6 ms·

They always start with the murmurs to prepare public opinion. And in any case, I think people really are failing to see the equivalence here, and it's scary.

They always start with the murmurs to prepare public opinion. And in any case, I think people really are failing to see the equivalence here, and it's scary. The suggestions to "just stop" (translation: "just lose") are actually serious. You'll have an economically crippled Russia with a wounded collective ego. Perfect setup for a rematch. Just like WW1 to WW2. But the normalizers have the majority opinion on their side at this point, and sadly nobody will stop them from making this tragedy a reality. So: there really is an equivalence here, and sadly history teaches people nothing. This time they are right, dammit. With any luck, our grandkids will live to discuss how this was the biggest geopolitical miscalculation. Don't think I have a point? Think about how everyone expected Russians to take to the streets and overthrow Putin back in 2022. The level of delusion is unreal.

RealityVoid 2y ago
I think your timeline is off by about 2 decades. The nightmare period of Russia is not the current time, it's the 90's. That's when they were most wounded and the had the most economic turmoil. And just as you wouldn't have stopped Hitler by appeasing him after he grabbed the power, you won't stop Putin by appeasing him now.
- riehwvfbk 2y ago
  If we are examining the equivalence between Putin and Hitler, and saying (aided by the passage of time so we can actually think calmly) - pressuring Germany was what allowed Hitler to come to power, is it not then true that this period where Russia was wounded and had all the turmoil is what allowed Putin to come to power? Second question: who did the wounding? Who do you think the average Russian thinks did the wounding?
  - RealityVoid 2y ago
    > is it not then true that this period where Russia was wounded and had all the turmoil is what allowed Putin to come to power? Sure, that was my point. > Second question: who did the wounding? Who do you think the average Russian thinks did the wounding? It's... Hard for me to formulate a strong answer on this, but my impression is that Russia mostly did the wounding itself but the current average Russian probably blames either the reform attempts masking a power grab OR the west and the US for it's toils.
    - riehwvfbk 2y ago
      That's my point though: these leaders aren't aliens beamed down to Earth from space. They are the kind of leader a society elects as a sort of Hail Mary last ditch self preservation effort (yes, elects, in that they actually have support and are not usurpers). As for the second part, let me retell an anecdote. I was once at a party (in the US) with someone who participated in "helping" one of the post-Soviet republics with reforming their industry after perestroika. After too many drinks he began to brag about how "these corrupt businessmen thought they were hot sh... for grabbing all that stuff, little did they know they were just handing it to us". There were a ton of vultures feasting on the USSR's corpse. Now, the fact that it came to that in the first place is absolutely the Soviet leadership's fault. And it is also ultimately the current Russian leadership's fault that Victoria Nuland even got around to handing out those cookies 10 years ago.
nemomarx 2y ago
Isn't this true even if they "win" in Ukraine? the economic damage and loss of working age men is already done
h0l0cube 2y ago
> The suggestions to "just stop" (translation: "just lose") are actually serious. Lose? You mean retreat to their own pre-war borders? To lose would be if they actually had to pay reparations or lost territory of their own. As I said, this would not be how the negotiations play out as Russia has the numbers to keep the war going as long as it wants. But sure. Tell me what would be lost in Russia ending the war? > Think about how everyone expected Russians to take to the streets and overthrow Putin back in 2022. Who is going to try and overthrow the leader who disappears people? Everyone saw what happened to Prigozhin when he dissented. And of course, there are plenty of pro-war nationalists that would take Putin's place should he ever die. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, or how it progresses your narrative of Russia as the victim in the conflict it started – at the economic and human cost to its own people – to take Ukraine territory.
- riehwvfbk 2y ago
  Thank you for an interesting discussion. This is why I have this throwaway: to talk about things beyond the soundbites in the media without worrying about the downvoters. To play devil's advocate: why doesn't the US stop now? There used to be a Ukraine entirely under Russia's control politically. Now there is a West Ukraine that is entirely dependent on the USA politically, has Black Sea access, has the oldest city in Russian history, has the oil and gas pipelines running through it (and so provides a way to continue to pressure Russia economically), and has a largely pro-West population. What is to be gained (other than pride) by forcing majority Russian-speaking lands that got accidentally attached to an entity named "Ukraine" to be part of this brave new world? And before you go "but borders", let me point out that the reason behind many wars in Africa were borders that were arbitrarily drawn by the colonizers for their own convenience, and that often split up historically homogeneous tribes, or forced mortal enemies to be "the same country" (Harari has the details). Finally, about the "who is going to try to overthrow Putin" point. It seems ridiculous now, but this is exactly what the media were selling back in 2022.
  - h0l0cube 2y ago
    > And before you go "but borders" It was communism that fostered this independence movement of the eastern states, and it was the USSR that drew the arbitrary line soon after the revolution. > What is to be gained (other than pride) by forcing majority Russian-speaking lands that got accidentally attached to an entity named "Ukraine" to be part of this brave new world? If this really was Russia’s intent they wouldn’t have tried to take the entire country at the outset. And if this is some kind of liberation project for those long suffering Russian speaking minorities, I’m certain those being bombed aren’t welcome of it. There’s no noble intentions behind the inception of this war, but let’s say there was, those intentions seem to have since been contradicted by the human cost which Russia’s leadership has proven insensitive to

RealityVoid 2y ago

I think your timeline is off by about 2 decades. The nightmare period of Russia is not the current time, it's the 90's. That's when they were most wounded and the had the most economic turmoil. And just as you wouldn't have stopped Hitler by appeasing him after he grabbed the power, you won't stop Putin by appeasing him now.

riehwvfbk 2y ago
If we are examining the equivalence between Putin and Hitler, and saying (aided by the passage of time so we can actually think calmly) - pressuring Germany was what allowed Hitler to come to power, is it not then true that this period where Russia was wounded and had all the turmoil is what allowed Putin to come to power? Second question: who did the wounding? Who do you think the average Russian thinks did the wounding?
- RealityVoid 2y ago
  > is it not then true that this period where Russia was wounded and had all the turmoil is what allowed Putin to come to power? Sure, that was my point. > Second question: who did the wounding? Who do you think the average Russian thinks did the wounding? It's... Hard for me to formulate a strong answer on this, but my impression is that Russia mostly did the wounding itself but the current average Russian probably blames either the reform attempts masking a power grab OR the west and the US for it's toils.
  - riehwvfbk 2y ago
    That's my point though: these leaders aren't aliens beamed down to Earth from space. They are the kind of leader a society elects as a sort of Hail Mary last ditch self preservation effort (yes, elects, in that they actually have support and are not usurpers). As for the second part, let me retell an anecdote. I was once at a party (in the US) with someone who participated in "helping" one of the post-Soviet republics with reforming their industry after perestroika. After too many drinks he began to brag about how "these corrupt businessmen thought they were hot sh... for grabbing all that stuff, little did they know they were just handing it to us". There were a ton of vultures feasting on the USSR's corpse. Now, the fact that it came to that in the first place is absolutely the Soviet leadership's fault. And it is also ultimately the current Russian leadership's fault that Victoria Nuland even got around to handing out those cookies 10 years ago.

nemomarx 2y ago

Isn't this true even if they "win" in Ukraine? the economic damage and loss of working age men is already done

h0l0cube 2y ago

> The suggestions to "just stop" (translation: "just lose") are actually serious. Lose? You mean retreat to their own pre-war borders? To lose would be if they actually had to pay reparations or lost territory of their own. As I said, this would not be how the negotiations play out as Russia has the numbers to keep the war going as long as it wants. But sure. Tell me what would be lost in Russia ending the war? > Think about how everyone expected Russians to take to the streets and overthrow Putin back in 2022. Who is going to try and overthrow the leader who disappears people? Everyone saw what happened to Prigozhin when he dissented. And of course, there are plenty of pro-war nationalists that would take Putin's place should he ever die. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here, or how it progresses your narrative of Russia as the victim in the conflict it started – at the economic and human cost to its own people – to take Ukraine territory.

riehwvfbk 2y ago
Thank you for an interesting discussion. This is why I have this throwaway: to talk about things beyond the soundbites in the media without worrying about the downvoters. To play devil's advocate: why doesn't the US stop now? There used to be a Ukraine entirely under Russia's control politically. Now there is a West Ukraine that is entirely dependent on the USA politically, has Black Sea access, has the oldest city in Russian history, has the oil and gas pipelines running through it (and so provides a way to continue to pressure Russia economically), and has a largely pro-West population. What is to be gained (other than pride) by forcing majority Russian-speaking lands that got accidentally attached to an entity named "Ukraine" to be part of this brave new world? And before you go "but borders", let me point out that the reason behind many wars in Africa were borders that were arbitrarily drawn by the colonizers for their own convenience, and that often split up historically homogeneous tribes, or forced mortal enemies to be "the same country" (Harari has the details). Finally, about the "who is going to try to overthrow Putin" point. It seems ridiculous now, but this is exactly what the media were selling back in 2022.
- h0l0cube 2y ago
  > And before you go "but borders" It was communism that fostered this independence movement of the eastern states, and it was the USSR that drew the arbitrary line soon after the revolution. > What is to be gained (other than pride) by forcing majority Russian-speaking lands that got accidentally attached to an entity named "Ukraine" to be part of this brave new world? If this really was Russia’s intent they wouldn’t have tried to take the entire country at the outset. And if this is some kind of liberation project for those long suffering Russian speaking minorities, I’m certain those being bombed aren’t welcome of it. There’s no noble intentions behind the inception of this war, but let’s say there was, those intentions seem to have since been contradicted by the human cost which Russia’s leadership has proven insensitive to