6 ms·

> What diplomatic off ramp does Russia need? One that saves face, to at least some degree. > There is a simple first step towards redemption and that is get

> What diplomatic off ramp does Russia need? One that saves face, to at least some degree. > There is a simple first step towards redemption and that is get out of Ukraine right now. Better yesterday. Simple for you, because you're not the one losing face For example, here's another "simple first step" for Europe "towards redemption" (in the eyes of the Russians): withdraw all military and financial support for Ukraine, and refuse to allow transit for weapons sent to it. How does that one make you feel? Do you think Europe will take it? It's probably only a little less likely than Russia taking your option.

wbsss4412 4y ago
Your analysis is seemingly based in the notion that all viewpoints are equal valid, but an analysis of the war needs to be rooted in what’s right and what’s wrong. Russia is fighting a war of aggression in Ukraine. Do they have interests there? Sure, but that doesn’t give them the right to invade and topple the government. Before you ask, yes the US is extremely guilty of this exact same behavior, it is also wrong. This war started because Putin won’t accept anything less then complete fealty from the leaders of Ukraine/Belarus, and the 2014 revolution that threw out Yanikovich meant that they didn’t have a leader that was 100% on their side in Ukraine.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > Your analysis is seemingly based in the notion that all viewpoints are equal valid, No, it's rooted in the notion that Russia has it's own POV, and it's that POV that will determine its actions. The GGP's "simple first step" is nonsense, because it didn't recognize that POV. > but an analysis of the war needs to be rooted in what’s right and what’s wrong. And if someone (like an adversary) doesn't share your views about what’s right and what’s wrong, they'll reject your analysis and any recommendations based on it.
  - wbsss4412 4y ago
    > Your "simple first step" is nonsense What are you talking about? I never said anything about a “simple first step” > appeals to right and wrong are only persuasive for people who are aligned with you one that Look, I’m all for understanding the other side, but don’t take empathy so far that morality has no meaning.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > What are you talking about? I never said anything about a “simple first step” I corrected that. I didn't notice at first that you were a different account than the one I originally responded to.
  - serpix 4y ago
    The POV of Russia is genocide of Ukrainian people and culture. This is a POV that is not up for consideration or saving of face.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > The POV of Russia is genocide of Ukrainian people and culture. This is a POV that is not up for consideration or saving of face. Exactly, so no one should suggest to the Russians that they just go home because what they're doing is wrong. It's not realistic. If you want them to just go home, you have to do better than that to engineer the situation. Otherwise, the options are fight or surrender to them.
- anticodon 4y ago
  > yes the US is extremely guilty of this exact same behavior, it is also wrong. Has US ever suffered sanctions for that? I don't remember any. > This war started because Putin won’t accept anything less then complete fealty from the leaders of Ukraine/Belarus How do you know this? Did Putin said this personally to you? Announced this in the media? You attribute to him something that western propaganda fakes like it's some irrefutable absolute and complete truth. BTW, do you remember that before it all started, Russia explicitly asked for guarantees that NATO won't expand further towards Russian borders and that request blatantly refused by the West. Also, your media probably do not say that Ukrainian politicians repeatedly announced plans to exterminate Russian population of Ukraine. Physically kill all the Russians just as Hitler (he's considered a hero in Ukraine) wanted. You'd probably never find this in English or any other language spoken on the West, but there is plenty of evidence in Russian/Ukrainian even though a lot of it being scrubbed in the last 200 days. Still you can find a lot of those on YouTube for example, if you can understand Russian/Ukrainian. You'll never be able to get a complete picture of what was and what is happening here because you can read and understand only what is fed to you by your media and this information is heavily biased to put it politely. > the 2014 revolution that threw out Yanikovich It wasn't a revolution - it was a coup funded and organized by the EU and USA.
  - wbsss4412 4y ago
    > It wasn't a revolution - it was a coup funded and organized by the EU and USA. I don’t doubt that there was western involvement, just as there was certainly Russian involvement supporting prior administrations. While it can be difficult to discern the true desires of Ukrainians given outside involvement, its very easy to say that the current government in Ukraine is much more democratic than plenty of US Allies in other parts of the world, eg the Middle East. > Also, your media probably do not say that Ukrainian politicians repeatedly announced plans to exterminate Russian population of Ukraine. Physically kill all the Russians just as Hitler (he's considered a hero in Ukraine) wanted. You'd probably never find this in English or any other language spoken on the West, but there is plenty of evidence in Russian/Ukrainian even though a lot of it being scrubbed in the last 200 days. Still you can find a lot of those on YouTube for example, if you can understand Russian/Ukrainian. If this is so easy to find, why not provide actual sources? Edit: the irony here is the extremely close parallels between this war and hitter’s annexation of the sudentenland. > How do you know this? Did Putin said this personally to you? Announced this in the media? I can tell from his actions. Russia has been invading its neighbors the entire time he’s been in power. Did I go a bit overboard when I said “complete fealty”? Sure. But it’s quite obvious that Putin won’t accept those states as anything less than Russian client states within its sphere of influence. > Has US ever suffered sanctions for that? I don't remember any. US does bad things so other countries should do bad things too.
- dnh44 4y ago
  >but an analysis of the war needs to be rooted in what’s right and what’s wrong. I don't think such an analysis is 100% useful because because that's not the main criteria that countries use to make their decisions. The main criteria are strategic and economical considerations. Ethical considerations are nice to have but they are more often used to justify a decision based on furthering strategic/economic goals. The US has played a blinder on this one.
MomoXenosaga 4y ago
It works both ways you know. Europe cannot afford to lose face either. Imagine EU can be blackmailed by Russia! Wouldn't stand a chance against the US or China. The EU clearly believes they can win this fight so why should it withdraw support to Ukraine?
- yabqk 4y ago
  The EU doesn’t stand a chance against the US: look how they forced us to wage a proxy war against Russia. And now we’re going to buy liquefied gas from them.
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    > The EU doesn’t stand a chance against the US: look how they forced us to wage a proxy war against Russia. America forced the EU into a proxy war with Russia... by having Russia invade Ukraine? Sounds like somebody has been huffing Russian propaganda.
    - dnh44 4y ago
      It's a a reasonable assessment if you accept following three (I think easy to accept) items. - That the US has a long term goal of preventing a "peer competitor" from arising. - That the US has a financial and strategic interest in causing the collapse of the Russian Federation. - The US leadership is capable of intelligent long term thinking (so we have to ignore Trump/Biden). https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1346.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1346.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard https://www.dw.com/en/chinas-rise-and-conflict-with-us/a-55026173 https://www.dw.com/en/chinas-rise-and-conflict-with-us/a-550... https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/nato-versus-russia-in-ukraine-how-us-could-be-aiming-for-russia-s-breakup-into-smaller-states/ar-AA11JkWr https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/nato-versus-russia-in-u... A quick quote from the last link sounds like classic US policy to me: "A much more truly ambitious apparent long-term US ambition seems to have been to instigate the breakup of Russia into smaller manageable countries, paralleling the emergence of nations in eastern Europe after 1989. It could then deal with a reconstructed historical Russia of smaller emerging statelets run by competitive elites at odds with each other. These new polities, anxious for revenues, will then, presumably, be eager to sign lucrative commercial deals with US corporations since the entire region is extraordinarily wealthy in raw material resources." And if we look at the result of the current crisis (I'll quote myself from a post above): "- Potential collapse of the Russian Federation and the economic benefits this would bring (for the West) - Solidifying EU support of NATO - Increased energy sales to Europe at higher prices - Increased military sales to NATO countries due to new threat - Increased budget for "the military industrial complex" - Further the long term goal of preventing a peer competitor from appearing by both weakening Russia and making the EU more dependant on the US both economically and militarily. - Mutually beneficial German/Russian cooperation is pretty much dead now so no threat of such an alliance appearing in the future." I think its pretty well played on the part of the US; nothing to be ashamed about. I'm interested to see what happens next.
bhaak 4y ago
They've made a bad mistake and if they were the men they've were portraying themselves to be, they would own up on their mistakes. Only cowards need to save face.

wbsss4412 4y ago

Your analysis is seemingly based in the notion that all viewpoints are equal valid, but an analysis of the war needs to be rooted in what’s right and what’s wrong. Russia is fighting a war of aggression in Ukraine. Do they have interests there? Sure, but that doesn’t give them the right to invade and topple the government. Before you ask, yes the US is extremely guilty of this exact same behavior, it is also wrong. This war started because Putin won’t accept anything less then complete fealty from the leaders of Ukraine/Belarus, and the 2014 revolution that threw out Yanikovich meant that they didn’t have a leader that was 100% on their side in Ukraine.

tablespoon 4y ago
> Your analysis is seemingly based in the notion that all viewpoints are equal valid, No, it's rooted in the notion that Russia has it's own POV, and it's that POV that will determine its actions. The GGP's "simple first step" is nonsense, because it didn't recognize that POV. > but an analysis of the war needs to be rooted in what’s right and what’s wrong. And if someone (like an adversary) doesn't share your views about what’s right and what’s wrong, they'll reject your analysis and any recommendations based on it.
- wbsss4412 4y ago
  > Your "simple first step" is nonsense What are you talking about? I never said anything about a “simple first step” > appeals to right and wrong are only persuasive for people who are aligned with you one that Look, I’m all for understanding the other side, but don’t take empathy so far that morality has no meaning.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > What are you talking about? I never said anything about a “simple first step” I corrected that. I didn't notice at first that you were a different account than the one I originally responded to.
- serpix 4y ago
  The POV of Russia is genocide of Ukrainian people and culture. This is a POV that is not up for consideration or saving of face.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > The POV of Russia is genocide of Ukrainian people and culture. This is a POV that is not up for consideration or saving of face. Exactly, so no one should suggest to the Russians that they just go home because what they're doing is wrong. It's not realistic. If you want them to just go home, you have to do better than that to engineer the situation. Otherwise, the options are fight or surrender to them.
anticodon 4y ago
> yes the US is extremely guilty of this exact same behavior, it is also wrong. Has US ever suffered sanctions for that? I don't remember any. > This war started because Putin won’t accept anything less then complete fealty from the leaders of Ukraine/Belarus How do you know this? Did Putin said this personally to you? Announced this in the media? You attribute to him something that western propaganda fakes like it's some irrefutable absolute and complete truth. BTW, do you remember that before it all started, Russia explicitly asked for guarantees that NATO won't expand further towards Russian borders and that request blatantly refused by the West. Also, your media probably do not say that Ukrainian politicians repeatedly announced plans to exterminate Russian population of Ukraine. Physically kill all the Russians just as Hitler (he's considered a hero in Ukraine) wanted. You'd probably never find this in English or any other language spoken on the West, but there is plenty of evidence in Russian/Ukrainian even though a lot of it being scrubbed in the last 200 days. Still you can find a lot of those on YouTube for example, if you can understand Russian/Ukrainian. You'll never be able to get a complete picture of what was and what is happening here because you can read and understand only what is fed to you by your media and this information is heavily biased to put it politely. > the 2014 revolution that threw out Yanikovich It wasn't a revolution - it was a coup funded and organized by the EU and USA.
- wbsss4412 4y ago
  > It wasn't a revolution - it was a coup funded and organized by the EU and USA. I don’t doubt that there was western involvement, just as there was certainly Russian involvement supporting prior administrations. While it can be difficult to discern the true desires of Ukrainians given outside involvement, its very easy to say that the current government in Ukraine is much more democratic than plenty of US Allies in other parts of the world, eg the Middle East. > Also, your media probably do not say that Ukrainian politicians repeatedly announced plans to exterminate Russian population of Ukraine. Physically kill all the Russians just as Hitler (he's considered a hero in Ukraine) wanted. You'd probably never find this in English or any other language spoken on the West, but there is plenty of evidence in Russian/Ukrainian even though a lot of it being scrubbed in the last 200 days. Still you can find a lot of those on YouTube for example, if you can understand Russian/Ukrainian. If this is so easy to find, why not provide actual sources? Edit: the irony here is the extremely close parallels between this war and hitter’s annexation of the sudentenland. > How do you know this? Did Putin said this personally to you? Announced this in the media? I can tell from his actions. Russia has been invading its neighbors the entire time he’s been in power. Did I go a bit overboard when I said “complete fealty”? Sure. But it’s quite obvious that Putin won’t accept those states as anything less than Russian client states within its sphere of influence. > Has US ever suffered sanctions for that? I don't remember any. US does bad things so other countries should do bad things too.
dnh44 4y ago
>but an analysis of the war needs to be rooted in what’s right and what’s wrong. I don't think such an analysis is 100% useful because because that's not the main criteria that countries use to make their decisions. The main criteria are strategic and economical considerations. Ethical considerations are nice to have but they are more often used to justify a decision based on furthering strategic/economic goals. The US has played a blinder on this one.

MomoXenosaga 4y ago

It works both ways you know. Europe cannot afford to lose face either. Imagine EU can be blackmailed by Russia! Wouldn't stand a chance against the US or China. The EU clearly believes they can win this fight so why should it withdraw support to Ukraine?

yabqk 4y ago
The EU doesn’t stand a chance against the US: look how they forced us to wage a proxy war against Russia. And now we’re going to buy liquefied gas from them.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  > The EU doesn’t stand a chance against the US: look how they forced us to wage a proxy war against Russia. America forced the EU into a proxy war with Russia... by having Russia invade Ukraine? Sounds like somebody has been huffing Russian propaganda.
  - dnh44 4y ago
    It's a a reasonable assessment if you accept following three (I think easy to accept) items. - That the US has a long term goal of preventing a "peer competitor" from arising. - That the US has a financial and strategic interest in causing the collapse of the Russian Federation. - The US leadership is capable of intelligent long term thinking (so we have to ignore Trump/Biden). https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1346.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1346.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard https://www.dw.com/en/chinas-rise-and-conflict-with-us/a-55026173 https://www.dw.com/en/chinas-rise-and-conflict-with-us/a-550... https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/nato-versus-russia-in-ukraine-how-us-could-be-aiming-for-russia-s-breakup-into-smaller-states/ar-AA11JkWr https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/nato-versus-russia-in-u... A quick quote from the last link sounds like classic US policy to me: "A much more truly ambitious apparent long-term US ambition seems to have been to instigate the breakup of Russia into smaller manageable countries, paralleling the emergence of nations in eastern Europe after 1989. It could then deal with a reconstructed historical Russia of smaller emerging statelets run by competitive elites at odds with each other. These new polities, anxious for revenues, will then, presumably, be eager to sign lucrative commercial deals with US corporations since the entire region is extraordinarily wealthy in raw material resources." And if we look at the result of the current crisis (I'll quote myself from a post above): "- Potential collapse of the Russian Federation and the economic benefits this would bring (for the West) - Solidifying EU support of NATO - Increased energy sales to Europe at higher prices - Increased military sales to NATO countries due to new threat - Increased budget for "the military industrial complex" - Further the long term goal of preventing a peer competitor from appearing by both weakening Russia and making the EU more dependant on the US both economically and militarily. - Mutually beneficial German/Russian cooperation is pretty much dead now so no threat of such an alliance appearing in the future." I think its pretty well played on the part of the US; nothing to be ashamed about. I'm interested to see what happens next.

bhaak 4y ago

They've made a bad mistake and if they were the men they've were portraying themselves to be, they would own up on their mistakes. Only cowards need to save face.