vacuumflower @ vacuumflower @lemmy.sdf.org

Posts

0

Comments

624

Joined

2 yr. ago

I said "in some moments". There were days and places under Kherson a few months before.

Like every ceasefire.

I suppose right now Ukraine just wants some better guarantees while it has a strong negotiating position.

So that it takes some effort from Putin to even be heard.

Or maybe what Zelensky says is what he means, you can't negotiate with a pathological liar (just like a few of Ukraine's allies, though) who doesn't know how to lose with dignity. Be it a person or a whole elite of some country, like Russia. I mean, emotionally I've met some and I'd agree. Just don't know what it is rationally.

We'll see. Ukraine is still regaining land, albeit slowly. In some moments - rather fast and cheap even.

But also yes, the Russian forces have learned something.

All weapons which make sense for Russia's leadership. Nukes are not that, they want to still rule over something when this ends.

Chemical weapons are possible, I think.

The word "genocide" means something else (which, in case of Turkey and China and even Yazidis in Syria, most of the world has problems recognizing).

Yes, but Ukrainians need to regroup too.

I obviously mean that you are talking too tough for somebody not participating.

Well, it sometimes pays off. You can see how Pashinyan is regarded as opposed to Zelensky or literally anyone not as miserable. Looking weak is bad. Humans are still apes. And politicians in some sense are even more apes than the general population - they mostly participate in some free for all without any moral boundaries, which is an environment more macho-friendly than any other.

I mostly meant that people calling for Ukrainian offensive don't quite feel that it's not a movie, most of the soldiers are mobilized men, and Ukraine has already tried a few times. Turns out it's not as cheap as one would have thought.

They likely want to stockpile weapons, train people better (especially commanders, since their recent attempts were just as Soviet-styled as what Russia does), make preparations. Maybe wait for something unexpected happening for Russia leading to it being distracted.

Or maybe they want to wait until the terrain freezes, so that it would be easier to push. Or the other way around - due to Russian problems in logistics, they want to push in the shortest possible window before frosts, so that territory taken would be easier to hold. I dunno, I'm not a military expert.

Actually likely not, he's been building international relations similarly to the Russian criminal code of behavior, and while it's sad that even Americans and Europeans would consider this kinda acceptable, now he's shown himself to be weak and humiliated. In other words, of the lower caste, and simply said, a pidor.

So no, he won't be let back in. But some other (in appearances mostly, not in essence) government in Russia may.

I would understand if at least 20% of the Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel would be comprised of western volunteers talking about terrorists and no negotiations.

But that is not a thing. So looks a bit ballsy, cause one would think that in a rather apocalyptic war on Ukraine's soil, after they've reclaimed large swathes of territory, they'd be interested in some reduction of monthly casualties and rebuilding various capacities on that territory. Which a ceasefire would provide.

I mean, even if you are right, you are eagerly advocating for spending mobilized Ukrainian lives on a costly offensive.

Ukraine itself is not a "genuinely pluralistic democracy" despite appearances, it's almost as corrupt and authoritarian as Russia.

It's not the case where only Russia has to become more democratic cause democracies usually don't fight each other.

But for Russia to stop being a threat it's sufficient to just lose this war finally. It won't recover its ability to attack anyone anytime soon, and when it will, the process of recovery itself is going to naturally ensure that it's not interested in attacking Ukraine.

So yes, you are right about oligarchs and the general structure of the societies.

Essential assets you are talking about are what exactly? If you mean factories and plants, then actual equipment in most of them was obsolete even in 1991, and through the 90s and 00s has mostly been scrapped.

There are some remaining and even functioning, yes, but whether state ownership is going to prevent those from slowly crumbling due to growing obsolescence, irrelevance and lack of expertise, I'm not sure.

Basically industrial capacities are something to be created from scratch mostly.

And why then it's a problem that Russia wreaks havoc in Ukraine?..

And I don't see Western states acting in their best interest anyway. I actually see something between slow surrender to the worst of their competition and some weird kind of "let no one win", trying to empower the worst savages while simply not working with those of competitors who shouldn't necessarily be their adversaries. You can also take a look at the people which reach the top in European and US political classes, these are of, eh, declining quality.

Also for my second point - an event in the future still can't be the cause for an event in the past, justification or not.

Other than that - large parts of NATO \ West "civilization offering", so to say, were about freedom and human rights.

And large parts of the Soviet alternative were about humanism and equality and unification.

And if it's casual for you that people were not supposed to believe in any of that in either case, then I don't get it why people here are so eager to point out Soviet hypocrisies as if they were any different.

It'd be probably also awesome for realpolitik fans to not forget how real world works in terms of errors. Right now an error in your security systems means some protest, some Assange or Snowden, some scandal. Getting into realpolitik too much would shift those errors to justified terrorist acts. Well, I suppose that may be one reason why some countries are so eager to get rid of nuclear energy despite all the green agenda in PR. Single point of failure and all that.

And ones better than the current mainstream were pretty numerous.

Well, then the solution is abolishing the law making these loans so easy. It will make things easier for students themselves (only after a transient process, though, which itself is going to be hard - but that can be softened by, say, abolishing it gradually, for different categories of students).

I'm not from the US, I think I've heard that banks are obligated to give those loans with some characteristics?

It's going to cost much less if getting a student loan becomes much harder, because universities still need people paying.

If anybody can get a loan, the cost becomes inflated.

Just a thought.

Actually makes sense.

The US military is terrifying because of its logistics and intelligence apparatus, not its individual soldiers.

It may be the best in the world in training individual soldiers too.

China is the ultimate cargo cult wrt tech. They copy the form, hoping to eventually understand the mechanisms.

Well, if it works for consumer electronics and plenty of other tech, then it may eventually happen for aircraft carriers, no?

Oh, come on, no Russian (with balls turning around the correct axes in the skull, so to say) would believe that, about modern and best trained and falling behind.

The West thought that Ukraine would fall in days in the event of a Russian invasion.

That was sufficiently close, if you remember news and videos from the first weeks. It could have happened for all or most of the Left Bank Ukraine, if the Russian military would be just a bit less shit.

That helicopter assault on Kyiv's suburbs was rather Hollywood worthy. Ended with wasting best assault troops for nothing, though.

I mean, returning to modern and so on, if an American believes that, then I'm not sure whether they've been to Mexico even, not anything in Europe, let alone Eastern Europe.

Zero surprise they’re recycling their old talking points for China instead.

Now about China they may be right. China manufactures lots of things. China has its own consumer electronics. China has everything for a bloody autarchy, though of course it would take decades more to reach that and I don't see that being useful for them.

China is much more serious than Russia. It really (as in many times confirmed) does things in terms of modern weaponry and control systems which Russia has been doing only on paper, which has become clear now for everybody.

Anyway, it's better to overreact, no?

And even more so the irony that the Right’s ‘Anti-Woke’ culture is just a woke culture of it’s own on the other access,

Unexpectedly agree.

but rather than standing for anything it just exist to oppose and stagnate.

And with this too. Just "standing for anything" as I see usually occurs about things that don't shoot back, but in general yee, that seems to be a correct description of most "right" folks I've met.

Really "right" views (as what LOTR hobbits have in the book, for example) I usually encounter from people with chaotic-good alignment who would themselves most likely identify politically as leftists. Because the "right" is occupied by that swamp now.

What's wrong with being poetic about your job? One would think it can possibly give you an edge of the true samurai kind?.. Something rather good for a military?