5 ms·

Lol I’m not “placing blame” I’m stating what I see as facts. Russia will not surrender. The longer the Ukraine is in the war, the higher likelihood the people

Lol I’m not “placing blame” I’m stating what I see as facts. Russia will not surrender. The longer the Ukraine is in the war, the higher likelihood the people of Ukraine starve. We can make an argument that they shouldn’t surrender. That’s a moral position. I’m pointing out if we don’t figure it out within the next few months you’re not going to get the food from the region, as people are fighting over it. I don’t care who’s fault it is. We should recognize the situation so we can try to mitigate the issue.

valeness 4y ago
What the OP is saying is you could have phrased your comment like you did in your last paragraph here. Nobody disagrees that until it ends the situation will create further instability; but it can end with Russia giving up or surrendering as well. There is no global objective truth that Russia will not surrender; so by saying "I'm just stating facts" you're actually making a normative claim instead of a descriptive one; which can be viewed as problematic.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  It is common and reasonable to exclude unlikely if conditions from statements. They are just claiming that Russian concession is much less likely than a Ukrainian one, which I think many would agree with.
  - Balero 4y ago
    How about: If the war in Ukraine continues, we can expect less food production and potential oil disruption to center Europe. No need to comment on how to get to this outcome, or thoughts about who will make a concession leading to a big conversation away from the main point of what you were trying to say. Keep the if statement about exactly matters, not a secondary effect/cause.
asah 4y ago
Where do you get this "fact" that Russia won't surrender? More powerful armies have been forced to retreat from unsuccessful invasions.
- lettergram 4y ago
  I dont see any way Ukraine can win. There’s a lot of real information out there (military reports). I’m not going to dive into that and debate it. There are also many channels covering this topic mostly neutral: Here’s one: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KILAY2miQdI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KILAY2miQdI Here’s another: https://m.youtube.com/c/AlexanderMercourisReal https://m.youtube.com/c/AlexanderMercourisReal In short, for Russia to lose would be the end of Russia. They have to be seen as hitting their objectives (they’ve hit a few so far). Ukraine is massively out gunned, but has more manpower active. That said, I don’t see an outcome where Ukraine can regain any territory and will likely only lose more. That will further embolden Russia and will keep them from surrendering at the very least.
  - Balero 4y ago
    You are right there are lots of real information out there. You have picked a 1. random unpopular youtube channel (which might be good, I couldn't verify anything from it, as I couldn't find who ran it, if you know I am happy to be proved wrong) and 2. A disbarred barrister https://twitter.com/markgaleotti/status/927087181532991489?lang=bg https://twitter.com/markgaleotti/status/927087181532991489?l.... There is much better information to pick than this! Any information will have a bias, and if they claim to be neutral I personally get suspicious of what that bias is. Your assertion that you can't see anyway for Ukraine to win is based on "If Russia loses, it would be the end of Russia". Well, if Ukraine loses it will be the end of Ukraine, so I guess by your logic Russia can't win either? (TBF, everyone losing to some degree is right with war). I won't get drawn into a discussion about how the war will go. People qualified to make a guess have been wrong and wont make prediction. Neither of us is qualified, so I will not be weighing in on this except to say that unexpected things happen all the time in conflict.
    - 4y ago
ailef 4y ago
I don't understand what kind of bubble people are in if they think Russia is about to surrender soon. According to the Western media they were running out of ammo in March, April, May and June. Meanwhile, with an incompetent army running out of supplies, they were apparently able to occupy 20% of Ukraine's territory.
- Balero 4y ago
  To be clear. I agree with you, I doubt Russia will surrender any time soon. The conclusion as far as food goes is that globally, plans should be made that do not count on any food from Ukraine, or Russia entering global markets. I just took umbrage that OP was seemingly (and probably unintentionally) putting the blame for the situation on Ukraine and not Russia.
  - ailef 4y ago
    My interpretation is that he phrased it like that because he sees Ukraine surrendering as the most likely scenario. Not to put blame or responsibility on Ukraine.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    Innocent victims surrender all the time. I didn't read it as assigning blame or a moral position .
- daemoens 4y ago
  The goal was 100% of the country, not 20%. They've been stalled with little progress over the past month.
  - ailef 4y ago
    I've never heard the goal was 100% of the country. Can you point to a source?
    - daemoens 4y ago
      Putin's speech on February 24th, the day of the invasion > "To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation." How do you demilitarize a nation by taking only 20% of it? The only way to do this would be to capture the entirety of the country.

valeness 4y ago

What the OP is saying is you could have phrased your comment like you did in your last paragraph here. Nobody disagrees that until it ends the situation will create further instability; but it can end with Russia giving up or surrendering as well. There is no global objective truth that Russia will not surrender; so by saying "I'm just stating facts" you're actually making a normative claim instead of a descriptive one; which can be viewed as problematic.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
It is common and reasonable to exclude unlikely if conditions from statements. They are just claiming that Russian concession is much less likely than a Ukrainian one, which I think many would agree with.
- Balero 4y ago
  How about: If the war in Ukraine continues, we can expect less food production and potential oil disruption to center Europe. No need to comment on how to get to this outcome, or thoughts about who will make a concession leading to a big conversation away from the main point of what you were trying to say. Keep the if statement about exactly matters, not a secondary effect/cause.

asah 4y ago

Where do you get this "fact" that Russia won't surrender? More powerful armies have been forced to retreat from unsuccessful invasions.

lettergram 4y ago
I dont see any way Ukraine can win. There’s a lot of real information out there (military reports). I’m not going to dive into that and debate it. There are also many channels covering this topic mostly neutral: Here’s one: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KILAY2miQdI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KILAY2miQdI Here’s another: https://m.youtube.com/c/AlexanderMercourisReal https://m.youtube.com/c/AlexanderMercourisReal In short, for Russia to lose would be the end of Russia. They have to be seen as hitting their objectives (they’ve hit a few so far). Ukraine is massively out gunned, but has more manpower active. That said, I don’t see an outcome where Ukraine can regain any territory and will likely only lose more. That will further embolden Russia and will keep them from surrendering at the very least.
- Balero 4y ago
  You are right there are lots of real information out there. You have picked a 1. random unpopular youtube channel (which might be good, I couldn't verify anything from it, as I couldn't find who ran it, if you know I am happy to be proved wrong) and 2. A disbarred barrister https://twitter.com/markgaleotti/status/927087181532991489?lang=bg https://twitter.com/markgaleotti/status/927087181532991489?l.... There is much better information to pick than this! Any information will have a bias, and if they claim to be neutral I personally get suspicious of what that bias is. Your assertion that you can't see anyway for Ukraine to win is based on "If Russia loses, it would be the end of Russia". Well, if Ukraine loses it will be the end of Ukraine, so I guess by your logic Russia can't win either? (TBF, everyone losing to some degree is right with war). I won't get drawn into a discussion about how the war will go. People qualified to make a guess have been wrong and wont make prediction. Neither of us is qualified, so I will not be weighing in on this except to say that unexpected things happen all the time in conflict.
  - 4y ago

ailef 4y ago

I don't understand what kind of bubble people are in if they think Russia is about to surrender soon. According to the Western media they were running out of ammo in March, April, May and June. Meanwhile, with an incompetent army running out of supplies, they were apparently able to occupy 20% of Ukraine's territory.

Balero 4y ago
To be clear. I agree with you, I doubt Russia will surrender any time soon. The conclusion as far as food goes is that globally, plans should be made that do not count on any food from Ukraine, or Russia entering global markets. I just took umbrage that OP was seemingly (and probably unintentionally) putting the blame for the situation on Ukraine and not Russia.
- ailef 4y ago
  My interpretation is that he phrased it like that because he sees Ukraine surrendering as the most likely scenario. Not to put blame or responsibility on Ukraine.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  Innocent victims surrender all the time. I didn't read it as assigning blame or a moral position .
daemoens 4y ago
The goal was 100% of the country, not 20%. They've been stalled with little progress over the past month.
- ailef 4y ago
  I've never heard the goal was 100% of the country. Can you point to a source?
  - daemoens 4y ago
    Putin's speech on February 24th, the day of the invasion > "To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation." How do you demilitarize a nation by taking only 20% of it? The only way to do this would be to capture the entirety of the country.