|
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. |
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 13 2023 22:42 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2023 22:07 a_ch wrote:How does this On August 13 2023 18:09 Nezgar wrote:
You do not even know what he is talking about. And that makes sense, because you do not know what kind of thinkers your government adores and models their modus operandi after.
"The Kremlin defines Ukraine as an artificial state, whose Jewish president proves it cannot be real."
This sentence might not make a whole lot of sense looking in from the outside. But from the perspective of a fascist and antisemitic government, there is no flaw in that logic. And that is the problem.
It shows that you do not understand what drives your government, why they do what they do and what their actions mean. You cannot understand why those things are problematic and why there is so much international pushback.
You do not know these things because you are uneducated on this topic. "I don't know what he is talking about, so it is false" is just not a good argument. It's not an argument at all.
And this is both hilarious and sad because earlier it was claimed how superior the education in Russia is compared to western countries. And you are a living testament that it is not. Because at the end of the day, you fell for Russian propaganda and are incapable of critical thought and reflection.
coincides in your head with this? On August 13 2023 08:15 Nezgar wrote:
I did not mention Ilyin by name but I think it's telling that you immediately knew who I meant when I said that Putin imported the corpse of a fascist thinker to Russia. If two of your president's main political and philosophical inspirations are a literal and unrepentant Nazi, and a fascist like Ilyin, there is not much guesswork involved to figure out which direction Putin leans towards. Its either I know the matter very well, or I don't; it cannot be both at the same time. You're a perfect example of a brainwashed person, who is capable only of repeating propaganda cliche, On August 13 2023 08:15 Nezgar wrote:
I don't want to take anyway away from KwarK, but this tendency towards authoritarianism is deeply ingrained in the DNA of the Russian state and society. It is in their history and all throughout their history ever since Ivan the Terrible. They have never changed the way they operate, how they think about power and the role of its citizens. Putin is just the recent in a long list of Russian autocrats and until the nation does some serious collective reflecting on their past, he won't be the last. and a racist too. It sucks to be you, honestly. I would discuss anything on "Russia a fascist state" if and only if you give clear examples or statements of our government officials. Not that there don't exist one, but this takes too much effort from me, and almost no effort from you, since all you do is retranslate anti-Russian propagandist crap, which have been produced for decades. Several people here have provided one example after another. You keep ignoring the examples. That's on you alone.
-sorry, I have limited capacity, and also won't respond to Kwark (although his points on the matter were the most thoughtful in my opinion). So if you select something, for example, I can try
|
United States41404 Posts
On August 13 2023 17:18 a_ch wrote:
>>Today it is Russia that is denying Ukrainian food to the world, threatening famine in the global south
-Russia have been prolonging the grain deal without its claims (on de-sanctioning fertilizers) being met several times. So it is very easy to see, which side doesn't care about global famine.
I mean it’s Russia. Obviously. Very obviously.
Few things to unpack here.
Firstly, there’s the “I broke X because you didn’t give me what I wanted so if you really cared about X you’d have given me what I wanted but you didn’t so really you don’t care about X”.
Like seriously, are you 4 years old? What went wrong in your brain that you can write “it’s easy to see which side doesn’t care about famine” and to you it’s not the side literally burning the grain silos. One side is burning grain silos, the other side isn’t. It is easy to see and I don’t know how you can’t. One side is the terrorist killing hostages, the other is the one not giving in to demands.
Secondly, there were a lot of compromise options given to Russia on fertilizer. They were offered the linking of an agricultural bank to SWIFT with inspection of the payments going through there to ensure they were for agricultural products. They rejected that and insisted they would take nothing less than SWIFT for all banks with no oversight. That implies that the fertilizer thing is just an excuse because they wouldn’t settle for solutions that addressed the fertilizer issue.
Thirdly, the party denying access to SWIFT isn’t Ukraine, or the third world nations having their grain blown up. This is classic blackmail, I’ll keep killing hostages until you give in when the hostages aren’t even the party being negotiated with.
Fourthly, the west are entirely entitled to deny access to SWIFT. They built it, it’s theirs, it’s a service that they have previously chosen to extend to Russia as a good will gesture but which Russia did not build, does not own, and is not entitled to. Russia is behaving like a 19th century colonial power. The west responded by saying “if you want to act like a 19th century empire then you can’t use our 21st century banking network”, just as you would with an entitled child. Russia is throwing a tantrum over it as if they deserve access to SWIFT no matter what they do.
And fifthly, the grain deal was extremely generous to Russia. As we have seen Russia completely lacks the power to project naval power within the Black Sea. They cannot actually enforce a blockade against third parties short of simply blindly sinking shipping (and they really don’t want to do that, that’s how you get your fleet sunk). Their ships in the Black Sea would get sunk if they tried to anchor off the Ukrainian coast. If you’re too weak to enforce a blockade then you don’t get a blockade. But Ukraine made a deal with Turkey to voluntarily allow Turkey to stop their ships so that Russians could peacefully inspect them without needing a physical blockade. This gave Russia far more blockade power than they deserved based on their naval power. Far more blockade power than they have now that they withdrew from the deal. It was an own goal in response to a bridge attack. If you want to be able to blockade places you need a serious fleet with a flagship that doesn’t catch fire and sink.
|
On August 13 2023 22:44 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2023 22:42 Magic Powers wrote:On August 13 2023 22:07 a_ch wrote:How does this On August 13 2023 18:09 Nezgar wrote:
You do not even know what he is talking about. And that makes sense, because you do not know what kind of thinkers your government adores and models their modus operandi after.
"The Kremlin defines Ukraine as an artificial state, whose Jewish president proves it cannot be real."
This sentence might not make a whole lot of sense looking in from the outside. But from the perspective of a fascist and antisemitic government, there is no flaw in that logic. And that is the problem.
It shows that you do not understand what drives your government, why they do what they do and what their actions mean. You cannot understand why those things are problematic and why there is so much international pushback.
You do not know these things because you are uneducated on this topic. "I don't know what he is talking about, so it is false" is just not a good argument. It's not an argument at all.
And this is both hilarious and sad because earlier it was claimed how superior the education in Russia is compared to western countries. And you are a living testament that it is not. Because at the end of the day, you fell for Russian propaganda and are incapable of critical thought and reflection.
coincides in your head with this? On August 13 2023 08:15 Nezgar wrote:
I did not mention Ilyin by name but I think it's telling that you immediately knew who I meant when I said that Putin imported the corpse of a fascist thinker to Russia. If two of your president's main political and philosophical inspirations are a literal and unrepentant Nazi, and a fascist like Ilyin, there is not much guesswork involved to figure out which direction Putin leans towards. Its either I know the matter very well, or I don't; it cannot be both at the same time. You're a perfect example of a brainwashed person, who is capable only of repeating propaganda cliche, On August 13 2023 08:15 Nezgar wrote:
I don't want to take anyway away from KwarK, but this tendency towards authoritarianism is deeply ingrained in the DNA of the Russian state and society. It is in their history and all throughout their history ever since Ivan the Terrible. They have never changed the way they operate, how they think about power and the role of its citizens. Putin is just the recent in a long list of Russian autocrats and until the nation does some serious collective reflecting on their past, he won't be the last. and a racist too. It sucks to be you, honestly. I would discuss anything on "Russia a fascist state" if and only if you give clear examples or statements of our government officials. Not that there don't exist one, but this takes too much effort from me, and almost no effort from you, since all you do is retranslate anti-Russian propagandist crap, which have been produced for decades. Several people here have provided one example after another. You keep ignoring the examples. That's on you alone. -sorry, I have limited capacity, and also won't respond to Kwark (although his points on the matter were the most thoughtful in my opinion). So if you select something, for example, I can try
Nah it's fine, just that anywhere else even good leaders become quickly unpopular. While in Russia, this seems not to happen or not to lead to consequences.
Also most of serious opponents are in prison, dead or fled the country. One cannot name an opponent in Russia.
Like I said, if you were a Putin supporter, it is even more likely you end up boiled alive. You mentioned you lost a lot in the stock market crash, but you are currently going to lose the rest.
If you keep your saving in Rubbles, the inflation will eat it in 2 years.
If you convert to Euro or Dollar, at some point these will be blocked or you will be declared a traitor or whatever.
And if you only have your salary, inflation will do the same, and If I understood correctly you are paid by the state if you work at an university.
I'd feel only safe as a cop or a soldier on the monetary side, they are the last to starve in a dictatorship.
Sorry about posting something which requires no answer from you, and I dearly hope for you I am wrong, but I can't see how things can go differently. They might take a year or two longer. But once that will have happened, will you think "oh that guy from TLNET warned me?" or will you find someone to blame? At least there will be plenty of candidate to blame beside Putin.
The state will start to make laws that will make criminals of those who managed their money
|
On August 13 2023 22:44 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2023 22:42 Magic Powers wrote:On August 13 2023 22:07 a_ch wrote:How does this On August 13 2023 18:09 Nezgar wrote:
You do not even know what he is talking about. And that makes sense, because you do not know what kind of thinkers your government adores and models their modus operandi after.
"The Kremlin defines Ukraine as an artificial state, whose Jewish president proves it cannot be real."
This sentence might not make a whole lot of sense looking in from the outside. But from the perspective of a fascist and antisemitic government, there is no flaw in that logic. And that is the problem.
It shows that you do not understand what drives your government, why they do what they do and what their actions mean. You cannot understand why those things are problematic and why there is so much international pushback.
You do not know these things because you are uneducated on this topic. "I don't know what he is talking about, so it is false" is just not a good argument. It's not an argument at all.
And this is both hilarious and sad because earlier it was claimed how superior the education in Russia is compared to western countries. And you are a living testament that it is not. Because at the end of the day, you fell for Russian propaganda and are incapable of critical thought and reflection.
coincides in your head with this? On August 13 2023 08:15 Nezgar wrote:
I did not mention Ilyin by name but I think it's telling that you immediately knew who I meant when I said that Putin imported the corpse of a fascist thinker to Russia. If two of your president's main political and philosophical inspirations are a literal and unrepentant Nazi, and a fascist like Ilyin, there is not much guesswork involved to figure out which direction Putin leans towards. Its either I know the matter very well, or I don't; it cannot be both at the same time. You're a perfect example of a brainwashed person, who is capable only of repeating propaganda cliche, On August 13 2023 08:15 Nezgar wrote:
I don't want to take anyway away from KwarK, but this tendency towards authoritarianism is deeply ingrained in the DNA of the Russian state and society. It is in their history and all throughout their history ever since Ivan the Terrible. They have never changed the way they operate, how they think about power and the role of its citizens. Putin is just the recent in a long list of Russian autocrats and until the nation does some serious collective reflecting on their past, he won't be the last. and a racist too. It sucks to be you, honestly. I would discuss anything on "Russia a fascist state" if and only if you give clear examples or statements of our government officials. Not that there don't exist one, but this takes too much effort from me, and almost no effort from you, since all you do is retranslate anti-Russian propagandist crap, which have been produced for decades. Several people here have provided one example after another. You keep ignoring the examples. That's on you alone. -sorry, I have limited capacity, and also won't respond to Kwark (although his points on the matter were the most thoughtful in my opinion). So if you select something, for example, I can try
I've tried a few times, but each time you either didn't respond or you dismissed the claims with no further argumentation.
I provided quotes for Putin's rejection of Ukraine's statehood. If you address these honestly without straight up dismissing them as "misinterpretation of Putin's words" then I'll consider discussing other things with you. You have to take Putin by his exact words, and by all of his words.
https://tl.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=28090344
https://tl.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=28090351
Also, I'm not sure if you're aware that fascism is not just nazism. Nazism is only a variant of fascism, as it includes biological racism, which Mussolini's fascism did not. Germany's fascism was of the Nazi variant.
The reason why I'm explaining this is because you said the following:
"-if I'd believe the part on the fascists to be true, I'd be long gone from Russia, as my family has places to live in Israel and Germany, and its not hard for a math PhD to get a well-paid job there. All the other is a "you have more nazis - no you have more nazis" thing. I don't know, how to do the comparisons; at least our nazis do not kill city mayors"
Fascists aren't necessarily anti-semitic. Putin's Russia has its own brand of fascism. Like all other brands, it's a nationalist autocracy that is overwhelmingly authoritarian and even to a large degree totalitarian. These are all key characteristics of fascism.
Putin's Russia is indeed extremely fascist. He rules the Russian state with complete impunity. He treats other states as subordinates. He threatens the world with nuclear annihilation. He treats Russian citizens as mere cogs in the system with no regard to their individual autonomy. His citizens are an extension of his rule as they silence one another.
|
United States41404 Posts
On August 13 2023 23:47 0x64 wrote:
The state will start to make laws that will make criminals of those who managed their money
For no other reason than that they need the money to pay for their wars. A starving animal begins to consume its fat reserves for the energy needed to survive. Then its muscles. Then eventually its own organs. Much of the early Nazi spending was the dividend from the seizure of the property of German Jews, for example.
Cannibalizing your own people is ultimately destructive though. A last resort. It destroys that on which the wealth is built.
Russians with substantial savings will be disappointed to learn that they are viewed as the fat reserves. This will be done first through currency controls, they will be forced to hold rubles which the state will devalue, seizing part of the value of their savings by stealth with monetary policy. Then through forcing banks to become practically insolvent, requiring them to lend the savings of the people to the state with assurances of repayment. Banks can be insolvent for a long time before anyone notices. Finally there will be the declaration that anyone who had evaded these measures is unpatriotic and deserves to have their remaining assets seized.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 13 2023 19:03 Magic Powers wrote:
The thing about Putin is that there weren't just warning signs, there were also many blatant war crimes and human rights violations that went ignored. Chechnya was warm-up for him. Around 18 years ago while I was getting surgery I met a boxer who was getting his broken nose fixed. He had fled to Austria from Chechnya and left some of his family behind. He described the horrible conditions in his country, including terror attacks against civilians well into the mid 2000's, and how Russia was responsible for all of it. I didn't understand politics back then and I didn't know if I should believe him. But it was very clear that he was speaking his own truth as he saw it. He wasn't lying. It was the first time I met someone who had seen the terror Putin's Russia was inflicting on other nations.
-this is a valid point, and people from Chechnya must know Russia's bad side more than anyone else. The problem is, is a smooth transition from a war to peaceful co-living even possible?
You'd say that a possible alternative is independence of their Respublic, - but we tried this after the 1st Chechen war. In fact it has been even worse, and ended up with Chechen forces attacking a neighboring Russian territory, leading to the 2nd war, where they have been defeated.
It appears that Chechnya alone is not self-sufficient, and those who can help it survive outside of Russia, in return require it to be an anti-Russian bulwark - which is a good parallel to what is happening in Ukraine now.
Here is an interesting article by Novaya Gazeta, about hard-going conscription in Chechnya in autumn 2022, https://novayagazeta.ru/articles/2022/09/29/ne-khochu-chtoby-vrag-razrushil-groznyi-media
Let me also bring two quotes from it, by Kadyrov, auto-translated via google,
"You are devils! You married Putin!" we are told [all this time]. "You are defending Russia's interests, [its] imperial ambitions." Yes, imperial! So what?.. And I tell you that I do not want the enemy to destroy Grozny, which I restored with so much efforts. So that war comes to Chechnya. I'd rather fight in Ukraine, because I don't want women and children to be killed here. I have nowhere to put them, I won't have food for them, I don't have bunkers for them! It's better for me to fight there, because I don't want Chechnya to be burned, I don't want everything here to be broken! Chechnya has not been rebuilt to be destroyed again..."
"Before the start of the SMO, [the attitude] towards the Chechen people on the part of Russian society was heaven and earth, how it changed. Among people, the recognition of us as a [full-fledged] subject of Russia and even, one might say, in most offices in the leadership of the state has occurred only now. Previously, they looked at us with caution, through binoculars, one might say. Therefore... due to the fact that [our] special forces worked more than required, volunteers worked more than expected, we became [finally] part of the territory of Russia!"
|
United States41404 Posts
On August 14 2023 00:46 a_ch wrote:
-this is a valid point, and people from Chechnya must know Russia's bad side more than anyone else.
The Chechens know it better than anyone else. Except, of course, the Poles who suffered under Russofication for hundreds of years, were slaughtered at Katyn Wood, the excesses of the Red Army, and so forth. And, of course, the Ukrainians who had their language and culture outlawed under Russofication, were genocided by Stalin’s man made famines, and had the entire Tatar population exterminated by rounding them up at gunpoint, putting them on trains, and sending them to a desolate area with no provisions made for them to survive the journey or arrival. A modern Trail of Tears. And they were far from the only ethnic group that were “relocated” by Stalin.
And the anti Jewish pogroms, can’t forget those. Centuries of that.
Then, of course, there are the Circassians, though they don’t really exist anymore. The Tsars exterminated them.
But sure, apart from every other group that has come into contact with Russia’s imperial ambitions the Chechens know Russia’s bad side more than anyone else.
At a certain point Russians need to ask themselves why every single ethnic group around them only ever sees Russia’s bad side. They need to ask themselves if they actually have a good side and why nobody has ever seen it. They’re so afraid of all their neighbours joining NATO but they’re lacking the introspection to wonder why everyone wants to join NATO when the only thing NATO offers anyone is protection from Russia. They’re pushing these countries away and this latest invasion is just the latest in 400 years of good reasons to fear Russia.
It’s not just Chechnya, it’s every single part of the Russian empire to every single non Russian people who dared to imagine preserving their culture. Ukraine is just the latest example of “you want protection from our violence? I’ll kill you for that”. And then they wonder why all their neighbours are terrified of them.
One comparison that springs to mind is the classic Bushism “they hate our freedom”. The US was seriously unpopular among a large disaffected population in the Middle East who experienced daily repression at the hands of US backed oil dictators while their culture and way of life were eroded by a global new order in which they had no place. These people may have misplaced their anger but their grievances were real. And the American people want to make sense of why villagers who live somewhere they’ve never heard of hate America and so Bush stands up and boldly declares that they hate America because they hate freedom. And suddenly everything is super simple and because freedom = America it is suddenly right and just to kill these people.
Hopefully Russians can see how utterly banal and idiotic that Bushism is, and also how the stupid half of the American population went “the would is complicated but this explanation is simple so it makes sense to me”. And if you can see it when Bush does it to stupid Americans I hope you can see it when Putin does it to stupid Russians who want to know why everyone hates Russian rule.
|
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces.
With Chechnya it's similar. They could've functioned as a separate state, but Putin didn't like that. He thinks the downfall of the Soviet Union is a huge blemish on Russia's record and he's been trying to "correct" that.
|
On August 13 2023 06:15 KwarK wrote:
What’s weird is that you’re on the side of the rapists and murderers making Bakhmut a hell on earth. That makes your pleas of “won’t anyone think of the poor draftees” ring a little hollow.
Very poor answer from you Kwark. What even is this? Its like youre speedrunning commiting logical fallicies.
On August 13 2023 06:27 Magic Powers wrote:
"The wives of the missing men are angry that they were sent into Bakhmut without training. The vast majority of mobilized soldiers in Ukraine receive at least minimal preparation, and cases of untrained men being ordered to fight aren’t widespread. But Ukrainian law doesn’t specify how long training should last, and lawyers say recruits can do little beyond lodging a complaint via their commanders or a Defense Ministry hotline.
Ukrainian lawmakers in February introduced a bill mandating a minimum of three months’ preparation for mobilized troops, but it hasn’t advanced through Parliament. Ukraine’s Defense Ministry denied sending soldiers without training into Bakhmut, and an officer from the 93rd said he hadn’t heard of such cases in his unit. “If it happens, it’s wrong,” he said. A spokesman for Ukraine’s armed forces declined to comment."
It's been condemned, it's been addressed, and it doesn't appear to be systemic whatsoever.
Not quite a non-story, but certainly not in the least comparable to the Russian way of mobilizing men. So this is once again an example of anti-Ukrainian bias by our "neutral" zeo, as expected.
You read an article where someone is giving a first hand account about something wrong happening. In the same article the people doing something wrong say 'I dunno? Why are you asking me its not happening?' as well as 'decline to comment'. Your conclusion is that its case closed, thats that, its not happening. Nothing to see here, the abuser said everything is fine.
Yikes. Just yikes.
|
On August 14 2023 02:09 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 13 2023 06:15 KwarK wrote:
What’s weird is that you’re on the side of the rapists and murderers making Bakhmut a hell on earth. That makes your pleas of “won’t anyone think of the poor draftees” ring a little hollow. Very poor answer from you Kwark. What even is this? Its like youre speedrunning commiting logical fallicies. Show nested quote +On August 13 2023 06:27 Magic Powers wrote:
"The wives of the missing men are angry that they were sent into Bakhmut without training. The vast majority of mobilized soldiers in Ukraine receive at least minimal preparation, and cases of untrained men being ordered to fight aren’t widespread. But Ukrainian law doesn’t specify how long training should last, and lawyers say recruits can do little beyond lodging a complaint via their commanders or a Defense Ministry hotline.
Ukrainian lawmakers in February introduced a bill mandating a minimum of three months’ preparation for mobilized troops, but it hasn’t advanced through Parliament. Ukraine’s Defense Ministry denied sending soldiers without training into Bakhmut, and an officer from the 93rd said he hadn’t heard of such cases in his unit. “If it happens, it’s wrong,” he said. A spokesman for Ukraine’s armed forces declined to comment."
It's been condemned, it's been addressed, and it doesn't appear to be systemic whatsoever.
Not quite a non-story, but certainly not in the least comparable to the Russian way of mobilizing men. So this is once again an example of anti-Ukrainian bias by our "neutral" zeo, as expected. You read an article where someone is giving a first hand account about something wrong happening. In the same article the people doing something wrong say 'I dunno? Why are you asking me its not happening?' as well as 'decline to comment'. Your conclusion is that its case closed, thats that, its not happening. Nothing to see here, the abuser said everything is fine. Yikes. Just yikes.
"It's been condemned, it's been addressed, and it doesn't appear to be systemic whatsoever."
Learn to read.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 13 2023 23:47 0x64 wrote:
Nah it's fine, just that anywhere else even good leaders become quickly unpopular. While in Russia, this seems not to happen or not to lead to consequences.
Also most of serious opponents are in prison, dead or fled the country. One cannot name an opponent in Russia.
Like I said, if you were a Putin supporter, it is even more likely you end up boiled alive. You mentioned you lost a lot in the stock market crash, but you are currently going to lose the rest.
If you keep your saving in Rubbles, the inflation will eat it in 2 years.
If you convert to Euro or Dollar, at some point these will be blocked or you will be declared a traitor or whatever.
And if you only have your salary, inflation will do the same, and If I understood correctly you are paid by the state if you work at an university.
I'd feel only safe as a cop or a soldier on the monetary side, they are the last to starve in a dictatorship.
Sorry about posting something which requires no answer from you, and I dearly hope for you I am wrong, but I can't see how things can go differently. They might take a year or two longer. But once that will have happened, will you think "oh that guy from TLNET warned me?" or will you find someone to blame? At least there will be plenty of candidate to blame beside Putin.
The state will start to make laws that will make criminals of those who managed their money
-one year ago I used to think very similarly, - so I moved all of the remaining money to my sister in Munich (when the borders to the Baltic States were still open, so the travel was much easier). If she spends that for something useful, I'm fine, - although, unexpectedly, at that time she was afraid even to put them to a bank account.
One friend of mine also has this point of view (but most of all he's afraid to get conscripted, although he has "unfit for war service" in his documents), so now he is trying to move to a UK university. But it looks like I've made my bet on Russia.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces.
Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former
-has more population and a bigger army,
-is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder
-is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular?
On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
With Chechnya it's similar. They could've functioned as a separate state, but Putin didn't like that. He thinks the downfall of the Soviet Union is a huge blemish on Russia's record and he's been trying to "correct" that.
I think they could have their own peaceful state in a perfect world, in which there is no warmongers on the both sides of the ocean, who's life motto is "divide and conquer".
|
On August 14 2023 03:42 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces. Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former -has more population and a bigger army, -is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder -is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular? Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
With Chechnya it's similar. They could've functioned as a separate state, but Putin didn't like that. He thinks the downfall of the Soviet Union is a huge blemish on Russia's record and he's been trying to "correct" that. I think they could have their own peaceful state in a perfect world, in which there is no warmongers on the both sides of the ocean, who's life motto is "divide and conquer". Finland is a close ally to NATO and covered by the EU mutual defence treaty long before the Ukraine invasion.
Putin might have gotten away with little to no Western response if the 3 day operation had actually lasted 3 days. There was no reality in which he was getting away with an invasion of Finland without a full response from the EU and by association NATO.
|
United States41404 Posts
Finland is in the EU and therefore under the French nuclear aegis. It's off the table as a Russian target. Russia only attacks the weak.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 14 2023 03:46 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 03:42 a_ch wrote:On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces. Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former -has more population and a bigger army, -is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder -is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular? On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
With Chechnya it's similar. They could've functioned as a separate state, but Putin didn't like that. He thinks the downfall of the Soviet Union is a huge blemish on Russia's record and he's been trying to "correct" that. I think they could have their own peaceful state in a perfect world, in which there is no warmongers on the both sides of the ocean, who's life motto is "divide and conquer". Finland is a close ally to NATO and covered by the EU mutual defence treaty long before the Ukraine invasion. Putin might have gotten away with little to no Western response if the 3 day operation had actually lasted 3 days. There was no reality in which he was getting away with an invasion of Finland without a full response from the EU and by association NATO.
-yeah, and Ukraine is reliably protected by the Budapest Memorandum.
|
United States41404 Posts
On August 14 2023 03:58 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 03:46 Gorsameth wrote:On August 14 2023 03:42 a_ch wrote:On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces. Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former -has more population and a bigger army, -is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder -is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular? On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
With Chechnya it's similar. They could've functioned as a separate state, but Putin didn't like that. He thinks the downfall of the Soviet Union is a huge blemish on Russia's record and he's been trying to "correct" that. I think they could have their own peaceful state in a perfect world, in which there is no warmongers on the both sides of the ocean, who's life motto is "divide and conquer". Finland is a close ally to NATO and covered by the EU mutual defence treaty long before the Ukraine invasion. Putin might have gotten away with little to no Western response if the 3 day operation had actually lasted 3 days. There was no reality in which he was getting away with an invasion of Finland without a full response from the EU and by association NATO. -yeah, and Ukraine is reliably protected by the Budapest Memorandum.
Not even slightly comparable.
|
On August 14 2023 03:42 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces. Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former -has more population and a bigger army, -is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder -is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular? Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
With Chechnya it's similar. They could've functioned as a separate state, but Putin didn't like that. He thinks the downfall of the Soviet Union is a huge blemish on Russia's record and he's been trying to "correct" that. I think they could have their own peaceful state in a perfect world, in which there is no warmongers on the both sides of the ocean, who's life motto is "divide and conquer".
Are you planning to respond to my previous comment I wrote about Putin's claims of Ukraine's statehood and about Russia's fascism?
The reason why Finland is not a valid target for Russia is obvious: even before joining NATO they were armed to the teeth and they could mobilize just about their entire workforce. In practice their military was more powerful than Russia's, at least defensively. It would've been suicidal for Putin to attempt an invasion of Finland.
Ukraine on the other hand was considered weak by Putin. He thought it would be a repeat of the invasion of Crimea.
Many or most analysts thought Ukraine would fall within a matter of weeks or even days. Only with hindsight do we understand that Ukraine had the means and Ukrainians the will to square up with Russia.
Additionally, Putin didn't think Zelensky would find so many powerful allies having his back. Germany? Laughable. Never. The US? Eh. Ukraine wouldn't matter that much to them.
Putin learned the hard way how poor his prediction was. Several countries practically stripped their own military bare in support of Ukraine. That's almost unheard of.
|
On August 14 2023 03:42 a_ch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces. Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former -has more population and a bigger army, -is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder -is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular?
It's simple. Finnish military is way better trained and prepared for a Russian invasion than the Ukrainian military was. The whole point of the Finnish army is to make sure that taking Finland would be way too costly to even consider for Russia.
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 14 2023 04:12 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 03:42 a_ch wrote:On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces. Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former -has more population and a bigger army, -is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder -is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular? On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
With Chechnya it's similar. They could've functioned as a separate state, but Putin didn't like that. He thinks the downfall of the Soviet Union is a huge blemish on Russia's record and he's been trying to "correct" that. I think they could have their own peaceful state in a perfect world, in which there is no warmongers on the both sides of the ocean, who's life motto is "divide and conquer". Are you planning to respond to my previous comment I wrote about Putin's claims of Ukraine's statehood and about Russia's fascism? The reason why Finland is not a valid target for Russia is obvious: even before joining NATO they were armed to the teeth and they could mobilize just about their entire workforce. In practice their military was more powerful than Russia's, at least defensively. It would've been suicidal for Putin to attempt an invasion of Finland. Ukraine on the other hand was considered weak by Putin. He thought it would be a repeat of the invasion of Crimea. Many or most analysts thought Ukraine would fall within a matter of weeks or even days. Only with hindsight do we understand that Ukraine had the means and Ukrainians the will to square up with Russia.
It's just like as I came to this forum as a means of structured procrastination not to do my job, the same I now try to avoid that question by answering the more simple ones. I promise to return to it
|
Russian Federation240 Posts
On August 14 2023 04:18 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2023 03:42 a_ch wrote:On August 14 2023 01:24 Magic Powers wrote:
Putin would no doubt invade Finland if he could. He chose Ukraine not only because he preferred Ukraine, but moreso because he thought they would roll over. A bully senses weakness and pounces. Then why attack Ukraine instead of Finland, when the former -has more population and a bigger army, -is much more poor, so there's less washing machines and Nutella to plunder -is culturally closer to Russia, so the war would be less popular? It's simple. Finnish military is way better trained and prepared for a Russian invasion than the Ukrainian military was. The whole point of the Finnish army is to make sure that taking Finland would be way too costly to even consider for Russia.
With all due respect, I think it is no match to the army of Ukraine. One key difference would be - an average Finn has much more to lose, compared to Ukrainians - who's army core consisted of ultranationalists
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
