violence, death, and suffering instead of negotiating a negative peace as a lesser evil (which it objectively was for millions of Ukrainians prior to Euromaidan). So, you would argue that if the opposition is dangerous and evil enough, one would be best of just surrendering in general, and hope for more lenient treatment? So if, for example, there was a government in the US which was pretty shitty and bad for a lot of people and the environment, but one would have to fear civil war if one opposes it (which would be very bad for a lot of americans), one should best just accept the shitty government? Obviously not, that's libs/Dems. They just reject their argument when it is presented to them in this context and petulantly lash out at me for confronting them with that contradiction. What is the contradiction in this particular example in your opinion? Realpolitik lesser evilism. Libs/Dems exploit a realpolitik lesser-evil framing to rationalize their counterrevolutionary positions against socialists while rejecting realpolitik lesser-evil framing in order to rationalize their pro-revolutionary stance regarding Ukraine. Unless of course you count their support for avowed Neo-Nazis as long as they point their guns the right direction. They definitely used a 'lesser evilism" to rationalize that part.
Why aren't you happy? Trump calls Nazis "very fine people" and Biden supposedly supports neo-nazis in Ukraine, If trump stops, then EU might pick up.
Nazi = National Socialist.
So Socialism is winning, one country at time.
Maybe Israel annexing gaza and westbank would be great for Socialism, because replacing all the landlords with kibbuz - the collective - will bring more socialism into the world.
:/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
