|
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. |
United States41470 Posts
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.
|
On October 13 2022 18:22 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 17:46 Mikau313 wrote:On October 13 2022 17:40 Manit0u wrote:
Any negative claim on a nation as a whole is racism by definition
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.
|
On October 13 2022 18:49 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
On October 13 2022 16:50 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +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:On October 13 2022 07:11 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 06:24 KwarK wrote:On October 13 2022 06:21 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 05:38 KwarK wrote:
Your elections are rigged and you live in a fascist dictatorship (seriously, check the criteria) but when this is pointed out to you you happily concede the point while brushing aside the entire idea of fairness. You don’t even know you’re doing it, you’ve been trained to do this, your parents were trained to do it, it’s part of the way Russians think. The contradictions no longer even register in Russian brains because the idea of actual truth is missing. you just won't be able to ask me something new on this topic, especially if you simply bring some propaganda stamps (like, do you even know the definition of fascism besides very vague 14 points of U. Eco? Try to apply it to modern Ukraine - you'd be surprised). Stalin broke y’all. I point out that you literally cannot help yourselves from doing “we’re not and if we are everyone else is” and that you don’t even know that you’re doing it. You instantly respond with do you even know the definition of fascism… Try to apply it to modern Ukraine - you'd be surprised). You don’t even notice you’re doing it in your angry response to me. That’s how badly he broke you. You literally couldn’t express a denial of it without doing it. This game could be played by the both sides. Like, as many of Americans are descendants of European exiled criminals or slaves, don't you think the genetics have to be inferior to the law-abiding guys who've stayed home in Europe? (Sorry to the rest of the US guys, thats not how I think of you, just an example of stupid racist bullshit, same as this guy is consistently bringing here) 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
If you say current Russia does not fall under the umbrella of "all nationalists" then I don't know what's left to discuss with you. Even the Kreml likely wouldn't deny this.
And yeah, important distinction between nazi and nationalist.
|
United States41470 Posts
On October 13 2022 18:56 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
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.
Well if Nato and Ukraine think they can get a 100% victory then by all means continue.
Personally i think this is impossible but i could very well be wrong.
Its not going to happen under Putin so this would require a regime change or at the minimum an internal conflict within the leadership.
A regime change that would be favorable for the west and not end up with someone in charge who is even more hawkish. It is possible (an "expert" said on tv here that he expects this to happen within 1 year) but personally i dont see this happening.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On October 13 2022 18:15 StorrZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 10:05 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 09:23 StorrZerg wrote:
1. Pretty funny how you assumed though.
2. Those claims are not racist. He has been presenting quite a bit of information to which you continue to not respond to discussion and just lash out.
4. One can be a fascist and not be a nazi.
You do understand why there is so much negative talk regarding Russian politics right? You do understand what the Russian government is doing is wrong right?
1. Yep, my bad. Stereotypes live in all of us perhaps 2. Any negative claim on a nation as a whole is racism by definition (which btw is itself a stupid thing in this case, as Russia is quite diverse and multinational). 4. I disagree. The most clear and lucid definition of fascism that I saw was "the dictatorship of nationalists". All of the other features are just consequences. In this definition a fascist person is nonsence, or maybe some wannabe imitator of historical personalities - which is definetely not what was meant here. On the last one - I'm a consistent anti-war person. I've signed several petitions against the war right after the start, and participated in the protests. Today the same, I'm for stopping the war ASAP. But instead of pushing both of the sides to sign a treaty, I see as how Western media manipulate the public opinion and stir the hatred even more - sometimes resorting to blatant lies of the level I thought impossible. So I blame both our government - for starting this bullshit, the US goverment - for provoking the conflict, and pushing to continue the war, but most of all - the Ukrainian government, who in this situation worked as true traitors to their people. You want the war to stop asap. How does that happen in your eyes? 1. Great we agree russia started the war. 2. How did usa provoke conflict? 3. How did the ukrainian government work as traitors to their people in this situation? To me it seems they are being rallied to be true patriots to defend their homeland from an invasion.
2 - That's hella big question. It started as early as in the beginning of 90s by promoting Ukrainian nationalism (like, supporting very questionable accusations of Holodomor as genocide). It worsened in 2004 with a US-backed revolt, that brought Yuschenko to power - and again a surge of nationalism with all sorts of brainwashing (like government-backed search for a different ancestry of Russians and Ukrainians - in a situation when noone can differ between Russians and Ukrainians if they both speak Russian). It worsened again with another US-backed revolt in 2014 - where the first decrees of the new government all were about "ukrainization" of a very heterogenous country. This btw included withdrawing the official status of Russian language in Ukraine, which was by far more prevalent than the Ukrainian in the East and in most big cities.
The other provocative line has been about NATO membership. I'm sure, many Ukrainians truely believed that it is a good way of protecting their country - but as we see, all the direct military help (weaponry) the US and NATO has provided is worth less than 15bn. So, instead of protection, Ukraine has stuck between the rock and a hard place, - to lose already 20% of its territory, and sustain enormous damage to economics (~40% of GDP) and population (millions of refuges).
As this is not enough - it is your media (helped by Zelensky) that continue promoting ideas that help keeping public in a thought that it is necessary to continue. They would spread claims of genocide by showing a box with teeth of "tortured victims" - and when the proof arises, that it is the local dentist's collection, no big media would mention it. Or they write about Russian forces deliberately shelling themselves at Zaporizhie Nuclear Station - I don't know what degree of idiocy is needed to believe that, but many do somehow. Or a recent video from freshly reclaimed Kupyask, where Azov member Zhorin shows dead bodies of people, accused of cooperation with Russians - it is of course brougth without the context, as an evidence of Russian war crimes.
So your government on one hand promotes continuation of the war, while on the other - is afraid to involve too much by keeping the military aid at a bare minimum - so its literally participating in a genocide of Ukrainians, whos army by all evidence lacks weapons (but is quite big in numbers, so it still keeps fighting)
3 - Zelensky came to power with the promise that he'd do everything to end the conflict in Donbass. What he actually did was botch the Minsk peace agreement, and when he knew the war was coming (in October 2021 - February 2022) - he was affirming people of the opposite; look his WP interview for a proof.
He made the country into a true dictatorship with censored and manipulative media that creates tons of fakes. Even the Ukrainian parliament at some point has fired the ambudsmen Denisova, as her claims on "thousands of women raped by Russian soldiers" could not be supported by even one case.
|
On October 13 2022 19:21 a_ch wrote:
3 - Zelensky came to power with the promise that he'd do everything to end the conflict in Donbass. What he actually did was botch the Minsk peace agreement, and when he knew the war was coming (in October 2021 - February 2022) - he was affirming people of the opposite; look his WP interview for a proof.
Oh, now we're blaming Zelensky for not being responsive enough to Russia's signs of aggression (implying that yes indeed, Putin is the aggressor and therefore at fault for this war, not Zelensky).
You're engaging in victim blaming.
|
United States41470 Posts
On October 13 2022 19:21 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 18:15 StorrZerg wrote:On October 13 2022 10:05 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 09:23 StorrZerg wrote:
1. Pretty funny how you assumed though.
2. Those claims are not racist. He has been presenting quite a bit of information to which you continue to not respond to discussion and just lash out.
4. One can be a fascist and not be a nazi.
You do understand why there is so much negative talk regarding Russian politics right? You do understand what the Russian government is doing is wrong right?
1. Yep, my bad. Stereotypes live in all of us perhaps 2. Any negative claim on a nation as a whole is racism by definition (which btw is itself a stupid thing in this case, as Russia is quite diverse and multinational). 4. I disagree. The most clear and lucid definition of fascism that I saw was "the dictatorship of nationalists". All of the other features are just consequences. In this definition a fascist person is nonsence, or maybe some wannabe imitator of historical personalities - which is definetely not what was meant here. On the last one - I'm a consistent anti-war person. I've signed several petitions against the war right after the start, and participated in the protests. Today the same, I'm for stopping the war ASAP. But instead of pushing both of the sides to sign a treaty, I see as how Western media manipulate the public opinion and stir the hatred even more - sometimes resorting to blatant lies of the level I thought impossible. So I blame both our government - for starting this bullshit, the US goverment - for provoking the conflict, and pushing to continue the war, but most of all - the Ukrainian government, who in this situation worked as true traitors to their people. You want the war to stop asap. How does that happen in your eyes? 1. Great we agree russia started the war. 2. How did usa provoke conflict? 3. How did the ukrainian government work as traitors to their people in this situation? To me it seems they are being rallied to be true patriots to defend their homeland from an invasion. 2 - That's hella big question. It started as early as in the beginning of 90s by promoting Ukrainian nationalism (like, supporting very questionable accusations of Holodomor as genocide). It worsened in 2004 with a US-backed revolt, that brought Yuschenko to power - and again a surge of nationalism with all sorts of brainwashing (like government-backed search for a different ancestry of Russians and Ukrainians - in a situation when noone can differ between Russians and Ukrainians if they both speak Russian). It worsened again with another US-backed revolt in 2014 - where the first decrees of the new government all were about "ukrainization" of a very heterogenous country. This btw included withdrawing the official status of Russian language in Ukraine, which was by far more prevalent than the Ukrainian in the East and in most big cities. The other provocative line has been about NATO membership. I'm sure, many Ukrainians truely believed that it is a good way of protecting their country - but as we see, all the direct military help (weaponry) the US and NATO has provided is worth less than 15bn. So, instead of protection, Ukraine has stuck between the rock and a hard place, - to lose already 20% of its territory, and sustain enormous damage to economics (~40% of GDP) and population (millions of refuges). As this is not enough - it is your media (helped by Zelensky) that continue promoting ideas that help keeping public in a thought that it is necessary to continue. They would spread claims of genocide by showing a box with teeth of "tortured victims" - and when the proof arises, that it is the local dentist's collection, no big media would mention it. Or they write about Russian forces deliberately shelling themselves at Zaporizhie Nuclear Station - I don't know what degree of idiocy is needed to believe that, but many do somehow. Or a recent video from freshly reclaimed Kupyask, where Azov member Zhorin shows dead bodies of people, accused of cooperation with Russians - it is of course brougth without the context, as an evidence of Russian war crimes. So your government on one hand promotes continuation of the war, while on the other - is afraid to involve too much by keeping the military aid at a bare minimum - so its literally participating in a genocide of Ukrainians, whos army by all evidence lacks weapons (but is quite big in numbers, so it still keeps fighting) 3 - Zelensky came to power with the promise that he'd do everything to end the conflict in Donbass. What he actually did was botch the Minsk peace agreement, and when he knew the war was coming (in October 2021 - February 2022) - he was affirming people of the opposite; look his WP interview for a proof. He made the country into a true dictatorship with censored and manipulative media that creates tons of fakes. Even the Ukrainian parliament at some point has fired the ambudsmen Denisova, as her claims on "thousands of women raped by Russian soldiers" could not be supported by even one case.
Lol
|
On October 13 2022 19:21 pmh 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. Well if Nato and Ukraine think they can get a 100% victory then by all means continue. Personally i think this is impossible but i could very well be wrong. Its not going to happen under Putin so this would require a regime change or at the minimum an internal conflict within the leadership. A regime change that would be favorable for the west and not end up with someone in charge who is even more hawkish. It is possible (an "expert" said on tv here that he expects this to happen within 1 year) but personally i dont see this happening. Do you think Russia will be able to permanently stop Ukraine's advance in the face of swiftly dwindling material while Ukraine is being supplied by the entirety of NATO?
Because from where I'm sitting the full reclaiming of Ukraine land seems merely a matter of time, and if Putin wants to then keep on throwing soldiers without equipment across the border into prepared defensive positions to get slaughtered by a vastly superior military he is free to do so.
Russia will run of people before the world runs out of bullets.
|
Yes i think they can.
All Russia needs is low tier artillery and ammo. They have virtually unlimited suplies of ammo,definitely more then Nato at this point. They dont have the high tech but they dont need that.
China also does not want Russia to fall,so they do have some support from other industrial nations. And they always have the threat of the nuclear option as a last resort.
|
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.
This assumes the Ukrainian army will be storming Moscow . I think there are still some differences between Putin and Hitler's eventual fate.
|
United States41470 Posts
On October 13 2022 19:32 pmh wrote:
Yes i think they can.
All Russia needs is low tier artillery and ammo. They have virtually unlimited suplies of ammo,definitely more then Nato at this point. They dont have the high tech but they dont need that.
And they always have the nuclear option as a last resort.
I disagree that the nation that has already run out of socks has limitless resources but there’s no sense arguing when we can just wait 12 months and see who was right.
|
On October 13 2022 19:34 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2022 19:32 pmh wrote:
Yes i think they can.
All Russia needs is low tier artillery and ammo. They have virtually unlimited suplies of ammo,definitely more then Nato at this point. They dont have the high tech but they dont need that.
And they always have the nuclear option as a last resort. I disagree that the nation that has already run out of socks has limitless resources but there’s no sense arguing when we can just wait 12 months and see who was right.
That is probably the way it will go indeed.
The stakes are very high,they go way beyond Ukraine itself. Shaping the geo-political balance for decades to come. There are arguments for continuing i can see them. But i think the risk and backlash it will give when not "winning" in the end also becomes bigger the longer it goes on.
I dunno,i have given my 2 cents on this subject and i am kinda done with it.
The situation is to polarized for any position that is not on the extreme end of either side to be relevant.
|
On October 13 2022 19:32 pmh wrote:
Yes i think they can.
All Russia needs is low tier artillery and ammo. They have virtually unlimited suplies of ammo,definitely more then Nato at this point. They dont have the high tech but they dont need that.
And they always have the nuclear option as a last resort. We've seen how good unlimited ammo supplies combine with HIMARS.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On October 13 2022 17:51 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +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:On October 13 2022 07:11 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 06:24 KwarK wrote:On October 13 2022 06:21 a_ch wrote:
[quote]
you just won't be able to ask me something new on this topic, especially if you simply bring some propaganda stamps (like, do you even know the definition of fascism besides very vague 14 points of U. Eco? Try to apply it to modern Ukraine - you'd be surprised).
Stalin broke y’all. I point out that you literally cannot help yourselves from doing “we’re not and if we are everyone else is” and that you don’t even know that you’re doing it. You instantly respond with do you even know the definition of fascism… Try to apply it to modern Ukraine - you'd be surprised). You don’t even notice you’re doing it in your angry response to me. That’s how badly he broke you. You literally couldn’t express a denial of it without doing it. This game could be played by the both sides. Like, as many of Americans are descendants of European exiled criminals or slaves, don't you think the genetics have to be inferior to the law-abiding guys who've stayed home in Europe? (Sorry to the rest of the US guys, thats not how I think of you, just an example of stupid racist bullshit, same as this guy is consistently bringing here) 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 they'll be hated
|
On October 13 2022 19:44 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +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:On October 13 2022 07:11 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 06:24 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Stalin broke y’all.
I point out that you literally cannot help yourselves from doing “we’re not and if we are everyone else is” and that you don’t even know that you’re doing it.
You instantly respond with
[quote]
You don’t even notice you’re doing it in your angry response to me. That’s how badly he broke you. You literally couldn’t express a denial of it without doing it. This game could be played by the both sides. Like, as many of Americans are descendants of European exiled criminals or slaves, don't you think the genetics have to be inferior to the law-abiding guys who've stayed home in Europe? (Sorry to the rest of the US guys, thats not how I think of you, just an example of stupid racist bullshit, same as this guy is consistently bringing here) 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
All that proves is that the closest way out of the conflict for many eastern-Ukranians was Russia, which... duh?
It doesn't show anything about how these Ukranians, or Ukranians as a whole, feel about Russia.
It also doesn't even remotely address what Kwark was saying, it's just more useless deflection.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On October 13 2022 18:50 Mikau313 wrote:Show nested quote +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:
Any negative claim on a nation as a whole is racism by definition
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)
|
On October 13 2022 19:55 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +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:
Any negative claim on a nation as a whole is racism by definition
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?
|
On October 13 2022 19:44 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +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:On October 13 2022 07:11 a_ch wrote:On October 13 2022 06:24 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Stalin broke y’all.
I point out that you literally cannot help yourselves from doing “we’re not and if we are everyone else is” and that you don’t even know that you’re doing it.
You instantly respond with
[quote]
You don’t even notice you’re doing it in your angry response to me. That’s how badly he broke you. You literally couldn’t express a denial of it without doing it. This game could be played by the both sides. Like, as many of Americans are descendants of European exiled criminals or slaves, don't you think the genetics have to be inferior to the law-abiding guys who've stayed home in Europe? (Sorry to the rest of the US guys, thats not how I think of you, just an example of stupid racist bullshit, same as this guy is consistently bringing here) 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
