5 ms·

He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy. They invaded a country without a reason. They literally are the bad guy. Some random percent of Russians believ

He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy. They invaded a country without a reason. They literally are the bad guy. Some random percent of Russians believe that Putin is great? Of course they say that, otherwise they would be in prison. He has a point about West sending trash to Ukraine. But saying it's somehow Anduril? You have to be quiet open minded to accept his associations. The guy makes some good points but buries them in a ton of his opinions that it's hard to find the points he makes.

A_D_E_P_T 2y ago
> They invaded a country without a reason. They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. > They literally are the bad guy. Maybe. I agree that the invasion was a very grave evil. Even so, it doesn't mean that they're destined to lose, and we shouldn't think that way. Mongols were bad guys but won so much that they got tired of winning. It's a very grave fallacy to believe that the Good Guys always prevail. And, besides, the Russians you ask would surely say, "Wait, you think those Banderite Ukrainians are the GOOD Guys?! And here I thought we were the Good Guys! Throughout its entire history, Russia has always fought and always conquered evil." > Of course they say that, otherwise they would be in prison. You can't seriously believe this. I'd invite you to hang out on the Russian internet (or Russian Telegram) for a different view. Have a look at what they write in their own language, when talking between themselves.
- mrkeen 2y ago
  > You can't seriously believe this. You don't need to say that Putin isn't great to get arrested. Holding up a blank piece of paper is enough.
  - lukan 2y ago
    It can be enough. Not at all everyone who expressed opposition to the war is in prison. I did not looked too much into it, but can you name anyone at all, who is in a russian prison now, simply for verbally opposing the war? (There surely are plenty of political prisoners in russia, but I believe they were more vocal and organised in their opposition)
    - amenhotep 2y ago
      If you'd asked this two weeks ago it would've been pretty easy for me. Alexei Moskalev has only just been released from a penal colony. I suppose you can dismiss that because social media posts and having a daughter with a brain and a heart don't count as "verbal", but I don't think that would be very reasonable.
      - lukan 2y ago
        Well, I would consider his actions quite vocal. (And the article in the realm of propaganda, because they made it look like he was jailed just for the picture, when he also made uncited posts on social media.) But nevertheless, it is another good example to save, for my debates with certain people of other opinion. (Nato aggression)
- benterix 2y ago
  > They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. I read Putin's rationalization that was published just after the war broke off and retracted soon after but you can still read it.[0] He basically claims that Russia has to be great again and it is his historical role to conquer it so that Ukrainians are his slaves just like Belorussians are. So yes, they have their reasons and realizations, just like another ruler in 1938 and 1939, the problem is that nobody else agreed with them. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
- benterix 2y ago
  > Have a look at what they write in their own language, when talking between themselves. Let them enjoy some degree of relative freedom on Telegram channels where they still can. I honestly doubt it will last for long.
otabdeveloper4 2y ago
> invaded a country without a reason Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly why. WW3 happened for no reason at all.
- benterix 2y ago
  First, it is not WW3 but Russian aggression on Ukraine. Second, they had very clear reasons: Putin always considered Ukraine his property and when he realized he can lose it, he decided to use force. He elaborated on it in a longer piece[0] and in the Carlson show. https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
  - otabdeveloper4 2y ago
    > it is not WW3 Of course it is.
lukan 2y ago
"He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy." I did not see that. I did see the opinion, that they do not represent the ultimate evil, like the orcs do. The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia, that is the point being made - and if this already qualifies to you as saying they are not the bad guys, then I recommend reading a bit more carefully, as it is exactly this black and white thinking, that is in the realm of fantasy.
- libertine 2y ago
  > The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia This is a very bold claim, can you back this up? Because we won't see massive lines of Russian men trying to join the army to defend the homeland. In fact, the moment a general mobilization was announced you had hundreds of thousands (if not million+?) fleeing Russia. The main motivations we've seen for the Russians joining are: - entrepreneurship - going to war became an entrepreneurial endeavor to get paid a large sum of money (if I recall correctly Russians are now being paid more than US soldiers if you factor in their sign-in bonus); - getting out of jail - to the point of seeing violent criminals commit crimes again; I'm not saying they see themselves as representations of evil; I'm saying they don't seem to care whether they represent it or not.
  - lukan 2y ago
    Since I was talking about russian soldiers, I did talk about their motivation. Not about russian people who are not soldiers and don't want to become soldiers. Because the russian army still largely consists of voluntarily soldiers. And as far as I know, defending mother russia from NATO aggression is a major motivator, as well as money is. But also the Nazis did not view themself as evil - but rather as powerful because of lack of restraint. And protecting the poor suppressed aryan people. So my point was not at all, that the russian soldiers are somehow nice - just that the world is not as black and white as fantasy often is - but people like the fantasy approach of black and white - and the proplem starts when they apply this thinking to the real world.
    - 2y ago
defrost 2y ago
I've seen a lot of politicised "reasons". I rarely see resource based reasons .. which are more than likely the undercurrent. Putin et al truly believe in a "Greater Russia" and that Ukraine is part of that. First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea. That provided some reason for a more recent invasion, after almost a decade of blocked water supply Russia needed a land corridor and a secure water supply o/wise Crimea was a hollow gain. Still not going well with that: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could-threaten-crimean-water-supply-says-top-russian-official-2023-06-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could... Next to grain and water the other complaints seem small petty namecalling with little justification.
- lukan 2y ago
  "First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea." No, they already had it de facto, just not de jure. But with the shift in power in Kiew they were afraid of loosing it.
  - defrost 2y ago
    Either way, they (Russia) lost the water supply.

A_D_E_P_T 2y ago

> They invaded a country without a reason. They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. > They literally are the bad guy. Maybe. I agree that the invasion was a very grave evil. Even so, it doesn't mean that they're destined to lose, and we shouldn't think that way. Mongols were bad guys but won so much that they got tired of winning. It's a very grave fallacy to believe that the Good Guys always prevail. And, besides, the Russians you ask would surely say, "Wait, you think those Banderite Ukrainians are the GOOD Guys?! And here I thought we were the Good Guys! Throughout its entire history, Russia has always fought and always conquered evil." > Of course they say that, otherwise they would be in prison. You can't seriously believe this. I'd invite you to hang out on the Russian internet (or Russian Telegram) for a different view. Have a look at what they write in their own language, when talking between themselves.

mrkeen 2y ago
> You can't seriously believe this. You don't need to say that Putin isn't great to get arrested. Holding up a blank piece of paper is enough.
- lukan 2y ago
  It can be enough. Not at all everyone who expressed opposition to the war is in prison. I did not looked too much into it, but can you name anyone at all, who is in a russian prison now, simply for verbally opposing the war? (There surely are plenty of political prisoners in russia, but I believe they were more vocal and organised in their opposition)
  - amenhotep 2y ago
    If you'd asked this two weeks ago it would've been pretty easy for me. Alexei Moskalev has only just been released from a penal colony. I suppose you can dismiss that because social media posts and having a daughter with a brain and a heart don't count as "verbal", but I don't think that would be very reasonable.
    - lukan 2y ago
      Well, I would consider his actions quite vocal. (And the article in the realm of propaganda, because they made it look like he was jailed just for the picture, when he also made uncited posts on social media.) But nevertheless, it is another good example to save, for my debates with certain people of other opinion. (Nato aggression)
benterix 2y ago
> They had their reasons or at least rationalizations, though you don't see them and they might not make sense to you. I read Putin's rationalization that was published just after the war broke off and retracted soon after but you can still read it.[0] He basically claims that Russia has to be great again and it is his historical role to conquer it so that Ukrainians are his slaves just like Belorussians are. So yes, they have their reasons and realizations, just like another ruler in 1938 and 1939, the problem is that nobody else agreed with them. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
benterix 2y ago
> Have a look at what they write in their own language, when talking between themselves. Let them enjoy some degree of relative freedom on Telegram channels where they still can. I honestly doubt it will last for long.

otabdeveloper4 2y ago

> invaded a country without a reason Yeah, I'm sure that's exactly why. WW3 happened for no reason at all.

benterix 2y ago
First, it is not WW3 but Russian aggression on Ukraine. Second, they had very clear reasons: Putin always considered Ukraine his property and when he realized he can lose it, he decided to use force. He elaborated on it in a longer piece[0] and in the Carlson show. https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefrontierpost.com/the-new-world-order/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220305153356/https://thefronti...
- otabdeveloper4 2y ago
  > it is not WW3 Of course it is.

lukan 2y ago

"He made a theory that Russia is not the bad guy." I did not see that. I did see the opinion, that they do not represent the ultimate evil, like the orcs do. The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia, that is the point being made - and if this already qualifies to you as saying they are not the bad guys, then I recommend reading a bit more carefully, as it is exactly this black and white thinking, that is in the realm of fantasy.

libertine 2y ago
> The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia This is a very bold claim, can you back this up? Because we won't see massive lines of Russian men trying to join the army to defend the homeland. In fact, the moment a general mobilization was announced you had hundreds of thousands (if not million+?) fleeing Russia. The main motivations we've seen for the Russians joining are: - entrepreneurship - going to war became an entrepreneurial endeavor to get paid a large sum of money (if I recall correctly Russians are now being paid more than US soldiers if you factor in their sign-in bonus); - getting out of jail - to the point of seeing violent criminals commit crimes again; I'm not saying they see themselves as representations of evil; I'm saying they don't seem to care whether they represent it or not.
- lukan 2y ago
  Since I was talking about russian soldiers, I did talk about their motivation. Not about russian people who are not soldiers and don't want to become soldiers. Because the russian army still largely consists of voluntarily soldiers. And as far as I know, defending mother russia from NATO aggression is a major motivator, as well as money is. But also the Nazis did not view themself as evil - but rather as powerful because of lack of restraint. And protecting the poor suppressed aryan people. So my point was not at all, that the russian soldiers are somehow nice - just that the world is not as black and white as fantasy often is - but people like the fantasy approach of black and white - and the proplem starts when they apply this thinking to the real world.
  - 2y ago

defrost 2y ago

I've seen a lot of politicised "reasons". I rarely see resource based reasons .. which are more than likely the undercurrent. Putin et al truly believe in a "Greater Russia" and that Ukraine is part of that. First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea. That provided some reason for a more recent invasion, after almost a decade of blocked water supply Russia needed a land corridor and a secure water supply o/wise Crimea was a hollow gain. Still not going well with that: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could-threaten-crimean-water-supply-says-top-russian-official-2023-06-06/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-dam-blast-could... Next to grain and water the other complaints seem small petty namecalling with little justification.

lukan 2y ago
"First (2014) they wanted agricultural resources, better sea access, etc. and they took Crimea." No, they already had it de facto, just not de jure. But with the shift in power in Kiew they were afraid of loosing it.
- defrost 2y ago
  Either way, they (Russia) lost the water supply.