3 ms·

> Vladimir Putin has assumed, without a drop of exaggeration, a historic responsibility by deciding not to leave the solution of the Ukrainian question to futur

> Vladimir Putin has assumed, without a drop of exaggeration, a historic responsibility by deciding not to leave the solution of the Ukrainian question to future generations. After all, the need to solve it would always remain the main problem for Russia > Now this problem is gone - Ukraine has returned to Russia. This does not mean that its statehood will be liquidated, but it will be reorganized, re-established and returned to its natural state of part of the Russian world. > This is a conflict between Russia and the West, this is a response to the geopolitical expansion of the Atlanticists, this is Russia's return of its historical space and its place in the world The whole pamphlet makes me want to vomit. But still ~nice~ (no, totally wrong connotation)... revealing(?) to get some more insight into the... whatever one should call that kind of thinking.

jacquesm 5y ago
It's pretty typical for rhetoric in that part of the world. People in other parts of the world have similar responses to American speeches.
- tguvot 5y ago
  you are mistaken. it's not rhetoric. they really do believe in this.
  - rpmisms 5y ago
    And we "really do believe" in our politicians' speeches, despite how absurd they sound.
    - tguvot 5y ago
      It's literally what a bunch of population really believe in. i been couch surfing livejournal (which is mostly russian those days). it's real believe and desire of many russian people. right now a bunch of them saying "he made a right call, we need to go all the way through it, and sanctions will make us stronger and independent". and no, it's not trolls for hire. it's people that been posting this kind of stuff for 15 years
      - archi42 5y ago
        Just had a call with a colleague with Russian passport. Essentially: Yes. He described as people he knew being essentially manipulated and outright brainwashed into believing that shit since. With the efforts going on for well over a decade now. The whole "foreign agent" method to squash the remaining opposition is really just the tip of the iceberg.
        tguvot 5y ago
        was just talking with my coworker who recently moved from russia to states because he wanted to save his family from russian reality. he spent last few days talking with his friends and family "back there". he says that most of them totally brainwashed, say that everything that west shows about ukraine it's fake and propoganda. total misunderstanding of the fact that russian economy pretty much ended over the weekend. sure that everything is good and they "liberate republics for neo-nazi junta". dude is devastated
        jacquesm 5y ago
        I can imagine, that's got to be absolutely terrible. Long ago I had a similar situation with the parents of my partner who were in a completely different reality, 'their main tactic was head down and ignore it all, be grateful that you are alive and shut up'.
- archi42 5y ago
  If I would have read something like that for the first time, I think I would have felt merely uncomfortable and puzzled, like "they're either kidding or insane". But 90 years ago my country essentially redefined the meaning of the word "atrocity". And when we disseminated those decades in our history lessons, we read some of the speeches given back then. The topics are a bit adapted to Russia, its history and the modern geopolitical environment; but the rhetoric, logic and tone is essentially the same. This is what makes me feel sick.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    The fact that it makes you feel sick is a good thing: it means that you haven't lost your humanity. And this is the really dangerous thing right now: the fact that many people are starting to see 'Russians' and not 'Russia/Putin' as the problem. Obviously Russians have some agency, but not to the degree that many think they do. They could do a lot more, but for people who have not lived under the jackboot of a dictator for the whole of their lives this may seem a bit simpler and less dangerous than it really is. Even so: the only real change can come from within Russia.
enaaem 5y ago
Note that NATO encirclement wasn't a motivation at all or a minor one at best. The Kremlins true motivation is to create a Greater Russia. Russia will not allow for an independent Ukraine. This is consistent with Putins speech before the invasion on how Ukraine isn't really a country. Ukrainians understand this and that's why they are begging to join NATO. They are not trying to unnecessarily provoke Russia, but they already understand that Russia is an existential threat to them now. Some argued before that Ukraine should become a neutral buffer state, but that is simply not an option with the current Russian ambitions.
- archi42 5y ago
  That's my interpretation as well. As I said elsewhere, I recall the last maniac to promise a "Greater $nation" in Europe did cause an immeasurable amount of suffering while trying to establish what was basically an empire built on lies and deception. It's difficult to believe that in this iteration the aggressor might be "saturated" after invading the first country and everyone lives happily ever after. (sry for the /s in the end, but it makes the thought more bearable). //Edit Appendix, historical background: I'm alluding to Nazi Germany that tried to "re"establish a mixture of the German Empire (which existed in one form or another for nearly a millennium from 962 to some time in the early 19th century) and the Roman Empire; hence the name "3rd Empire" and the aspiration for it to last another millennium. After invading Poland the popular opinion was that Hitler was "saturated" and would leave the rest of Europe alone (I tried to fact check this, but I can't easily find a reference; though I'm pretty sure that this was discussed in our history books - so take this with a grain of salt). I believe history shows how fatally wrong that assessment was. But maybe as a German I am just a tiny little bit sensitive regarding dictators assaulting their neighbors and claiming nationalistic BS.
  - enaaem 5y ago
    Im not afraid of that at all. Looking at the Russian performance, they stand no chance against NATO, even without the US. The Russians barely have the logistics to invade Ukraine, let alone Europe.

jacquesm 5y ago

It's pretty typical for rhetoric in that part of the world. People in other parts of the world have similar responses to American speeches.

tguvot 5y ago
you are mistaken. it's not rhetoric. they really do believe in this.
- rpmisms 5y ago
  And we "really do believe" in our politicians' speeches, despite how absurd they sound.
  - tguvot 5y ago
    It's literally what a bunch of population really believe in. i been couch surfing livejournal (which is mostly russian those days). it's real believe and desire of many russian people. right now a bunch of them saying "he made a right call, we need to go all the way through it, and sanctions will make us stronger and independent". and no, it's not trolls for hire. it's people that been posting this kind of stuff for 15 years
    - archi42 5y ago
      Just had a call with a colleague with Russian passport. Essentially: Yes. He described as people he knew being essentially manipulated and outright brainwashed into believing that shit since. With the efforts going on for well over a decade now. The whole "foreign agent" method to squash the remaining opposition is really just the tip of the iceberg.
      - tguvot 5y ago
        was just talking with my coworker who recently moved from russia to states because he wanted to save his family from russian reality. he spent last few days talking with his friends and family "back there". he says that most of them totally brainwashed, say that everything that west shows about ukraine it's fake and propoganda. total misunderstanding of the fact that russian economy pretty much ended over the weekend. sure that everything is good and they "liberate republics for neo-nazi junta". dude is devastated
        jacquesm 5y ago
        I can imagine, that's got to be absolutely terrible. Long ago I had a similar situation with the parents of my partner who were in a completely different reality, 'their main tactic was head down and ignore it all, be grateful that you are alive and shut up'.
archi42 5y ago
If I would have read something like that for the first time, I think I would have felt merely uncomfortable and puzzled, like "they're either kidding or insane". But 90 years ago my country essentially redefined the meaning of the word "atrocity". And when we disseminated those decades in our history lessons, we read some of the speeches given back then. The topics are a bit adapted to Russia, its history and the modern geopolitical environment; but the rhetoric, logic and tone is essentially the same. This is what makes me feel sick.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  The fact that it makes you feel sick is a good thing: it means that you haven't lost your humanity. And this is the really dangerous thing right now: the fact that many people are starting to see 'Russians' and not 'Russia/Putin' as the problem. Obviously Russians have some agency, but not to the degree that many think they do. They could do a lot more, but for people who have not lived under the jackboot of a dictator for the whole of their lives this may seem a bit simpler and less dangerous than it really is. Even so: the only real change can come from within Russia.

enaaem 5y ago

Note that NATO encirclement wasn't a motivation at all or a minor one at best. The Kremlins true motivation is to create a Greater Russia. Russia will not allow for an independent Ukraine. This is consistent with Putins speech before the invasion on how Ukraine isn't really a country. Ukrainians understand this and that's why they are begging to join NATO. They are not trying to unnecessarily provoke Russia, but they already understand that Russia is an existential threat to them now. Some argued before that Ukraine should become a neutral buffer state, but that is simply not an option with the current Russian ambitions.

archi42 5y ago
That's my interpretation as well. As I said elsewhere, I recall the last maniac to promise a "Greater $nation" in Europe did cause an immeasurable amount of suffering while trying to establish what was basically an empire built on lies and deception. It's difficult to believe that in this iteration the aggressor might be "saturated" after invading the first country and everyone lives happily ever after. (sry for the /s in the end, but it makes the thought more bearable). //Edit Appendix, historical background: I'm alluding to Nazi Germany that tried to "re"establish a mixture of the German Empire (which existed in one form or another for nearly a millennium from 962 to some time in the early 19th century) and the Roman Empire; hence the name "3rd Empire" and the aspiration for it to last another millennium. After invading Poland the popular opinion was that Hitler was "saturated" and would leave the rest of Europe alone (I tried to fact check this, but I can't easily find a reference; though I'm pretty sure that this was discussed in our history books - so take this with a grain of salt). I believe history shows how fatally wrong that assessment was. But maybe as a German I am just a tiny little bit sensitive regarding dictators assaulting their neighbors and claiming nationalistic BS.
- enaaem 5y ago
  Im not afraid of that at all. Looking at the Russian performance, they stand no chance against NATO, even without the US. The Russians barely have the logistics to invade Ukraine, let alone Europe.