Let’s have a war!

[ousdahl]

IIRC these areas were already independent republics that didn’t wanna be part of Ukraine anyway, which prompted the Azov paramilitaries to go all militant on those regions for years now anyway, with weapons paid for by you and me.


i don’t think this is a fair or accurate representation

since when has that ever stopped him from proclaiming such "truths"

i don’t get it

a quick google search of “history” of those regions yields ample perspectives that offer a notably different narrative

for hundreds of years, through the czars, stalin, the soviets, and now putin, there has been repeated attempts to wrestle that region away from Ukraine and ethnic Ukrainians

And yet, you’re the one who’s been posting opinion pieces like “Ukrainians never harbored ill feelings toward Russians”

Acknowledging the hundreds of years of conflicts may cast doubt upon narratives that this all happened as some unprovoked unilateral aggression.

Bear in mind, the one who’s been fussing to consider all those through some lens of historical context has been Qusdahl.

And I say do not out of antagonism! I’m hoping the discussion is making progress!

[KUTradition]

since when has that ever stopped him from proclaiming such "truths"

i don’t get it

a quick google search of “history” of those regions yields ample perspectives that offer a notably different narrative

for hundreds of years, through the czars, stalin, the soviets, and now putin, there has been repeated attempts to wrestle that region away from Ukraine and ethnic Ukrainians

And yet, you’re the one who’s been posting opinion pieces like “Ukrainians never harbored ill feelings toward Russians”

Acknowledging the hundreds of years of conflicts may cast doubt upon narratives that this all happened as some unprovoked unilateral aggression.

Bear in mind, the one who’s been fussing to consider all those through some lens of historical context has been Qusdahl.

And I say do not out of antagonism! I’m hoping the discussion is making progress!

which link was that?

i take it you’ve chosen not to do any digging?

the history largely flies in the face of your narrative, rather than supports it

[KUTradition]

Acknowledging the hundreds of years of conflicts may cast doubt upon narratives that this all happened as some unprovoked unilateral aggression.

history would suggest that this is just another page in the prolonged “russo” obsession with eastern and southern Ukraine, and the attempts by russo leaders to exterminate ethnic Ukrainians and subsume their lands (formally or just practically)…so, in a very limited sense you are correct

[KUTradition]

https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/c2be0 ... 2n5bPfr0qy

[ousdahl]

Here’s that link you requested, trad.

https://thehill.com/opinion/internation ... raine/amp/

To say the very least right now - interesting read, indeed.

[KUTradition]

Here’s that link you requested, trad.

https://thehill.com/opinion/internation ... raine/amp/

To say the very least right now - interesting read, indeed.

i admittedly skimmed it quickly, but i didn’t see the part you quoted

did i miss it?

edit: i found it

Since 1991 and before the war, Ukrainians never harbored ill feelings toward Russians — as public opinion surveys consistently demonstrated — and their governments never adopted anti-Russian foreign policies.

why’d you leave the bolded part out?

regardless, i fail to see your point. if you disagree with that sentiment, provide evidence to the contrary. the results of the vote for independence, regardless of what the feelings were towards russia generally, were rather resounding

both can be true, that 1) Ukrainians overwhelmingly wanted independence, and 2) a majority of Ukrainians harbored little ill will towards russia

the second part is hardly surprising, given the apparent systematic emigration of russians into Ukraine for generations

(also, speaking in absolutes is rarely a good idea)

[ousdahl]

I left the bolded part out because the bolded part, like many of the other hot takes and absolutes in that article, left me feeling a little skeptical. (as one should feel about pretty much any wartime media, even if it supports one's own views)

The author provides a serviceable number of links about other data and info he cites, yet he doesn't for the bolded part. As such, we just dunno exactly what "public opinion surveys" he's referring to, nor how consistent they are. Heck, for all we know, it could be ironclad scientific data, or it could be just another poll taken at the mall!

The omission, coupled with his absolutist assertions like Ukrainians never harbored ill feelings toward Russians; makes the opinion piece sound less like objective journalism, and more like...well, just another opinion piece...at best.

At worst, it might just reek of more good-guy-bad-guy western war machine propaganda.

[ousdahl]

Do you think the US military folks who signed the NYT ad count?

in a general sense, sure

do they have the bonafides that would make them experts in this particular arena?

how about you answer my question about how Ukraine is similar to Afghanistan/Iraq and who exactly is doing the lying/misleading?

i’m a little sick of answering your questions and not having the same done in return

BTW sorry if this wasn't clearly answered the first times around.

Ukraine is similar to Afghanistan and Iraq in that it’s the United States meddling in countries so far across the world most Americans couldn’t even find them on a map. They’re also similar cuz I don’t think the United States powers give one flying fuck about the people of any of those places.

The misleading is being done by the war machine...the State Department, the Pentagon, collectively the gummint; and the powers that wag that dog: the MIC war profiteers who view arms sales as nothing more than dollar signs, other interests of capital who view war as nothing more than a chance to tap global markets (for real, Halliburton LOL sigh), the corporate media that patriotically echoed the battle cry of "WMDs in Iraq" as quickly as they've patriotically echoed "Stand With Ukraine," the politicians who are deep in the pockets of the aforesaid interests; also, generally, some extra-strong dose of good ol’ American hubris…both in a “we can do whatever we want and it’s up to the rest of the world to deal with it” kinda way, in a “if anyone else in the world tries what we do it’s a war crime” kinda way, and a little more specifically in some Cold War hatchet that never quite got buried kinda way.

Is that an appropriate answer? I hope so. And, not trying to ruffle any feathers.

(BTW, feral, I called you out the other day for not realizing the cold war's even been over for like 3 decades now. But, after thinking about it some more, forgive me if I erred in saying so. Because...is it?)

[KUTradition]

Do you think the US military folks who signed the NYT ad count?

in a general sense, sure

do they have the bonafides that would make them experts in this particular arena?

how about you answer my question about how Ukraine is similar to Afghanistan/Iraq and who exactly is doing the lying/misleading?

i’m a little sick of answering your questions and not having the same done in return

BTW sorry if this wasn't clearly answered the first times around.

Ukraine is similar to Afghanistan and Iraq in that it’s the United States meddling in countries so far across the world most Americans couldn’t even find them on a map. They’re also similar cuz I don’t think the United States powers give one flying fuck about the people of any of those places.

The misleading is being done by the war machine...the State Department, the Pentagon, collectively the gummint; and the powers that wag that dog: the MIC war profiteers who view arms sales as nothing more than dollar signs, other interests of capital who view war as nothing more than a chance to tap global markets (for real, Halliburton LOL sigh), the corporate media that patriotically echoed the battle cry of "WMDs in Iraq" as quickly as they've patriotically echoed "Stand With Ukraine," the politicians who are deep in the pockets of the aforesaid interests; also, generally, some extra-strong dose of good ol’ American hubris…both in a “we can do whatever we want and it’s up to the rest of the world to deal with it” kinda way, in a “if anyone else in the world tries what we do it’s a war crime” kinda way, and a little more specifically in some Cold War hatchet that never quite got buried kinda way.

Is that an appropriate answer? I hope so. And, not trying to ruffle any feathers.

(BTW, feral, I called you out the other day for not realizing the cold war's even been over for like 3 decades now. But, after thinking about it some more, forgive me if I erred in saying so. Because...is it?)

so, who plays the parts of Finland, Poland, Sweden, Moldova, etc., in that analogy?

and what’s the misleading part? you yourself have admitted that russia is the aggressor here

[KUTradition]

here’s an academic source for the overwhelming support of the 1991 referendum

https://soviethistory.msu.edu/1991-2/th ... claration/

and again, i continue providing sources…

and again, again, if you really cared you could’ve found this info easily. you seem rather trapped in your narrative

[KUTradition]

i’d provide more sources, but i doubt it’d matter

[ousdahl]

both that post you quoted, I don't understand how you took it as me saying Russia is the aggressor here. But for that matter, I never meant to say Russia is NOT the aggressor, either.

Cuz of course Russia's an aggressor! They invaded, and that should be condemned! To me, it's more a matter of whether Russia is the ONLY aggressor. Cuz let's not act like there's no negative consequences to our own foreign meddling, supplying more and more arms, hawkish policies, etc.; not to mention Ukraine's own belligerence, either.

BTW, I once again am skeptical of your link about the 1991 referendum. Though it at least provides a source, that source appears to link to some Ukrainian website, the only content of which I'm able to read is, "404"

but, fwiw, feel free to provide more sources. Even if it's a 404 or some absolutist rhetoric, I'm trying to consider it in some bigger picture. Cuz honestly open to changing my mind here.

Trust me, I'd be thrilled to believe this is as simple as some battle of good versus evil, and that the only solution to ending this war is, more guns more bombs more war.

[ousdahl]

Trad, and everyone else:

Could you please read this NYT ad I posted the other day, and offer your reaction, whatever it may be?

https://eisenhowermedianetwork.org/russ ... war-peace/

If you need incentive to do so, here ya go:

This ad too compares Putin to Hitler

[ousdahl]

4-6 months!?

(One of my wife's favorite quotes: "I want it all, I want it now, and I want it delivered!")

[KUTradition]

both that post you quoted, I don't understand how you took it as me saying Russia is the aggressor here. But for that matter, I never meant to say Russia is NOT the aggressor, either.

Cuz of course Russia's an aggressor! They invaded, and that should be condemned! To me, it's more a matter of whether Russia is the ONLY aggressor. Cuz let's not act like there's no negative consequences to our own foreign meddling, supplying more and more arms, hawkish policies, etc.; not to mention Ukraine's own belligerence, either.

BTW, I once again am skeptical of your link about the 1991 referendum. Though it at least provides a source, that source appears to link to some Ukrainian website, the only content of which I'm able to read is, "404"

but, fwiw, feel free to provide more sources. Even if it's a 404 or some absolutist rhetoric, I'm trying to consider it in some bigger picture. Cuz honestly open to changing my mind here.

Trust me, I'd be thrilled to believe this is as simple as some battle of good versus evil, and that the only solution to ending this war is, more guns more bombs more war.

how many fucking times, dude? seriously

are you that inept at googling?

you’re really doing a great randy impression, so good job

https://www.csce.gov/sites/helsinkicomm ... rendum.pdf

[KUTradition]

Trad, and everyone else:

Could you please read this NYT ad I posted the other day, and offer your reaction, whatever it may be?

https://eisenhowermedianetwork.org/russ ... war-peace/

If you need incentive to do so, here ya go:

This ad too compares Putin to Hitler

what they’re proposing won’t fly in Kiev

from Ukraine’s perspective, an immediate ceasefire only serves to benefit russia. it’s like the authors of that piece completely forgot about 2014, or 2008…the notion that putin’s desire will somehow be satiated for the longtime seems incredibly misguided and not at all supported by the realities of the current situation, or history

if russia is the aggressor, why do we need to see the war through their eyes? they could’ve done any number of things to make their feelings known, instead of invading Ukraine. they easily could’ve disrupted energy supplies to Europe in an effort to force some sort of diplomatic agreement about NATO

they chose not to

they could’ve installed a military blockade in the Black Sea to halt grain shipments in order to force such talks

they chose not to

Ukraine getting into NATO was apparently an incredible long-shot prior to the conflict, and i’ve seen zero evidence to indicate otherwise

the other thing that piece doesn’t seem to mention at all, are the diplomatic efforts that took place prior to and at the outset of the conflict, which were largely rebuffed by putin

i’ll tell you the same thing i told randy re: covid and lab leak - you want everyone to be skeptical of the gov’t narrative until that narrative fits your own

[KUTradition]

and just so we’re clear, i’m not happy with the way the western allies have handled their support

i’m personally of the opinion that all sanctions possible should’ve come down like a hammer from the get-go. i don’t know how feasible that would’ve been, but that’s my feeling

and, as i’ve said before both here and in other threads, i’m not comfortable with our level of military spending to the detriment of other priorities (namely, environment, healthcare, and education). at the same time, though, the US getting out of the MIC business would leave a vacuum, with no guarantees on who would fill it. i prefer the world order with the US on top, rather than run the risk of it being china or russia

[Shirley]

4-6 months!?

(One of my wife's favorite quotes: "I want it all, I want it now, and I want it delivered!")

As has been discussed here before, if Biden had gone all-in militarily from the beginning and not waited, not only with F-16s but other weapon systems, the other countries in our coalition wouldn't have been incentivized to contribute like they are. And if your goal is to win while spending less American $, that's a win.

[jfish26]

4-6 months!?

(One of my wife's favorite quotes: "I want it all, I want it now, and I want it delivered!")

As has been discussed here before, if Biden had gone all-in militarily from the beginning and not waited, not only with F-16s but other weapon systems, the other countries in our coalition wouldn't have been incentivized to contribute like they are. And if your goal is to win while spending less American $, that's a win.

Not to mention that proceeding in something more aggressive that the stepwise and proportionate fashion in which we have...absolutely would be escalatory and something much closer to a true proxy war. And there are lots of valid reasons to avoid those things.

[Sparko]

As has been discussed here before, if Biden had gone all-in militarily from the beginning and not waited, not only with F-16s but other weapon systems, the other countries in our coalition wouldn't have been incentivized to contribute like they are. And if your goal is to win while spending less American $, that's a win.

Not to mention that proceeding in something more aggressive that the stepwise and proportionate fashion in which we have...absolutely would be escalatory and something much closer to a true proxy war. And there are lots of valid reasons to avoid those things.

So true! The conversation here is so excellent sometimes.