3 ms·

>Classic Russian strategy. The USSR lost 20 million people in WWII. Sure. But there was a sense that that was a relic of a bygone age. The role of Russian moth

>Classic Russian strategy. The USSR lost 20 million people in WWII. Sure. But there was a sense that that was a relic of a bygone age. The role of Russian mothers helping to shame the CCCP into capitulation during Afghanistan is well known. We thought that people would never stand for that kind of bloodshed again. You even see it still in the western response. "They can't keep this up", or "The people will overthrow Putin!". It's a total failure to comprehend that we are in fact facing an evil that the world has not seen in many generations.

cmrdporcupine 3y ago
Russia has held some amount of indirect control over those lands for hundreds of years. It cannot stomach the thought of losing dominance over them, and the presence of Russian speakers in those territories means that backing down would be seen as a complete betrayal. They'd rather burn it down and ruin it completely than lose control.
- ordu 3y ago
  It is just a Russian propaganda. Russians mostly didn't give a shit what happens in Ukraine before 2014. There were internet armchair battles, but I never knew a single person who really thought that Russia had any claims on Ukrainian territory. All this talk about history is no more than a central pillar of a Russian propaganda. It needs to justify what state is doing, it needs to find some moral grounds, and it uses history for that. And it is Russian history, which was rewritten for ~1k years each time when tsar changed. It never stopped. So to speak even in 1990s history was in a process of rewriting to show how bad USSR was. And now it is being rewritten to show that Russia didn't failed once, and all its fails are responsibility of "collective West". Just don't listen when Russians talk about history, and you'll be fine. > They'd rather burn it down and ruin it completely than lose control. Yeah-yeah... Putin has no other choices left if he wants to die peacefully. There is a risk for him to end as Muammar Gaddafi did, if he loses this war. No one is happy elites included, give them one chance and they will play a spectacle of brutalizing Putin, freeing Russia from under a heel of a merciless dictator.
- EB-Barrington 3y ago
  [dead]
- chaostheory 3y ago
  > It cannot stomach the thought of losing dominance over them Historically, there is a reason for that. Those countries are used as a buffer against an invasion from Western Europe. US and EU officials have tried to convince Putin that this was no longer the case over the years, but he never bought it since NATO continued to expand despite Russian protests.
  - cmrdporcupine 3y ago
    This is just ends in a circular argument because in the end NATO has expanded into the areas bordering Russia precisely because those countries (the Baltics, mainly) have a history of having their sovereignty violated by Russia, and continue to have serious and probably legitimate worries about that happening again. So you have to ask exactly why Russia protests so strongly about NATO expanding? And why countries on Russia's borders were so eager to join it? The only way Russia gets "invaded" by the "west" is by redefining its borders to include chunks of Ukraine... and now Ukraine defending itself and its internationally recognized borders is an "invasion" of "Russian sovereignty." Preposterous.
    - chaostheory 3y ago
      I agree with what you’ve written. Basically, Russia has used Eastern Europe the same way China uses North Korea, Xinjiang, Tibet, and parts of Mongolia: as a defensive buffer. Im not trying to ignore that occupations by authoritarian regimes tend to not be nice. I’m just stating the cold logic of it. I totally also get why the Ukrainian people want to fight for their freedom from authoritarian corruption. as for the larger “reason” it’s simply human nature. We’ve gotten better over the centuries, but game theory’s core idea is still in play.
082349872349872 3y ago
They even sang Офицеры at the concert to open the "anti-fascist special military operation". Oh the irony: I sing to the officers who took pity on the mothers Я пою офицерам, матерей пожалевшим By returning their living sons back to them Возратив им обратно живых сыновей

cmrdporcupine 3y ago

Russia has held some amount of indirect control over those lands for hundreds of years. It cannot stomach the thought of losing dominance over them, and the presence of Russian speakers in those territories means that backing down would be seen as a complete betrayal. They'd rather burn it down and ruin it completely than lose control.

ordu 3y ago
It is just a Russian propaganda. Russians mostly didn't give a shit what happens in Ukraine before 2014. There were internet armchair battles, but I never knew a single person who really thought that Russia had any claims on Ukrainian territory. All this talk about history is no more than a central pillar of a Russian propaganda. It needs to justify what state is doing, it needs to find some moral grounds, and it uses history for that. And it is Russian history, which was rewritten for ~1k years each time when tsar changed. It never stopped. So to speak even in 1990s history was in a process of rewriting to show how bad USSR was. And now it is being rewritten to show that Russia didn't failed once, and all its fails are responsibility of "collective West". Just don't listen when Russians talk about history, and you'll be fine. > They'd rather burn it down and ruin it completely than lose control. Yeah-yeah... Putin has no other choices left if he wants to die peacefully. There is a risk for him to end as Muammar Gaddafi did, if he loses this war. No one is happy elites included, give them one chance and they will play a spectacle of brutalizing Putin, freeing Russia from under a heel of a merciless dictator.
EB-Barrington 3y ago
[dead]
chaostheory 3y ago
> It cannot stomach the thought of losing dominance over them Historically, there is a reason for that. Those countries are used as a buffer against an invasion from Western Europe. US and EU officials have tried to convince Putin that this was no longer the case over the years, but he never bought it since NATO continued to expand despite Russian protests.
- cmrdporcupine 3y ago
  This is just ends in a circular argument because in the end NATO has expanded into the areas bordering Russia precisely because those countries (the Baltics, mainly) have a history of having their sovereignty violated by Russia, and continue to have serious and probably legitimate worries about that happening again. So you have to ask exactly why Russia protests so strongly about NATO expanding? And why countries on Russia's borders were so eager to join it? The only way Russia gets "invaded" by the "west" is by redefining its borders to include chunks of Ukraine... and now Ukraine defending itself and its internationally recognized borders is an "invasion" of "Russian sovereignty." Preposterous.
  - chaostheory 3y ago
    I agree with what you’ve written. Basically, Russia has used Eastern Europe the same way China uses North Korea, Xinjiang, Tibet, and parts of Mongolia: as a defensive buffer. Im not trying to ignore that occupations by authoritarian regimes tend to not be nice. I’m just stating the cold logic of it. I totally also get why the Ukrainian people want to fight for their freedom from authoritarian corruption. as for the larger “reason” it’s simply human nature. We’ve gotten better over the centuries, but game theory’s core idea is still in play.

082349872349872 3y ago

They even sang Офицеры at the concert to open the "anti-fascist special military operation". Oh the irony: I sing to the officers who took pity on the mothers Я пою офицерам, матерей пожалевшим By returning their living sons back to them Возратив им обратно живых сыновей