3 ms·

This take does not track with reality. Musk pushed Russia propaganda about Ukrane and repeatedly defended his position.

by greenthrow 4y ago

AzzieElbab 4y ago
Examples?
- scifibestfi 4y ago
  For a time it was considered propaganda to push for peace. It was truly bizarro. Then a few weeks later regime approved voices said we should consider peace and it was no longer considered propaganda.
  - coolbreezetft22 4y ago
    He pushed for Ukrainian territory to be formally ceded to Russia after they occupied it by force and violence. His "peace plan" was then enthusiastically praised by Kremlin propaganda. It seems his push for peace is always one sided in that all his ridiculous plans end with Russia being rewarded for aggression and Ukraine losing territory.
    - AzzieElbab 4y ago
      For some reasons many westerns believe that Russia will nuke the world before losing Crimea. I disagree but don’t see Musk being unique in believing this. Also and unfortunately, I do not see Ukraine taking back Crimea any time soon.
    - newZWhoDis 4y ago
      Except that isn’t what he said. He said the people in those regions should be able to decide which country they want to be part of and that the result should be enforced/respected by both sides. It’s a stupid opinion, but he didn’t say what you said he did.
      - vgt 4y ago
        He specifically said Crimea needs to be ceded to Russia.
    - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
      I'll note that a request for examples was made several posts back and no one seems willing to post them, only describe their interpretation of them.
  - lottin 4y ago
    "Pushing for peace" doesn't mean anything. It could mean to push for an unconditional surrender of Ukraine, or for an unconditional withdrawal of Russian troops, or anything in between. The fact that you use this phrase along with the term "regime" tells me that you're a either a Russian propagandist or a someone who has been misled by Russian propaganda.
    - scifibestfi 4y ago
      It means that you're working to find a peaceful solution. It's no different from people who opposed the Afghanistan and Vietnam wars and pushed for peace. People who oppose war were discredited by the regime then and they are being discreted today. News at 11.
      - lottin 4y ago
        Yes, because they don't oppose war, they oppose a Ukranian victory. And by doing that they basically discredit themselves.
  - astrange 4y ago
    That's poor game theory. Russia is a Mongol horde. Suing for peace against tribal border raiders (cooperate) is a rational strategy. If they know you'll always cooperate, then their best strategy is to always come back and attack (defect). Each time you achieve peace you lose land. So, rational strategies are bad. You want to adopt an irrational strategy where you appear to be a crazy person willing to hurt themselves to get revenge - now attackers won't risk themselves in the first place. This is why societies develop an "honor culture" and why NATO has that mutual defense clause.
    - AzzieElbab 4y ago
      Well, yeah. That is why you don’t prevent wars with sanctions.
    - scifibestfi 4y ago
      Only if you're correct about them being a Mongol horde and not a rational actor, but their actions were predictable and were in fact predicted by professors years ago who understand the geopolitcal landscape and history of NATO.
      - astrange 4y ago
        No, they're rational actors in this scenario. In real life Putin changed strategies in a way that made his country worse (turned into a Mongol horde) but personally improved him (gave him more power over the country). You can ignore anything he says; it's not meant for you and he doesn't care if you hear it or believe it. It's like when Russians say that Ukraine is run by Jewish Nazis. It's not intended to be truthful, which is why they don't care they've caused /more/ countries on their border to join NATO. By "professors" you presumably mean Meerscheimer, who's basically like a cynical politics poster who thinks everything is about "making hard choices" and so is in favor of anything that sounds like it's "making hard choices" even if it's wrong.

This take does not track with reality. Musk pushed Russia propaganda about Ukrane and repeatedly defended his position.

AzzieElbab 4y ago

Examples?

scifibestfi 4y ago
For a time it was considered propaganda to push for peace. It was truly bizarro. Then a few weeks later regime approved voices said we should consider peace and it was no longer considered propaganda.
- coolbreezetft22 4y ago
  He pushed for Ukrainian territory to be formally ceded to Russia after they occupied it by force and violence. His "peace plan" was then enthusiastically praised by Kremlin propaganda. It seems his push for peace is always one sided in that all his ridiculous plans end with Russia being rewarded for aggression and Ukraine losing territory.
  - AzzieElbab 4y ago
    For some reasons many westerns believe that Russia will nuke the world before losing Crimea. I disagree but don’t see Musk being unique in believing this. Also and unfortunately, I do not see Ukraine taking back Crimea any time soon.
  - newZWhoDis 4y ago
    Except that isn’t what he said. He said the people in those regions should be able to decide which country they want to be part of and that the result should be enforced/respected by both sides. It’s a stupid opinion, but he didn’t say what you said he did.
    - vgt 4y ago
      He specifically said Crimea needs to be ceded to Russia.
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
    I'll note that a request for examples was made several posts back and no one seems willing to post them, only describe their interpretation of them.
- lottin 4y ago
  "Pushing for peace" doesn't mean anything. It could mean to push for an unconditional surrender of Ukraine, or for an unconditional withdrawal of Russian troops, or anything in between. The fact that you use this phrase along with the term "regime" tells me that you're a either a Russian propagandist or a someone who has been misled by Russian propaganda.
  - scifibestfi 4y ago
    It means that you're working to find a peaceful solution. It's no different from people who opposed the Afghanistan and Vietnam wars and pushed for peace. People who oppose war were discredited by the regime then and they are being discreted today. News at 11.
    - lottin 4y ago
      Yes, because they don't oppose war, they oppose a Ukranian victory. And by doing that they basically discredit themselves.
- astrange 4y ago
  That's poor game theory. Russia is a Mongol horde. Suing for peace against tribal border raiders (cooperate) is a rational strategy. If they know you'll always cooperate, then their best strategy is to always come back and attack (defect). Each time you achieve peace you lose land. So, rational strategies are bad. You want to adopt an irrational strategy where you appear to be a crazy person willing to hurt themselves to get revenge - now attackers won't risk themselves in the first place. This is why societies develop an "honor culture" and why NATO has that mutual defense clause.
  - AzzieElbab 4y ago
    Well, yeah. That is why you don’t prevent wars with sanctions.
  - scifibestfi 4y ago
    Only if you're correct about them being a Mongol horde and not a rational actor, but their actions were predictable and were in fact predicted by professors years ago who understand the geopolitcal landscape and history of NATO.
    - astrange 4y ago
      No, they're rational actors in this scenario. In real life Putin changed strategies in a way that made his country worse (turned into a Mongol horde) but personally improved him (gave him more power over the country). You can ignore anything he says; it's not meant for you and he doesn't care if you hear it or believe it. It's like when Russians say that Ukraine is run by Jewish Nazis. It's not intended to be truthful, which is why they don't care they've caused /more/ countries on their border to join NATO. By "professors" you presumably mean Meerscheimer, who's basically like a cynical politics poster who thinks everything is about "making hard choices" and so is in favor of anything that sounds like it's "making hard choices" even if it's wrong.