5 ms·
"War with Russia" sounds like someone willingly started that war, and Russia was the target. Of course, nothing is further from the truth. "Russian invasion of
by bojan 1y ago
"War with Russia" sounds like someone willingly started that war, and Russia was the target.
Of course, nothing is further from the truth. "Russian invasion of Ukraine" is what should be written there.
- andyferris 1y agoFully agreed, but I suspect that was written that way because the Fed was rather more worried about the fact Russia was at war and under western sanctions, than that Ukraine was busy defending itself. Perhaps "Russia's war" would have been a better phrasing that captures both spirits (but it's not a phrase you hear said much).
- pbhjpbhj 1y agoYou think "Russia's war" captures more of the global relevance than "Russia's invasion of Ukraine"? For example, Ukraine was a very important food supplier -- one of the top grain suppliers in the World -- and the invasion caused shortages of some foods. Another example is that Ukraine provided a good source of iron ore for EU-based manufacture. If nothing else that would be important to USAmericans as indicating a market opportunity. Without that invasion and Putin's inspiration, would Trump have threatened invasion of USA's neighbours? That's got to be vital to USA finances too.
- pydry 1y agoYour demands of an absolute committment to maintaining the domestic establishment's war narrative while making a technical point have been noted. Slava Ukraini.
- sham1 1y agoTruth is the best narrative, and it's better than – perhaps unconsciously – downplaying the culpability of the Russian Federation for the war. Heroyam Slava.
- pydry 1y agoIt's curious how the "true narrative" people fight with such a passion for so frequently coincides with the dominant war narrative currently pushed by the imperial power center they live under. That is, until 10 years later when they have a new narrative about a different military rival. They quietly stop pushing the old narrative and everyone quietly admits the old one was kinda bullshit all along. E.g. my views didnt change one iota since 2003 but these views at some point magically stopped conferring a "Saddam sympathizer" moniker from people who demanded unthinking ideological commitment. It works the same way with people who live under and unthinkingly consume Russian imperialist propaganda too. The more passionate ones make routine demands for ideological purity similar to the one above.
- N7lo4nl34akaoSN 1y agoHow would you characterize the conflict?
- pydry 1y agoProxy war between two rival imperial power centers dueling for influence over a strategic chunk of land and sea.
- N7lo4nl34akaoSN 1y agoso "war with Russia" becomes "US proxy war with Russia over Ukraine" - fair enough
- mopsi 1y agoFrom earlier: That is, until 10 years later when they have a new narrative about a different military rival. They quietly stop pushing the old narrative and everyone quietly admits the old one was kinda bullshit all along. /---/ It works the same way with people who live under and unthinkingly consume Russian imperialist propaganda too. It certainly does. The Russian war against Ukraine began with unmarked soldiers, nicknamed "little green men," and Russia denying any involvement, claiming instead that Ukraine was in the midst of a civil war. When the latest Russian weapons appeared in Ukraine, Russia claimed that tourists must've bought them from military surplus stores. Then we went through a lot of bullshit - that Ukrainian nationalists were committing genocide in Donbas, or that Ukraine was secretly developing nuclear and biological weapons. Now, 10 years later, the narrative has shifted to how this has always been a major confrontation with the USA and NATO, a "proxy war". No doubt, it will shift many more times. Looking forward to when the current "supreme commander" Putin will be regarded as a failure, much like Gorbachev, and blamed for causing the difficult 2030s.
- SpicyLemonZest 1y agoWho, precisely, do you consider to be the domestic establishment? Neither the President of the United States nor his Secretary of Defense subscribe to this narrative.
- pydry 1y agoThe deep state, most European leaders + states plus a huge chunk of Congress. Also even some of Trump's team. The establishment doesnt suddenly get swapped out because a new President gets in (even if the tides are shifting).
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- didntcheck 1y agoI don't see how that follows at all. "War with x" is a factual statement with no implications of moral culpability in either direction
- cyanydeez 1y agoits not factual if war is a verb.
- sokoloff 1y agoIn the upthread usage: “it was the war with Russia”, war is a noun.
- ToValueFunfetti 1y agoYeah, no idea what's going on in this thread. As far as I can tell, this connotation was just invented for the purposes of- well, I shouldn't guess motivations, but I can't think of any good ones. Here's the BBC using it[1], CNN[2], The AP [3], The Conversation [4] [1]https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0l0k4389g2o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0l0k4389g2o [2]https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/21/europe/europe-conscription-war-russia-intl https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/21/europe/europe-conscription-wa... [3]https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-zelenskyy-starmer-trump-b025877c40ffe0ddf2a92adad1715231 https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-zelenskyy-star... [4]https://theconversation.com/why-russias-armed-forces-have-proven-resilient-in-the-war-in-ukraine-251588 https://theconversation.com/why-russias-armed-forces-have-pr...
- Thorrez 1y ago"It was the war with Russia that drove the fed to raise interest rates in 2022" sounds like the fed or the US was at war with Russia. Your links 1, 3, 4 mention Ukraine in the same sentence as "war with Russia", which makes it clear that the US and the fed are not at war with Russia. Link 2 talks about a threat of war, not an actual war.
- ToValueFunfetti 1y ago