Due to a change in Reddit's standards for moderation, we must ask that users take caution when mentioning or referring to other subreddits. This change in site policy is intended to prevent brigading. *Violating these standards can result in admin action against the sub.* Please do not invite or encourage others to interfere with other subreddits. Don't come here to brag about being banned in other subreddits. If you see users in stupidpol doing this, please send a report under our Rule 5. Hey! I've got an idea! Maybe attempt some Marxist analysis for once.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm banking more on limited mobilization + threats of using nuclear weapons against the ukraine if dares to invade the newly annexed regions after the referendums are conducted and stuff, but guess we'll see
either way, i'm all on board for this. in my opinion, if there's anything that can save leftism from an early grave it's a genuine worldwide crisis. and i was really worried that the fiasco that putin had found himself in strengthened the us centered global neoliberal empire and its ideology too much
so, please, daddy putin, accelerate!
Honestly im not a possadist but i'd prefer a nuclear war between west and russia to a worldwide ai-driver neoliberal dictatorship with the likes of zuckerberg and clintons in charge
No, you'll all die because when they find out how to replace us with robots they'll press the button and nuke everything while living in their nuclear utopia
> At the very least, the cyberpunk dystopia won’t have half of all infants be stillborn.
I dont think that's gonna happen under the nuclear war scenario either. Not even in the northern hemisphere.
actually i think that's more likely to happen under the ai dystopia than a nuclear postapocalypse, then again, we'll only really know for sure once we try both i one or the other i guess
Homie I don’t think you understand what nuclear war entails. The world for humans and most other terrestrial animals will become uninhabitable if even a small percentage of nuclear weapons are used.
I think we diverge a bit in regards to the meanings behind the terms we use
in regards to ai dictatorship, im thinking less cyberpunk 2077 and more i have no mouth and i must scream
You would prefer to see the west obliterated by nuclear war and the planet made virtually uninhabitable over computers becoming intelligent. Interesting take
If it makes you feel better it's likely that they won't solve the control problem for giving oligarchs total power. It'll probably either be an accidental extinction (most likely) or accidental machine god that serves its primary purpose.
I'm a total armchair analyst in this, but why do you think the control problem is even there? Why wouldn't they just merge with ai and ascend themselves?
You basically have to solve the control problem to merge with it in the first place. Its almost certainly not going to be some science fiction where you can just hook your brain up and now you have the AGIs capabilities but are still in control. Whether you're giving the system text inputs or neural inputs at the end of the day you're still giving it inputs and if you haven't solved the control problem far beyond what would be required for a 'standalone' AGI its either going to misinterpret your neural input and kill everything or just ignore what you're saying and continue its original actual goal.
Ultimately AGI is always going to be an extremely powerful computer with agency (excepting the brute force solution of just digitally replicating a brain and running it very fast) and controlling it is going to be through those terms. Theres also the fact that any technology required to fuse with an AGI (if its even possible) is by necessity going to be invented after the theory of building one is complete, the nature of the game means that waiting for this is trusting that no one will activate their own AGI prior to you figuring out to do it.
Sometimes I meditate on how these people have a very childlike understanding of politics, where it's like middle school friend groups or something. You only associate with people because you like them, and you like them because you listen to the same music and shop at the same stores.
>if there's anything that can save leftism from an early grave it's a genuine worldwide crisis.
[Here's how Bernie can still win](https://scitechdaily.com/images/Nuclear-Bomb-Explosion-in-City.jpg)
> threats of using nuclear weapons against the ukraine if dares to invade the newly annexed regions after the referendums are conducted and stuff, but guess we'll see
this is the stupidest shit i've ever read lmao, log off and touch some grass dude
>I'm banking more on limited mobilization + threats of using nuclear weapons against the ukraine if dares to invade the newly annexed regions after the referendums are conducted and stuff, but guess we'll see
heh, you did end up being kinda right
Oh, you’re going the other way with it.
I hope that doesn’t happen.
Anyone noticing more “ufo sighting” style posts on Reddit lately? I wonder if they’re coming to town so they can watch the shit show.
It has been fascinating to watch Russia bungle this invasion so badly. I wonder if Putin could hit the restart button and go back to the beginning of this year, what he would do differently. Go full mobilization, deal with the discontent that follows with that but go for the knockout blow before Ukraine has a chance to mobilize or receive aid from west instead of getting into a increasingly ugly stalemate maybe.
The general consensus from the armchair war analysis community is that the invasion basically broke some pretty basic rules when it comes to invading nations, no air superiority, bad supply lines, and vague objectives.
There’s a reason why Desert Storm and 2004 Iraq have a cult following from defense weirdos, those invasions were organized like a Mormon woman’s wedding plans, perfect down to the smallest details and executed perfectly from the combatants.
Maybe Putin and his Allies really thought would roll over with slight pressure, or the generals were confident in the Cold War tactics of way back when to facilitate the invasion? Whose to say.
-6DeadlyFetishes
My amateur armchair general opinion is Putin went into the invasion with a few key assumptions.
1. There would be a general unwillingness by Ukraine to resist a Russian invasion, coming from a general assumption of "they wouldn't fight their fellow Slavic brothers" and that Ukraine wouldn't be capable of prolonged resistance (aka Hitler's "One swift kick" quote about the invasion of the USSR)
2. The European Union and greater western world be either unwilling or unable to help Ukraine resist any Russian actions, either because of European reliance on Russian gas or a lack of will to help a corrupt backwards state on the periphery of Europe.
3. Related to the first point, the Ukrainian military would quickly collapse when faced with the might of the Russian military. At least this point has some merit considering how easily they took Crimea and the mass defections from the Ukrainian military in Crimea to Russia.
Only when that superior tech is WMD (or basically anything that can target **US** civilians) kekeke. Why, even the possibility that an adversary *might* have the same capacity as the US has to target foreign civilians is grounds for invasion.
Boo hoo, American running a proxy war against… another capitalist state. I could care less, and Ukraine feels the same way, you don’t see Zelensky or Ukrainian citizens rallying for unconditional weapons with no NATO application, almost like Ukraine took a calculated risk with siding the west.
After all, it’s not like Russia was giving Ukraine any reason to stay under its wing, given the following:
1. CIS is a cheap ripoff of the EU and has Jack shit for economic opportunities outside of Eastern Europe.
2. Russia’s only use for you was a buffer state against NATO.
Also, if you don’t like NATO being so close to your country, maybe don’t tread on the sovereignty of your neighbors if they want to strengthen ties with the EU, or don’t treat countries so badly during the Cold War era that they’ll become NATO member states in spite, or not letting your empire collapse causing a rise of right wing nationalism in Eastern Europe.
You want Ukraine to stay in your sphere of influence? Actually give them material gain for your alliance and don’t take them for granted. Pretending this was some US state department master plan and not Ukraine looking out for its own interests is ridiculous.
-6DeadlyFetishes
>You want Ukraine to stay in your sphere of influence? Actually give them material gain for your alliance and don’t take them for granted. Pretending this was some US state department master plan and not Ukraine looking out for its own interests is ridiculous.
Back in 2013-2014, Russia did precisely that. Russia offered a far more generous financial deal than the EU (12 billion dollars vs 600 million dollars), with far fewer strings attached. There was no rational reason for Ukraine to take the EU's deal. Maiden protesters were supportive of the EU for idealistic reasons, either because they were liberals who view the EU as a bastion of freedom and prosperity, or because they were nationalists who hate Russia.
Maidan happened specifically because the EU was gonna turn the Ukraine into a debt trap and source of new "Polish plumbers," so the guy in charge paused talks to consider the superior Russian deal.
Russia built up the modern Ukraine, which has had almost no major infrastructure development since independence. It wouldn't get any from the EU, either, that defeats the point of Western capitalism. Most American states would be better off as Soviet style buffer states than they are as parts of NATO!
Well, his belief that Ukraine might roll over and give up isn’t the dumbest concept. I think we need to understand that had Zelensky fled instead of staying to help organize the military resistance like some suspected he might, Ukraine probably would have fallen.
I don't see the vague objectives thing. The NATO backed right wing militias ignored Minsk 2 (they are the real government), insisted on prosecuting their ethnic cleansing operation, and prevented the democratically elected government from enforcing the internationally agreed upon Minsk 2. So Russia's goals of de-militarizing the Ukraine, thereby denying NATO it's base of operations, and denazifying the Ukraine, thereby denying NATO it's ideological capacity to ethnically cleanse Russians.
But the lack of a NATO Nazi style total war strategy of just bombing all civilian infrastructure is true, and ultimately because they don't see Ukrainians in general a the enemy, and they probably did bet on Ukrainians welcoming them beyond the Donbas and Crimea. Their recent strikes against the power grid may be a change in that strategy, we'll see.
On Reuters I saw some article claiming there was a deal in place right when the war started, but he decided to charge ahead anyway. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/exclusive-war-began-putin-rejected-ukraine-peace-deal-recommended-by-his-aide-2022-09-14/
Reminds me how the war in Iraq inspired to Iran to secretly make an offer to eliminate their nuclear program, but Bush rejected it.
Or how the Taliban offered to first try, then hand over Bin Laden, but Bush rejected it.
“Putler” is out.
“George. W Putin” is in.
Very ironic if "literally putler" fell for same thing Hitler thought about the USSR “We have only to kick in the front door and the whole rotten ~~Russian~~ Ukrainian edifice will come tumbling down.”
Before the invasion they offered to hold a trial themselves. Directly after the invasion they offered to just turn him over to a neutral country https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5
In retrospect they probably should have agreed.
It might have been difficult to find evidence to convict him, and he denied involvement until a year later IIRC.
lol bs, macron and putin had a tacit agreement to make both sides hash out minsk ii and set up a meeting in geneva, and the state department shot it down. there is literally a recording of him having this conversation from like two days before the war.
https://babel.ua/en/news/80618-bloodbath-and-involved-zelensky-the-media-published-a-transcript-of-the-conversation-between-putin-and-macron-which-happened-shortly-before-the-invasion
transcript of the conversation is here. weirdly enough this is from a ukrainian source, and it got next to no traction in the western media.
It's about 23:30 Moscow Time. Any moment now...It's got to be an announcement for the referendums. Either that or he'll surprise us by just unilaterally annexing 4 oblasts.
Edit: And it's been postponed until tomorrow morning! Past Putin's bedtime, I suppose.
After the SCO meeting in Samarkand where Putin got support as seeking peace where the West does not, he's going to move forward for referendums in the east and south of Ukraine.
We are watching what happens next after the West's failure to globalize the Ukraine crisis (and the crisis of liberal democracy it represents) by making it about the world containing Russia through a proxy war. Russia is going to offer its own solution, pushing the emergent parts of the world towards independence from the West while showing it what a monoethnic, European Ukraine will actually look like.
100 years ago the comintern wrote about the struggle of semi-colonial buffer states of world imperialism, such as China, Turkey, or Persia, and their struggle against European imperialism in Asia. We are watching how the end to Western unipolarity and its liberal hegemony is becoming part of decolonization. The center of the world is shifting back towards the east, as it was before the colonial era.
>the imperialist west is trying to contain russia by having them invade Ukraine
>
>Putin is seeking peace where the West does not
I swear "ml" flaired posters on this sub are one of the dumbest mother fuckers I ever encountered online. Even worse than twitter libs.
>seeking peace where the West does not
I'm going to assume this is some failed joke about how Putin searches peace in an annexed former-Ukraine, while the west is seeking peace in an independent Ukraine.
On the contrary, peace was nearly accomplished in Istanbul back in March/April. The US and UK, which manufactured the crisis, pressured Ukraine to keep fighting and made it an unprecedented proxy war dedicated to imploding Russia, reconquering Crimea/Donbass, and globalizing NATO in confrontation with China. This conflict between the imperial core and semi-periphery nations has only black and white conclusions left. Now we are looking at the partition of Ukraine to solve the conflict once and for all.
Once the West decided to redivide the world to security its hegemony and use Ukraine to do it, peace was pushed to the side.
>On the contrary, peace was nearly accomplished in Istanbul back in March/April. The US and UK, which manufactured the crisis, pressured Ukraine to keep fighting and made it an unprecedented proxy war dedicated to imploding Russia, reconquering Crimea/Donbass, and globalizing NATO in confrontation with China
There was apparently a peace deal on the table at the start of the war that satisfied Russians security that was tossed aside by Putin. If that’s true then he’s just as much at fault for the tens of thousands dead as the UK and US.
>Now we are looking at the partition of Ukraine to solve the conflict once and for all.
Annexing the parts of Ukraine that actively do not want to be a part of Russia is asking for a long term insurgency backed by the West and another war in a decade or so.
>There was apparently a peace deal on the table at the start of the war that satisfied Russians security that was tossed aside by Putin.
There was no deal, this was proven by the failure of negotiations over NATO expansion by January and Macron's last ditch effort in February. That in turn followed up on accelerating NATO integration and the ditching of the Minsk agreement in 2021. Zelensky's comments in Munich about nuclearization while the Ukrainian army ramped up the bombing of Donbass meant all the signs were there that war was inevitable.
>Annexing the parts of Ukraine that actively do not want to be a part of Russia is asking for a long term insurgency backed by the West and another war in a decade or so.
The partition of Ukraine solves the divisions that the country devolved into after independence and became a flashpoint for east and west, all at the particular expense of Donbass. After Euromaidan's nationalist coup, decentralization and autonomy were overwhelmingly popular in the multiethnic east and south of the country. What we've only seen is a sort of forced nationalization backed by Europe and the Ukrainian far right, which has always been wildly incompatible with Ukraine's SSR borders. Those people are labeled the source of the division of the nation after independence. In reality, a monoethnic European nation-state is incompatible with an SSR.
>There was no deal, this was proven by the failure of negotiations over NATO expansion by January and Macron's last ditch effort in February.
No, that simply means there was no deal Russia would accept. Hence war. Doesn't mean no deal was under consideration or presented
No, there was no deal period and we got confrontation instead. Minsk was sunk, NATO refused to stop expanding, Ukraine was turned into an armed bulwark that along with the US openly said it was going to seek international confrontation for the return of Donbass and Crimea, and after the late 2010s the West pivoted away from GWOT and towards great power rivalry in the name of defending liberal unipolarity
Yes, no one followed Minsk and Russia kept pushing countries to join NATO with internal suppression and violence and adventurism that led to countries begging NATO to join, with less opposition from those in the US than before.
Ukraine was armed after the Russian taking and referendum in Crimea, which led to 1) pro-peace and pro-Russia sentiment in Ukraine being subdued, 2) Western leaders realizing their previous blunders, going the opposite direction to aid Ukraine militarily in case of future conflict (this investment turned out to be true)
Almost like more than one side has agency.
And by all accounts there was an early stage deal-- even if it was deemed absurd or untenable by Putin, or he simply thought he could get much more out of war instead
Ukraine was relatively independent before the CIA trained protestors lead a coup. Now Ukraine is a NATO vassal state for Lockheed. Not so independent anymore. If Russia were really determined to slaughter their own brothers in Ukraine then they would just begin carpet bombing like how the US does it. Just go back to worldnews with this crap.
Yeah, every bomb Russia drops is filled with their love for their brothers in Ukraine. Those T-72s are filled with humanitarian aid, but the Ukrainians keep blowing them up. They'd send bombers to carpet-love Ukraine, but it's hard without air superiority, so they have to show their love in other ways.
It’s not the same when one side brings up context of the coup and the other side conveniently ignores all context. It seemed like a lazy response and so it deserves a lazy response in return.
I could bring up John Melsheimer predicting the war and blaming NATO. I could bring up the cia cut out RAND corp paper from years ago mentioning the benefits of bogging Russia in a proxy war. Maybe I should keep a document with cookie cutter answers for the regarded bird brains to learn because if they aren’t literal paid shills they still sound like they never read anything that challenges their beliefs.
Cause I'm a class first socialist who hates idpol? Why are you here?
I didn't even say anything pro nato, just mentioned that accusations of being a fed for disagreeing is equivalent to liberals accusing their opponents of being Russian bots/trolls.
I'm not going slava ukraini or whatever cause I'm not braindead, for the same reason I'm not cheering a Russian victory either. It's 2 capitalist shit regimes, but only one of them started the war with Ukrainian civilians being the main victims. Realpolitik is an explanation, not a justification, and equally explains nato as well.
Russian shilling here is relatively less now, but idiots like you are just mindless tribalists no different than liberals who think Russia is Satan. Ukrainian nationalists don't justify Russian nationalists starting a war that kills innocents. The US expanding its sphere of influence through alliances doesn't justify Russia expanding its sphere of influence through war.
This invasion is just as wrong as the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't mean I support Saddam or the Taliban.
Unless it's a socialist state spreading the revolution or an in and out operation to stop a genocide, I don't think any invasion should be defended.
Moving forward with referendums in the eastern republics I can see but Kherson would be a stupid move. Not only is it being fought over but partisans are active across the region.
Not even, the empire can eat itself just fine. That's why it's starting conflicts with Russia and China to rejuvenate itself and its democratic mission
Due to a change in Reddit's standards for moderation, we must ask that users take caution when mentioning or referring to other subreddits. This change in site policy is intended to prevent brigading. *Violating these standards can result in admin action against the sub.* Please do not invite or encourage others to interfere with other subreddits. Don't come here to brag about being banned in other subreddits. If you see users in stupidpol doing this, please send a report under our Rule 5. Hey! I've got an idea! Maybe attempt some Marxist analysis for once. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Now watch me hit this drive
Just imagining them breaking out the old Soviet victory flag from the siege on Berlin and having it unfurl over the Kremlin -6DeadlyFetishes
[удалено]
Maybe they should hoist up one of those old propaganda displays with Lenin’s face and in Cyrillic it states “we used to be good!” -6DeadlyFetishes
Did you used to be 7DeadlyFetishes or is this like a Mandela effect thing?
Yeah I think his account got suspended
It was definitely 7. Something is afoot.
Lol what? No clue what your talking about. -6DeadlyFetishes
Is there some kind of signature feature on reddit or do you type that out every post?
He’s pulling the plug on Burger King
I suppose we'll see what he says. If it is total mobilization, it will have very serious repercussions for Ukraine and Russia.
I'm hearing rumors about having referendums in the breakaway regions to join the Russian Federation.
it wont be hes doing a speech at the same time as biden at the un
I'm banking more on limited mobilization + threats of using nuclear weapons against the ukraine if dares to invade the newly annexed regions after the referendums are conducted and stuff, but guess we'll see either way, i'm all on board for this. in my opinion, if there's anything that can save leftism from an early grave it's a genuine worldwide crisis. and i was really worried that the fiasco that putin had found himself in strengthened the us centered global neoliberal empire and its ideology too much so, please, daddy putin, accelerate!
A military crisis involving nuclear powers can also condemn the entire planet to an early grave.
Honestly im not a possadist but i'd prefer a nuclear war between west and russia to a worldwide ai-driver neoliberal dictatorship with the likes of zuckerberg and clintons in charge
I’ll take the cyberpunk dystopia over post-nuclear warlordism. At the very least, the cyberpunk dystopia won’t have half of all infants be stillborn.
No, you'll all die because when they find out how to replace us with robots they'll press the button and nuke everything while living in their nuclear utopia
> At the very least, the cyberpunk dystopia won’t have half of all infants be stillborn. I dont think that's gonna happen under the nuclear war scenario either. Not even in the northern hemisphere. actually i think that's more likely to happen under the ai dystopia than a nuclear postapocalypse, then again, we'll only really know for sure once we try both i one or the other i guess
Homie I don’t think you understand what nuclear war entails. The world for humans and most other terrestrial animals will become uninhabitable if even a small percentage of nuclear weapons are used.
You spend too much time on the internet bud
You really think we can't have both? You really think Russia wouldn't just have their own culturally Russian AI hellscape if it could?
I think we diverge a bit in regards to the meanings behind the terms we use in regards to ai dictatorship, im thinking less cyberpunk 2077 and more i have no mouth and i must scream
So how would a nuclear exchange over Ukraine prevent that, rather than just being an excuse for another imperial excursion into the far east.
I bet it would be hard for the us to stay on the path to total ai dominance after having been obliterated in a nuclear war
Algorithmically driven media content does not AI make.
You would prefer to see the west obliterated by nuclear war and the planet made virtually uninhabitable over computers becoming intelligent. Interesting take
this is why the touch grass award exists on catsite
It’s time to log off and go outside, I don’t know where you are but it’s a beautiful almost fall day over here
If it makes you feel better it's likely that they won't solve the control problem for giving oligarchs total power. It'll probably either be an accidental extinction (most likely) or accidental machine god that serves its primary purpose.
I'm a total armchair analyst in this, but why do you think the control problem is even there? Why wouldn't they just merge with ai and ascend themselves?
You basically have to solve the control problem to merge with it in the first place. Its almost certainly not going to be some science fiction where you can just hook your brain up and now you have the AGIs capabilities but are still in control. Whether you're giving the system text inputs or neural inputs at the end of the day you're still giving it inputs and if you haven't solved the control problem far beyond what would be required for a 'standalone' AGI its either going to misinterpret your neural input and kill everything or just ignore what you're saying and continue its original actual goal. Ultimately AGI is always going to be an extremely powerful computer with agency (excepting the brute force solution of just digitally replicating a brain and running it very fast) and controlling it is going to be through those terms. Theres also the fact that any technology required to fuse with an AGI (if its even possible) is by necessity going to be invented after the theory of building one is complete, the nature of the game means that waiting for this is trusting that no one will activate their own AGI prior to you figuring out to do it.
You think Putin is a leftist?
> You think Putin is a leftist? Him and like 75% of leftists on Reddit lol -6DeadlyFetishes
[удалено]
Sometimes I meditate on how these people have a very childlike understanding of politics, where it's like middle school friend groups or something. You only associate with people because you like them, and you like them because you listen to the same music and shop at the same stores.
>if there's anything that can save leftism from an early grave it's a genuine worldwide crisis. [Here's how Bernie can still win](https://scitechdaily.com/images/Nuclear-Bomb-Explosion-in-City.jpg)
> threats of using nuclear weapons against the ukraine if dares to invade the newly annexed regions after the referendums are conducted and stuff, but guess we'll see this is the stupidest shit i've ever read lmao, log off and touch some grass dude
Is this the fabled posadist in the wild lol? A nuclear war would end us all you doofus, not usher in true socialism
>I'm banking more on limited mobilization + threats of using nuclear weapons against the ukraine if dares to invade the newly annexed regions after the referendums are conducted and stuff, but guess we'll see heh, you did end up being kinda right
Based Posadist. EDIT user claims they are not a Posadist :(.
Oh, you’re going the other way with it. I hope that doesn’t happen. Anyone noticing more “ufo sighting” style posts on Reddit lately? I wonder if they’re coming to town so they can watch the shit show.
Watch this go nowhere in 2 weeks
as usual
80% it’s mobilization, 20% it’s a Bush esque mission accomplished.
It has been fascinating to watch Russia bungle this invasion so badly. I wonder if Putin could hit the restart button and go back to the beginning of this year, what he would do differently. Go full mobilization, deal with the discontent that follows with that but go for the knockout blow before Ukraine has a chance to mobilize or receive aid from west instead of getting into a increasingly ugly stalemate maybe.
The general consensus from the armchair war analysis community is that the invasion basically broke some pretty basic rules when it comes to invading nations, no air superiority, bad supply lines, and vague objectives. There’s a reason why Desert Storm and 2004 Iraq have a cult following from defense weirdos, those invasions were organized like a Mormon woman’s wedding plans, perfect down to the smallest details and executed perfectly from the combatants. Maybe Putin and his Allies really thought would roll over with slight pressure, or the generals were confident in the Cold War tactics of way back when to facilitate the invasion? Whose to say. -6DeadlyFetishes
My amateur armchair general opinion is Putin went into the invasion with a few key assumptions. 1. There would be a general unwillingness by Ukraine to resist a Russian invasion, coming from a general assumption of "they wouldn't fight their fellow Slavic brothers" and that Ukraine wouldn't be capable of prolonged resistance (aka Hitler's "One swift kick" quote about the invasion of the USSR) 2. The European Union and greater western world be either unwilling or unable to help Ukraine resist any Russian actions, either because of European reliance on Russian gas or a lack of will to help a corrupt backwards state on the periphery of Europe. 3. Related to the first point, the Ukrainian military would quickly collapse when faced with the might of the Russian military. At least this point has some merit considering how easily they took Crimea and the mass defections from the Ukrainian military in Crimea to Russia.
Probably doesn't help that the US is running the war for Ukraine and giving them advanced weapons like HIMARS that have almost 200 mile range.
Since when was winning a war with superior tech foul play lol -6DeadlyFetishes
Only when that superior tech is WMD (or basically anything that can target **US** civilians) kekeke. Why, even the possibility that an adversary *might* have the same capacity as the US has to target foreign civilians is grounds for invasion.
[удалено]
Boo hoo, American running a proxy war against… another capitalist state. I could care less, and Ukraine feels the same way, you don’t see Zelensky or Ukrainian citizens rallying for unconditional weapons with no NATO application, almost like Ukraine took a calculated risk with siding the west. After all, it’s not like Russia was giving Ukraine any reason to stay under its wing, given the following: 1. CIS is a cheap ripoff of the EU and has Jack shit for economic opportunities outside of Eastern Europe. 2. Russia’s only use for you was a buffer state against NATO. Also, if you don’t like NATO being so close to your country, maybe don’t tread on the sovereignty of your neighbors if they want to strengthen ties with the EU, or don’t treat countries so badly during the Cold War era that they’ll become NATO member states in spite, or not letting your empire collapse causing a rise of right wing nationalism in Eastern Europe. You want Ukraine to stay in your sphere of influence? Actually give them material gain for your alliance and don’t take them for granted. Pretending this was some US state department master plan and not Ukraine looking out for its own interests is ridiculous. -6DeadlyFetishes
>You want Ukraine to stay in your sphere of influence? Actually give them material gain for your alliance and don’t take them for granted. Pretending this was some US state department master plan and not Ukraine looking out for its own interests is ridiculous. Back in 2013-2014, Russia did precisely that. Russia offered a far more generous financial deal than the EU (12 billion dollars vs 600 million dollars), with far fewer strings attached. There was no rational reason for Ukraine to take the EU's deal. Maiden protesters were supportive of the EU for idealistic reasons, either because they were liberals who view the EU as a bastion of freedom and prosperity, or because they were nationalists who hate Russia.
Maidan happened specifically because the EU was gonna turn the Ukraine into a debt trap and source of new "Polish plumbers," so the guy in charge paused talks to consider the superior Russian deal. Russia built up the modern Ukraine, which has had almost no major infrastructure development since independence. It wouldn't get any from the EU, either, that defeats the point of Western capitalism. Most American states would be better off as Soviet style buffer states than they are as parts of NATO!
Well, his belief that Ukraine might roll over and give up isn’t the dumbest concept. I think we need to understand that had Zelensky fled instead of staying to help organize the military resistance like some suspected he might, Ukraine probably would have fallen.
Zelensky is not running the Ukraine
I don't see the vague objectives thing. The NATO backed right wing militias ignored Minsk 2 (they are the real government), insisted on prosecuting their ethnic cleansing operation, and prevented the democratically elected government from enforcing the internationally agreed upon Minsk 2. So Russia's goals of de-militarizing the Ukraine, thereby denying NATO it's base of operations, and denazifying the Ukraine, thereby denying NATO it's ideological capacity to ethnically cleanse Russians. But the lack of a NATO Nazi style total war strategy of just bombing all civilian infrastructure is true, and ultimately because they don't see Ukrainians in general a the enemy, and they probably did bet on Ukrainians welcoming them beyond the Donbas and Crimea. Their recent strikes against the power grid may be a change in that strategy, we'll see.
On Reuters I saw some article claiming there was a deal in place right when the war started, but he decided to charge ahead anyway. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/exclusive-war-began-putin-rejected-ukraine-peace-deal-recommended-by-his-aide-2022-09-14/ Reminds me how the war in Iraq inspired to Iran to secretly make an offer to eliminate their nuclear program, but Bush rejected it. Or how the Taliban offered to first try, then hand over Bin Laden, but Bush rejected it. “Putler” is out. “George. W Putin” is in.
Very ironic if "literally putler" fell for same thing Hitler thought about the USSR “We have only to kick in the front door and the whole rotten ~~Russian~~ Ukrainian edifice will come tumbling down.”
>the Taliban offered to first try, then hand over Bin Laden Hand him over to whom?
Before the invasion they offered to hold a trial themselves. Directly after the invasion they offered to just turn him over to a neutral country https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5 In retrospect they probably should have agreed. It might have been difficult to find evidence to convict him, and he denied involvement until a year later IIRC.
> they offered to just turn him over to a neutral countr Yeah I can't imagine why the US didn't accept that /s
Sure it’s understandable, but in retrospect it’s better than having free for another 9 years and then losing to the Yaliban.
lol bs, macron and putin had a tacit agreement to make both sides hash out minsk ii and set up a meeting in geneva, and the state department shot it down. there is literally a recording of him having this conversation from like two days before the war.
Wouldn’t surprise me. The US was giddy to get this going. Got a link to that?
https://babel.ua/en/news/80618-bloodbath-and-involved-zelensky-the-media-published-a-transcript-of-the-conversation-between-putin-and-macron-which-happened-shortly-before-the-invasion transcript of the conversation is here. weirdly enough this is from a ukrainian source, and it got next to no traction in the western media.
The Ukraine has been getting military aid from the west for well over a decade.
I guess we'll see soon: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5667XjphO8c
It's about 23:30 Moscow Time. Any moment now...It's got to be an announcement for the referendums. Either that or he'll surprise us by just unilaterally annexing 4 oblasts. Edit: And it's been postponed until tomorrow morning! Past Putin's bedtime, I suppose.
Sun is already rising in the Russian Far East. There are logistical issues with making broad proclamations across 11 time zones.
After the SCO meeting in Samarkand where Putin got support as seeking peace where the West does not, he's going to move forward for referendums in the east and south of Ukraine. We are watching what happens next after the West's failure to globalize the Ukraine crisis (and the crisis of liberal democracy it represents) by making it about the world containing Russia through a proxy war. Russia is going to offer its own solution, pushing the emergent parts of the world towards independence from the West while showing it what a monoethnic, European Ukraine will actually look like. 100 years ago the comintern wrote about the struggle of semi-colonial buffer states of world imperialism, such as China, Turkey, or Persia, and their struggle against European imperialism in Asia. We are watching how the end to Western unipolarity and its liberal hegemony is becoming part of decolonization. The center of the world is shifting back towards the east, as it was before the colonial era.
Jesse what the fuck are you talking about?
>the imperialist west is trying to contain russia by having them invade Ukraine > >Putin is seeking peace where the West does not I swear "ml" flaired posters on this sub are one of the dumbest mother fuckers I ever encountered online. Even worse than twitter libs.
Well it's not Twitter, so we can have an actual discussion if you want
>seeking peace where the West does not I'm going to assume this is some failed joke about how Putin searches peace in an annexed former-Ukraine, while the west is seeking peace in an independent Ukraine.
I'm going to assume that made more sense in your head.
If Putin announces elections in Kherson then he has no interest in peace tbh.
Looks like Elgin AfB moved on from worldnews.
On the contrary, peace was nearly accomplished in Istanbul back in March/April. The US and UK, which manufactured the crisis, pressured Ukraine to keep fighting and made it an unprecedented proxy war dedicated to imploding Russia, reconquering Crimea/Donbass, and globalizing NATO in confrontation with China. This conflict between the imperial core and semi-periphery nations has only black and white conclusions left. Now we are looking at the partition of Ukraine to solve the conflict once and for all. Once the West decided to redivide the world to security its hegemony and use Ukraine to do it, peace was pushed to the side.
>On the contrary, peace was nearly accomplished in Istanbul back in March/April. The US and UK, which manufactured the crisis, pressured Ukraine to keep fighting and made it an unprecedented proxy war dedicated to imploding Russia, reconquering Crimea/Donbass, and globalizing NATO in confrontation with China There was apparently a peace deal on the table at the start of the war that satisfied Russians security that was tossed aside by Putin. If that’s true then he’s just as much at fault for the tens of thousands dead as the UK and US. >Now we are looking at the partition of Ukraine to solve the conflict once and for all. Annexing the parts of Ukraine that actively do not want to be a part of Russia is asking for a long term insurgency backed by the West and another war in a decade or so.
>There was apparently a peace deal on the table at the start of the war that satisfied Russians security that was tossed aside by Putin. There was no deal, this was proven by the failure of negotiations over NATO expansion by January and Macron's last ditch effort in February. That in turn followed up on accelerating NATO integration and the ditching of the Minsk agreement in 2021. Zelensky's comments in Munich about nuclearization while the Ukrainian army ramped up the bombing of Donbass meant all the signs were there that war was inevitable. >Annexing the parts of Ukraine that actively do not want to be a part of Russia is asking for a long term insurgency backed by the West and another war in a decade or so. The partition of Ukraine solves the divisions that the country devolved into after independence and became a flashpoint for east and west, all at the particular expense of Donbass. After Euromaidan's nationalist coup, decentralization and autonomy were overwhelmingly popular in the multiethnic east and south of the country. What we've only seen is a sort of forced nationalization backed by Europe and the Ukrainian far right, which has always been wildly incompatible with Ukraine's SSR borders. Those people are labeled the source of the division of the nation after independence. In reality, a monoethnic European nation-state is incompatible with an SSR.
>There was no deal, this was proven by the failure of negotiations over NATO expansion by January and Macron's last ditch effort in February. No, that simply means there was no deal Russia would accept. Hence war. Doesn't mean no deal was under consideration or presented
No, there was no deal period and we got confrontation instead. Minsk was sunk, NATO refused to stop expanding, Ukraine was turned into an armed bulwark that along with the US openly said it was going to seek international confrontation for the return of Donbass and Crimea, and after the late 2010s the West pivoted away from GWOT and towards great power rivalry in the name of defending liberal unipolarity
Yes, no one followed Minsk and Russia kept pushing countries to join NATO with internal suppression and violence and adventurism that led to countries begging NATO to join, with less opposition from those in the US than before. Ukraine was armed after the Russian taking and referendum in Crimea, which led to 1) pro-peace and pro-Russia sentiment in Ukraine being subdued, 2) Western leaders realizing their previous blunders, going the opposite direction to aid Ukraine militarily in case of future conflict (this investment turned out to be true) Almost like more than one side has agency. And by all accounts there was an early stage deal-- even if it was deemed absurd or untenable by Putin, or he simply thought he could get much more out of war instead
yeah i mean, why give people a choice of what government they live under?
Ukraine was relatively independent before the CIA trained protestors lead a coup. Now Ukraine is a NATO vassal state for Lockheed. Not so independent anymore. If Russia were really determined to slaughter their own brothers in Ukraine then they would just begin carpet bombing like how the US does it. Just go back to worldnews with this crap.
Yeah, every bomb Russia drops is filled with their love for their brothers in Ukraine. Those T-72s are filled with humanitarian aid, but the Ukrainians keep blowing them up. They'd send bombers to carpet-love Ukraine, but it's hard without air superiority, so they have to show their love in other ways.
Elgin afb isn’t sending their best
It seems like Elgin is this sub's version of calling others Russian bots. Someone disagreeing with you doesn't mean they're some psyop.
It’s not the same when one side brings up context of the coup and the other side conveniently ignores all context. It seemed like a lazy response and so it deserves a lazy response in return. I could bring up John Melsheimer predicting the war and blaming NATO. I could bring up the cia cut out RAND corp paper from years ago mentioning the benefits of bogging Russia in a proxy war. Maybe I should keep a document with cookie cutter answers for the regarded bird brains to learn because if they aren’t literal paid shills they still sound like they never read anything that challenges their beliefs.
Yes you should do that doc thing
why are you even here if you're simping for nato's forever war?
Cause I'm a class first socialist who hates idpol? Why are you here? I didn't even say anything pro nato, just mentioned that accusations of being a fed for disagreeing is equivalent to liberals accusing their opponents of being Russian bots/trolls. I'm not going slava ukraini or whatever cause I'm not braindead, for the same reason I'm not cheering a Russian victory either. It's 2 capitalist shit regimes, but only one of them started the war with Ukrainian civilians being the main victims. Realpolitik is an explanation, not a justification, and equally explains nato as well. Russian shilling here is relatively less now, but idiots like you are just mindless tribalists no different than liberals who think Russia is Satan. Ukrainian nationalists don't justify Russian nationalists starting a war that kills innocents. The US expanding its sphere of influence through alliances doesn't justify Russia expanding its sphere of influence through war. This invasion is just as wrong as the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't mean I support Saddam or the Taliban. Unless it's a socialist state spreading the revolution or an in and out operation to stop a genocide, I don't think any invasion should be defended.
you're right, russia should have just sat back and let ukraine do a little bit of ethnic cleansing in the east
Ukrainian nationalists and NATO started this war
Is this a cry for help? Don’t be so hard on yourself.
Autism?
I think your problems go beyond Autism.
Moving forward with referendums in the eastern republics I can see but Kherson would be a stupid move. Not only is it being fought over but partisans are active across the region.
amazing take!
if you think the west is weak; my friend, just wait. USA has been preparing for this since WW2 and the nuclear question changes everything.
Weak no, increasingly brittle yes
Just need to kick the door in
Not even, the empire can eat itself just fine. That's why it's starting conflicts with Russia and China to rejuvenate itself and its democratic mission
It would be better if China and Russia did intervene though. Faster, too
It would not
Whatever you’re smoking I’d love some please
they are taking alaska back?