3 ms·

> The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia Let's suppose this is true (I'm not convinced, in practice m

> The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia Let's suppose this is true (I'm not convinced, in practice most of them are fighting because they don't have choice, so what they think doesn't matter that much anyway). How do they explain the cognitive dissonance that instead of defending Russia they are actively attacking Ukraine? It makes no sense at all. If you say that they believe that Russia should be great again, and Ukrainians should be its subjects just like Belorussians, this makes much more sense, and there is support for this kind of thinking in the population. But let's not pretend they're good guys then.

lukan 2y ago
"But let's not pretend they're good guys then." I did not. "> The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia Let's suppose this is true (I'm not convinced, in practice most of them are fighting because they don't have choice, so what they think doesn't matter that much anyway" And are you aware, allmost no russian conscripts are involved in fighting? It is a voluntarily army. Econonic reasons do play a role, especially for people from asian backwater provinces - but all in all they do fight, because they choose to. So back to the main story - it is not just evil overlord Putin, that is the problem.
- benterix 2y ago
  > And are you aware, allmost no russian conscripts are involved in fighting? Actually I didn't know that, the reports from the beginning of the war stated otherwise. In any case, last time I read they said they managed to mobilize 300 000 people[0]. So what happened to them? It makes no sense to mobilize soldiers during the war and not send them to war. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_mobilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_mobilization
  - lukan 2y ago
    "the reports from the beginning of the war stated otherwise" Not the ones I read. "It makes no sense to mobilize soldiers during the war and not send them to war." They can guard other borders (russia has lots of them) and replace the professional soldiers there, who then can be send instead to Ukraine. And 140 000 of those 300 000 you cite seem to be Ukrainians. And they do have to fight indeed. But russia really avoided forcefully drafting ethnic russians and sending them into the war zone - the few times it did - it created too much unrest.
Eddy_Viscosity2 2y ago
> How do they explain the cognitive dissonance that instead of defending Russia they are actively attacking Ukraine? It makes no sense at all. Replace 'Russia' with 'USA', and 'Ukraine' with 'Iraq'. There are lots of other examples that could be used as well. I am firmly in the camp that believe Russia is in the wrong here and also that the US was wrong to invade Iraq. But that doesn't change the fact that its easy to create a strong rational-sounding argument about how an offense is really a defense. It happens all the time. There is no dissonance. They believe that the attack is the defense.
- benterix 2y ago
  > Replace 'Russia' with 'USA', and 'Ukraine' with 'Iraq'. This is actually an excellent example because it's clear that invasion was as wrong as the other one. When Bush designed his mad plan to attack Afghanistan and Iraq, he faced enormous outcry from his allies. In Europe, there were the biggest anti-war protests in the modern history of the continent (I believe in Rome it was 5 million people). It made no sense then, it made no sense during the war, and it makes no sense now. The only "positive" aspect of that war is that the USA is now much more careful when considering its options as it's clear that starting the war is relatively easy and having a positive outcome (so-called "winning") are two different things. Russia is only learning this now.

lukan 2y ago

"But let's not pretend they're good guys then." I did not. "> The russian soldiers also largely don't think they represent evil, they think they defend russia Let's suppose this is true (I'm not convinced, in practice most of them are fighting because they don't have choice, so what they think doesn't matter that much anyway" And are you aware, allmost no russian conscripts are involved in fighting? It is a voluntarily army. Econonic reasons do play a role, especially for people from asian backwater provinces - but all in all they do fight, because they choose to. So back to the main story - it is not just evil overlord Putin, that is the problem.

benterix 2y ago
> And are you aware, allmost no russian conscripts are involved in fighting? Actually I didn't know that, the reports from the beginning of the war stated otherwise. In any case, last time I read they said they managed to mobilize 300 000 people[0]. So what happened to them? It makes no sense to mobilize soldiers during the war and not send them to war. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_mobilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_mobilization
- lukan 2y ago
  "the reports from the beginning of the war stated otherwise" Not the ones I read. "It makes no sense to mobilize soldiers during the war and not send them to war." They can guard other borders (russia has lots of them) and replace the professional soldiers there, who then can be send instead to Ukraine. And 140 000 of those 300 000 you cite seem to be Ukrainians. And they do have to fight indeed. But russia really avoided forcefully drafting ethnic russians and sending them into the war zone - the few times it did - it created too much unrest.

Eddy_Viscosity2 2y ago

> How do they explain the cognitive dissonance that instead of defending Russia they are actively attacking Ukraine? It makes no sense at all. Replace 'Russia' with 'USA', and 'Ukraine' with 'Iraq'. There are lots of other examples that could be used as well. I am firmly in the camp that believe Russia is in the wrong here and also that the US was wrong to invade Iraq. But that doesn't change the fact that its easy to create a strong rational-sounding argument about how an offense is really a defense. It happens all the time. There is no dissonance. They believe that the attack is the defense.

benterix 2y ago
> Replace 'Russia' with 'USA', and 'Ukraine' with 'Iraq'. This is actually an excellent example because it's clear that invasion was as wrong as the other one. When Bush designed his mad plan to attack Afghanistan and Iraq, he faced enormous outcry from his allies. In Europe, there were the biggest anti-war protests in the modern history of the continent (I believe in Rome it was 5 million people). It made no sense then, it made no sense during the war, and it makes no sense now. The only "positive" aspect of that war is that the USA is now much more careful when considering its options as it's clear that starting the war is relatively easy and having a positive outcome (so-called "winning") are two different things. Russia is only learning this now.