Russia is a lot like the US in that there are 2 populations, the city dwellers....educated, connected, skeptical, and considerate of options (the coasts in the US...to generalize), and those who are emotional, overly patriotic, very tribal, subject to misinformation and conspiracy (fly-over country).
You have revealed your true self.
On behalf of all the blue collar white trash in flyover country (who cling to their guns and Bibles, to complete the thought) ... you can go fuck yourself.
Lord only knows what you think of all the minorities that also live here.
Do you seriously buy into the Putin narrative? It makes no sense (...)
I don't have to buy into anything. It's what Russia has indicated as their "red line" for years. Dismiss it in myriad ways, come up with competing hypotheses and motives. From subverting democracies, to restoring glory, to just plain insane/evil. Etc., etc. At this point it matters less what (supposedly) drives it, because the result is already here. And it just got started. Maybe it's easier if we all accept that it was apparently 'inevitable'.
It does make a difference. And to call it inevitable is defeatism, which always favours the big guy.
We have two sovereign states with conflicting views. When one says I have a red line and it involves restricting the sovereign rights of the other smaller state we don't have to accept that. To do so is to give in to big-boy-bullying tactics (which virtually ALL large nations can't seem to help using). I am fully aware that the US is even more guilty of this tactic, which is why it annoys me when many (particularly in the States) seem to think the Russian claim is somehow justified, because geopolitics.
No it's not. It wasn't right in Chile, (and myriad other states where the US has intervened) and its not right in Ukraine either.
Do you seriously buy into the Putin narrative? It makes no sense (...)
I don't have to buy into anything. It's what Russia has indicated as their "red line" for years.
Dismiss it in myriad ways, come up with competing hypotheses and motives. From subverting democracies, to restoring glory, to just plain insane/evil. Etc., etc.
At this point it matters less what (supposedly) drives it, because the result is already here. And it just got started.
Maybe it's easier if we all accept that it was apparently 'inevitable'.
The one key issue here is, do you think war would have been avoided if Ukraine had acknowledged the Don basin belonged to Russia, which admittedly has some kind of justification to its claim on the basis of the local population, (in crass disregard for the Soviet ethnic cleansing of the local cossacks that was instrumental in creating that local majority?) I seriously doubt it. Putin wants all of Ukraine.
The ethnic problems don't appear paramount (but regional). It is first and foremost the Ukraine/NATO symbiosis.
Do you seriously buy into the Putin narrative? It makes no sense for the following reasons:
1. Russia already has a direct border to NATO countries (Baltic states), so Ukraine as a buffer state is a non-sequitur 2. The directly neighbouring NATO nations are weak individually militarily and only constitute a threat collectively and only when attacked. 3. The last 20 years have been marked by growing business ties between Russia and Nato countries in Europe with the level of tension easing, not growing worse (as evidenced by Germany totally neglecting its military, believing commercial ties would be enough to thwart any military expansion)
These factors, coupled with the draconian Russian/Belarusian reaction to political opponents, are for me overwhelming evidence that Putin is not in fact scared of NATO cohesion or fire power (which collectively is anyway absurd and has been since nuclear deterrent became a thing, so no change there). No, he is afraid of free liberal democracy spreading into his home base, because that would be a threat to his own personal political fortunes. That is all this is about.
The one key issue here is, do you think war would have been avoided if Ukraine had acknowledged the Don basin belonged to Russia, which admittedly has some kind of justification to its claim on the basis of the local population, (in crass disregard for the Soviet ethnic cleansing of the local cossacks that was instrumental in creating that local majority?)
I seriously doubt it. Putin wants all of Ukraine.
The ethnic problems don't appear paramount (but regional). It is first and foremost the Ukraine/NATO symbiosis.
The one key issue here is, do you think war would have been avoided if Ukraine had acknowledged the Don basin belonged to Russia, which admittedly has some kind of justification to its claim on the basis of the local population, (in crass disregard for the Soviet ethnic cleansing of the local cossacks that was instrumental in creating that local majority?)
I have heard a respected MP calling for the deportation of all Russians from this country â all of them. I have heard crazy people calling for a 'no-fly zone' in Ukraine. If they got their way it would mean a terrible and immediate European war. I suspect they do not even know what they are calling for. Can you all please call off this carnival of hypocrisy?
I cannot join in it. I know too much. I know that our policy of Nato expansion â which we had promised not to do and which we knew infuriated Russians â played its part in bringing about this crisis.
I know that Ukraine's current government, now treated as if it was almost holy, was brought into being by a mob putsch openly backed by the USA in 2014.
I know that the much-admired President Zelensky in February 2021 closed down three opposition TV stations on the grounds of 'national security'. They went dark that night. I know that the opposition politician Viktor Medvedchuk was put under house arrest last year on a charge of treason. Isn't this the sort of thing Putin does?
I know that Ukraine's army has used severe force against Russian civilians in the Don Basin since 2014. The Russians have done dreadful things there, too, but there are plenty of people who will tell you that. The point is that this is not a contest of saints versus sinners, or of Mordor versus the Shire.
I also find it awkward that, when Britain and the USA rightly denounced Putin's illegal invasion of a sovereign country, they seemed to have forgotten that we gave him the idea, by doing this in Iraq in 2003. Unlike them I can truly claim to have opposed both these actions.
I tire of being told that Nato is purely defensive alliance when we know it bombed Serbia in 1999, incidentally killing civilians, when Serbia had not attacked a Nato member.
I also don't recall Libya attacking a Nato member before that 'defensive' alliance launched the air war on Tripoli which also killed civilians, children included, and turned that country into a cauldron of chaos, benefiting nobody.
And then there's the other thing that sticks in my gullet. The countries of the West have egged Ukraine on into a confrontation with Russia which has predictably ended in Putin's barbaric invasion. But while we stand and cheer at a safe distance, the Ukrainians are the ones who get shelled, bombed, besieged and driven from their homes. Is this honourable? Does sentimental praise for their bravery make up for it?
I would like to end with two quotations. The first is from the American Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman who said: 'I am sick and tired of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.'
The other is from the 'Benedictus' in the Church of England's 1662 Book of Common Prayer, which asks God 'to give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death, and to guide our feet into the way of peace', which I fervently pray, for I am not sure that anything else will now do any good.
Nice generalizations there.
I know of plenty of smart people who live in "flyover areas". Hi SFW, JFW, Lazy 8, Kurtster, etc. etc. etc.! And plenty more R.P. listeners and owner.
I know of plenty of people who live on the "coasts", who are, how would you say it?... losers.
lol
People are people and the pandemic has showed more about us than we realized.
The media laptop class telling us what to think
The Farm Animals often disregarded the experts
The experts and their fans - listening to NPR while masked and being afraid - perhaps were not as smart as the common farm animals who tuned out the NPR and continued enjoying life.
Location: Really deep in the heart of South California Gender:
Posted:
Mar 6, 2022 - 8:54pm
rgio wrote:
Putin's popularity within Russia is up 10 points since invading. Russia is a lot like the US in that there are 2 populations, the city dwellers....educated, connected, skeptical, and considerate of options (the coasts in the US...to generalize), and those who are emotional, overly patriotic, very tribal, subject to misinformation and conspiracy (fly-over country).
Nice generalizations there.
I know of plenty of smart people who live in "flyover areas". Hi SFW, JFW, Lazy 8, Kurtster, etc. etc. etc.! And plenty more R.P. listeners and owner.
I know of plenty of people who live on the "coasts", who are, how would you say it?... losers.
Re: the arte video.. I have no idea why parts of it need to be censored because of "hun" shite. It is a good summary of the situation and both of the "experts" are indeed experts.
Firstly it's a French video issued by Arte (a joint national broadcasting venture of France and Germany).
Take-aways - intro 1. History of Ukraine is long and like almost all of Central Europe characterised by push-me, pull-you effects between changing power centers (1000 years ago Ukraine itself was the strongest nation in Europe - new to me). 2. Ukraine was not only the breadbasket of the Soviet Union but also an important source of coal and iron ore in the Donbask.
First expert: 1. pro-Russian vs. pro-Western forces have also been jousting back and forth within the country since the fall of the Soviet Union with a trend towards pro-European (with the pro-Russian leader fleeing to Russia after the Maidan riots) 2. ethnic and language divisions play virtually no role in the country as there is a huge mix with the spectrum ranging from ethnic Russians speaking Ukrainian and supporting independence from Russia through to ethnic Ukrainians speaking Russian and being pro-Russian. 3. Allegiance to the "Ukrainian project" (i.e. independence from Russia and closer affiliation to Europe) has accelerated with each aggressive move by Russia - in other words anti-Russian sentiment has effectively been created by Russian aggression.
Second expert (geopolitics): 1. looks at the split in the UN vote condemning the war and notes the countries abstaining are a. very high population (China, India) and b. generally Brix nations. 2. re China, he posits China was intending to use Russia to be a rambock to drive division in the western alliances and weaken it, allowing it (China) to exploit any weaknesses to increase its influence. If this was the strategy it has backfired with the western alliance stronger than its ever been. 3. These big nations (I would leave India out of this one) are in a bit a quandary for they are facing the same internal pressures as Russia with various regions seeking independence and they are watching Russia carefully to learn lessons. 4. EU nations have woken up too late to the need to keep a strong army. It is going to take 1o years to get something in place (he's right - The German army is an empty shell at the moment).
My conclusion from the video: Putin, by trying to use force instead of luring people with attractive economic packages has created this mess all by himself and is almost singularly responsible for forging a true "Ukrainian nation" (see the article by Harari in the Guardian). Large nations should take heed that using force to suppress regional independence or annex neighbours (Taiwan) is almost certain to backfire.
It covers the history of Ukraine from the dark ages until today. Maps are shown, so it shoudln't be all too hard to follow, for the first half.
The second half would be much more intricate to relate, two interviews with 'experts', one from Ukraine, and one from France. I'd rather refrain from that one (crazy thought, y'know)...
Putin, die Ukraine und danach? | Mit offenen Karten Spezial Ukraine | ARTE
I think, this is a fair and balanced view of the history and political situation re: Ukraine we're all finding ourselves in at this time, as presented by French-German TV
Unfortunately, the video is in German... but I thought it might be manageable to view, at least by some here, so I posted it. Listen in, most will get the gist. And if you do, keep listening to the very end!
Or—crazy thought, I know—you could summarize the video since you find it so hep.
Almost universally*, from leaders in Europe and Asia to current and former American officials, Ukraine is being viewed as a test for the survival of a 75-year-old idea: that liberal democracy, American military might and free trade can create the conditions for peace and global prosperity.
Because the founder of that concept, the United States, continues to struggle â with partisanship, Covid and failure in distant war zones â many foreign policy leaders already see Ukraine in dire terms, as marking an official end of the American era and the start of a more contested, multipolar moment.
For at least a decade, liberal democracies have been disappearing. Their numbers peaked in 2012 with 42 countries, and now there are just 34, home to only 13 percent of the world population, according to V-Dem, a nonprofit that studies governments. In many of those, including the United States, âtoxic polarizationâ is on the rise.
NATO countries can no longer quietly accommodate Russian aggression and hydrocarbon blackmailing.
At least they will still have Saudi aggression and hydrocarbon blackmailing to compensate (a little, but not enough, according to knowledgeable people).
Or it might be like Iraq. Almost nobody notices the coffins coming home (because not in the sanitized media).
Russia can't sustain this war and hoped-for occupation, economically or militarily. NATO countries can no longer quietly accommodate Russian aggression and hydrocarbon blackmailing. Russia will be a pariah as long as Putin rules (with the possible exception of China).
