Ukraine Conflict - Beware lest in your anxiety to avoid war you obtain a master

[Mamoulian War]

A little bit more insight, on how Mariupol was supplied in the hardest times.

 

[pmp10]

11 hours ago, Mamoulian War said:

In a very rare occurence, Russia and USA agreed on a statement, and officialy announced, that this news are not based on truth.

So Russia refused to sow discord in the west with fake news?
I'll be a little more convinced once I hear official Biden peace plan. 

In other news - Leopard coalition is not coming along too well.
The 'over 100 Leopard 2 tanks' might turn out to not even be 50.

Edited February 4, 2023 by pmp10

[Malcador]

https://sol.sapo.pt/artigo/791623/costa-bloqueia-tanques

Translated for what that is worth

https://sol-sapo-pt.translate.goog/artigo/791623/costa-bloqueia-tanques?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp

 

""It should be noted that most of the 37 vehicles in Portugal – parked in the military field of Santa Margarida – are not operational due to lack of spare parts. This is because, despite having been purchased second-hand in the Netherlands, they belong to the most advanced range of Leopard 2 (the A6 model), being technologically very complex. In addition, the Army does not have and never had a single live ammunition for armored personnel to fire, but only training ammunition"

That's bad.

Apparently though, they will send them  - https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/02/4/7387923/

Edited February 4, 2023 by Malcador

[Maedhros]

17 hours ago, Malcador said:

How so?

Because they are the ones most deserving of criticism/disapproval. Why let them off the hook?

[Mamoulian War]

Maybe some of you still remember, how one Russian nazi was showing off skull of killed Ukrainian in front of cheering audience during some kind of performance. The skull of this scum was treated by lead from behind, and he ended up in hospital with very dire condition, allegedly incompatible with life…

[xzar_monty]

On 2/3/2023 at 11:14 PM, Maedhros said:

It baffles me that anyone's focus in this war is consistently criticising anyone but Russia.

It is one effective way of demonstrating who you support. (It may also be, among a few other things, an effective way of demonstrating extreme cynicism in general.)

As for the potential bafflement that overt support for Russia may cause, it's good to remember that pretty much any movement / ideology / whatever will have a number of people who genuinely support it. Obviously I haven't witnessed the discussions in person, but it's rather sobering to study the accounts of people who sincerely regard the 9/11 terrorists as heroes, for example. There's a bit of a shiver along the spine when you also delve into some of the psychological work done on people like this and recognize that by and large, they are not crazy, deluded, sociopathic, psychopathic of whatever; they're ordinary men.

Indeed, one of the most chilling books you can read is called precisely that, Ordinary Men.

[xzar_monty]

On 2/3/2023 at 10:10 PM, Zoraptor said:

Dear Germany,

If you don't want comparisons to World War 2 might I suggest sending pretty much any number other than 88 Leopard's to Ukraine?

I can't help but think that anyone who takes the 88 symbolism seriously has fallen into some sort of magical thinking or has perhaps read way too much Jung. It is there if you want to see it like that, no question, but given the number of variables in an endeavour of this size, it wouldn't be all that difficult to find other obscure references, too.

Makes me think of the design in the (Nike?) sneaker and the furore caused in parts of the Islamic world by the fact that if you really wanted to look at it that way, the squiggle could be seen as the name of god. I think this was in the very early 2000s -- I'm pretty sure at least some forum members will remember this.

[BruceVC]

2 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

It is one effective way of demonstrating who you support. (It may also be, among a few other things, an effective way of demonstrating extreme cynicism in general.)

As for the potential bafflement that overt support for Russia may cause, it's good to remember that pretty much any movement / ideology / whatever will have a number of people who genuinely support it. Obviously I haven't witnessed the discussions in person, but it's rather sobering to study the accounts of people who sincerely regard the 9/11 terrorists as heroes, for example. There's a bit of a shiver along the spine when you also delve into some of the psychological work done on people like this and recognize that by and large, they are not crazy, deluded, sociopathic, psychopathic of whatever; they're ordinary men.

Indeed, one of the most chilling books you can read is called precisely that, Ordinary Men.

We have discussed this at length but the tacit support for Russia from some is more  about anti-Western\NATO\US sentiment

Russia was the " alternative " to Western hegemony and culture  but even that  is exaggerated because there is Western influence and dominance in some sectors but the global world is a complex place and democratic governments, not autocracies,  mostly  make decisions based on  their own best interests around trade, growth and stability 

But also what is part of this is its hard for supporters or sympathizers  of Russia to believe and accept that everything they have always criticized the West for Putin is now doing in Ukraine but its worse. Its a bitter pill to swallow 

[xzar_monty]

1 minute ago, BruceVC said:

But also what is part of this is its hard for supporters or sympathizers  of Russia to believe and accept that everything they have always criticized the West for Putin is now doing in Ukraine but its worse. Its a bitter pill to swallow 

It is not a rule as such, but it is well known that after a certain age, people tend not to change their views. In fact, even in a realm as objective as physics, Max Planck has pointed out that science progresses one funeral at a time. What he meant by this was that a new scientific truth does not take over by convincing its opponents, but rather because these opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with new insight. So even if you prove that someone is wrong, that may not amount to much, or even anything.

We know almost nothing about consciousness, but I suppose the relative inability to change one's viewpoint must have something to do with the way personality, thoughts, beliefs and such are physically manifest in the brain, and how the brain, once it ages, becomes more fixed in its ways. Children are much more malleable in this respect, and of course in many other respects, too: they tend to love many fairground rides that make adults nauseous. The apparatus related to perception, balance etc. is not as fixed in children as in adults, and therefore children tend to enjoy a bit of disequilibrium, whereas most adults have a hard time not feeling it as "wrong". Dancers, skydivers and such are often an exception to this rule, but they have made an effort to be.

In cognitive therapy, for instance, it is something of a given that changing a negative pattern of behaviour often takes at least about six months of daily effort. So, for example, if you want to stop being a príck in your dealings with other people, you must pay very close attention to your reactions and words for at least six months and accept that you're almost certainly going to fail and feel discouraged quite a few times -- it's just not reasonable to expect anything else. NOT changing in this regard, however, is the easisest thing in the world.

I would assume that taking stock of one's beliefs, biases etc. in the political sphere would be a comparable endeavour, i.e. not very easy.

Btw, in the past two weeks or so, I've occasionally wondered (when on the forums) what @Darkpriest thinks about all the predictions he has made on the various iterations of this thread. I questioned his sources a few times (they were, quite frankly, essentially worse than useless), and it seems to me that pretty much everything he predicted has gone horribly wrong -- but of course I understand that the war is not over, nor is even the winter. I may also remember some predictions wrong.

[BruceVC]

46 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

I

Btw, in the past two weeks or so, I've occasionally wondered (when on the forums) what @Darkpriest thinks about all the predictions he has made on the various iterations of this thread. I questioned his sources a few times (they were, quite frankly, essentially worse than useless), and it seems to me that pretty much everything he predicted has gone horribly wrong -- but of course I understand that the war is not over, nor is even the winter. I may also remember some predictions wrong.

His main predictions were mostly the economic collapse of the West due to sanctions on Russia and he was just repeating what ZH and other Russian propaganda website  peddle. And it was wrong and inaccurate around most  predictions 

[xzar_monty]

@BruceVC: You mentioned "bitter pill" above. I have had to swallow one bitter pill after the start of this war, and it was very bitter indeed. Life-changing events such as these are not easy to take on board.

[BruceVC]

12 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

@BruceVC: You mentioned "bitter pill" above. I have had to swallow one bitter pill after the start of this war, and it was very bitter indeed. Life-changing events such as these are not easy to take on board.

Its happens to everyone, whenever I do I make it an instructive moment and try not to repeat my previous mistake or view

What was your bitter pill because they vary from person to person?

 

[Malcador]

On 2/4/2023 at 10:06 AM, Maedhros said:

Because they are the ones most deserving of criticism/disapproval. Why let them off the hook?

Covered by others heavily. Besides, makes the thread utterly uninteresting with it just one way.   At this stage of the war, it's going to be repetitive - the invasion was wrong and civilians dying is bad - or just tedious - Russia is evil and the source of all darkness in the world.  But at least we're not at retard level cheerleading like Massaro (skim his Twitter for a laugh).

 

[xzar_monty]

40 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

What was your bitter pill because they vary from person to person?

The whole relationship to military matters. Having been born at the time that I was, with some major wars just distant enough, it was possible to get the sense that an essentially pacifistic outlook was possible and then make choices on that basis. However, Russia has recently demonstrated that pacifism simply isn't possible to anyone who lives anywhere near Russia: pacifism is likely to get you killed, and if you happen to have family and/or other loved ones (as I do), pacifism just isn't possible. There is no question that if Russia had/has the opportunity, none of its smaller neighbours are safe, and the looting, raping and murdering will be just as merciless as it is now in Ukraine.

I remember watching the quiz show QI and hearing Jeremy Clarkson (someone I certainly do not respect) say something along the lines of, "Pacifism is all well and good until someone like Hitler comes along". I reflected upon that a bit and recognized that he was correct. But that was an abstract realization which didn't immediately make me recognize that I myself had made idiotic choices and based them upon utterly childish premises. It was only this war that really brought home the fact how completely wrong I was. That was a bitter pill indeed.

Edited February 5, 2023 by xzar_monty

[BruceVC]

29 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

The whole relationship to military matters. Having been born at the time that I was, with some major wars just distant enough, it was possible to get the sense that an essentially pacifistic outlook was possible and then make choices on that basis. However, Russia has recently demonstrated that pacifism simply isn't possible to anyone who lives anywhere near Russia: pacifism is likely to get you killed, and if you happen to have family and/or other loved ones (as I do), pacifism just isn't possible. There is no question that if Russia had/has the opportunity, none of its smaller neighbours are safe, and the looting, raping and murdering will be just as merciless as it is now in Ukraine.

I remember watching the quiz show QI and hearing Jeremy Clarkson (someone I certainly do not respect) say something along the lines of, "Pacifism is all well and good until someone like Hitler comes along". I reflected upon that a bit and recognized that he was correct. But that was an abstract realization which didn't immediately make me recognize that I myself had made idiotic choices and based them upon utterly childish premises. It was only this war that really brought home the fact how completely wrong I was. That was a bitter pill indeed.

Thats an understandable bitter pill and one I think many people will share

Very  few people believed Putin would be myopic  enough to invade Ukraine, I didnt, and this invasion has created understandable anxiety and instability  in the EU and particularly East European countries. But its also united the EU and NATO in ways that werent possible before.  Many people use to believe Putin could be reasoned with but its patently clear he only respects one thing, force and military strength that the likes of NATO\US  provides. You just cant trust the Russians on their word

But pacifism is a good quality, its just not feasible in certain geopolitical realities 

 

[xzar_monty]

16 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

You just cant trust the Russians on their word

It has been said of the actor Errol Flynn that he was entirely trustworthy: if you made any kind of deal with him, you could trust with 100% certainty that he would betray you.

Putin is trustworthy in precisely the same way.

[Lexx]

Question is, imagine Zelenskyy would have fled Ukraine, would Russia have kept him alive or still tried to murder him anyways? If it's the later, then you might as well just stay and fight. It's probably safer in the middle of the military and secret service, than in your little house somewhere in another country.

Edited February 5, 2023 by Lexx

[Zoraptor]

8 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

I can't help but think that anyone who takes the 88 symbolism seriously has fallen into some sort of magical thinking or has perhaps read way too much Jung. It is there if you want to see it like that, no question, but given the number of variables in an endeavour of this size, it wouldn't be all that difficult to find other obscure references, too.

88 isn't obscure though. Indeed its origins are specifically German, as a way to avoid the ban on nazi symbols like swastikas etc.

Now, them sending 14 Leopard 2s, that looked coincidental since that's the number of tanks in a company and didn't actually originate in Germany.

Somehow though they've managed to 'randomly' hit 1488. And yeah, it probably is still coincidence but it's a very funny one.

[xzar_monty]

Yeah, I agree it's not obscure -- my wording wasn't precise there, the "other" is badly placed, for which apologies.

[BruceVC]

8 hours ago, Lexx said:

Question is, imagine Zelenskyy would have fled Ukraine, would Russia have kept him alive or still tried to murder him anyways? If it's the later, then you might as well just stay and fight. It's probably safer in the middle of the military and secret service, than in your little house somewhere in another country.

Interesting point, he would have been more or less  safe living in the US. The Ruskie assassination influence isn't as strong there?

[Gorth]

12 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Very  few people believed Putin would be myopic  enough to invade Ukraine, I didnt, and this invasion has created understandable anxiety and instability  in the EU and particularly East European countries.

I did. To be fair, getting to his position in the environment he's in, it's not unreasonable to assume a modicum of cunning and intelligence. Not a whataboutif, but a similar example of the principle, Saddam Hussein. Ruthless, uncharming, universally hated, but he stayed in power until he got bombed out of his palace and even then, it took months to finally dispose of him. You don't cling that hard to power and life itself without some degree of cognitive abilities, no matter how twisted they may be. Libya's Gadaffi? Same thing etc.

@a few others who brought up the subject

Not sure who anyone sees supporting the Russian attack here (too many posts to trawl through and see if I can find any to be honest). Not spending all your time condemning Russia is not the same as agreeing.

Echo chambers never did anyone any favours and bringing to anyones attention, that "The West" is corrupt, rotten to the core and would do the same thing without batting an eyelid (if it resulted in a net positive on the geopolitical balance sheet) isn't the same as saying Russia did anything morally defensible, it's just saying that the soap box it's proclaimed from may be a bit rickety and frayed at the corners.  It sometimes feel’s harder to constantly say the other guy sucks when your own is no paragon of virtue in geopolitics. Introspection and self criticism isn't always a bad thing. In fact, you can have cake and eat it too in this situation.

[BruceVC]

4 minutes ago, Gorth said:

I did. To be fair, getting to his position in the environment he's in, it's not unreasonable to assume a modicum of cunning and intelligence. Not a whataboutif, but a similar example of the principle, Saddam Hussein. Ruthless, uncharming, universally hated, but he stayed in power until he got bombed out of his palace and even then, it took months to finally dispose of him. You don't cling that hard to power and life itself without some degree of cognitive abilities, no matter how twisted they may be. Libya's Gadaffi? Same thing etc.

@a few others who brought up the subject

Not sure who anyone sees supporting the Russian attack here (too many posts to trawl through and see if I can find any to be honest). Not spending all your time condemning Russia is not the same as agreeing.

Echo chambers never did anyone any favours and bringing to anyones attention, that "The West" is corrupt, rotten to the core and would do the same thing without batting an eyelid (if it resulted in a net positive on the geopolitical balance sheet) isn't the same as saying Russia did anything morally defensible, it's just saying that the soap box it's proclaimed from may be a bit rickety and frayed at the corners. Introspection and self criticism isn't always a bad thing. In fact, you can have cake and eat it too in this situation.

For me its not a question of intelligence for any dictator\autocratic  but rather egregious or myopic decisions made in the interests of nationhood or complete self-interests and the entire future of the country   becomes part of those decisions for the good and bad 

There are lots of examples of educated and clever leaders who were brutal dictators and made terrible decisions in the running of there countries that led to years if not decades of economic and social decline and degrees of  global isolation. Look at Zimbabwe, Mugabe was educated. He wasnt stupid but he made terrible decisions 

But I definitely disagree that any Western country would be able to do what Putin has done, there are checks and balances and more importantly political accountability and consequence when you want to invade a country if you a Democracy. Just look at the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, the US and their allies spent months at the UN trying to motivate the invasion and get  global support. There was months of domestic " marketing " in the US and UK to win over public sentiment for the invasion

Compare that with Russias invasion of Ukraine, within 2-3 months the Ruskies moved troops  on to the borders of Belarus and Ukraine and said it was a " training exercise ", they even dismissed the reality of an invasion.

You cant do that in a Democracy because you will be held accountable for your lies. The  vote and winning popular support matters but its irrelevant in any one party state or autocracy because what can civilians do?

And also if you prepared to ignore human rights, arrest and kill protestors and you have effective security forces then you can stay in power indefinitely. Even if your citizens suffer and your economy collapses. You cant do this in any Western country because you will be voted out 

Finally I agree echo-chambers are boring, I would prefer people are honest with there support for Russia but then you must accept people will disagree. But thats point of a debate, hopefully people wont take it personally but agree to disagree. 

 

[BruceVC]

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/3842074-economy-jobs-inflation-unemployment-report/ 

The US added 500k new jobs and inflation is down to 6.5%, it was an unbelievably positive showing with most analysts more cautious

Man the US sanctions against Russia and its support for Ukraine is really crashing its economy 

[Gorth]

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/3842074-economy-jobs-inflation-unemployment-report/ 

The US added 500k new jobs and inflation is down to 6.5%, it was an unbelievably positive showing with most analysts more cautious

Man the US sanctions against Russia and its support for Ukraine is really crashing its economy 

The number that really matters is how is the median household income doing compared to living expenses. That's what gives you a stable society and avoids social unrest (and also a good metric for measuring a country's poverty levels). The top 1% getting richer just inflates the GDP without improving the quality of life of anyone (and I mean literally anyone as they wont get any improvement of quality of life out of it). That being said, I haven't read the link yet, so not sure if it covers the subject.

[xzar_monty]

49 minutes ago, Gorth said:

The top 1% getting richer just inflates the GDP without improving the quality of life of anyone (and I mean literally anyone as they wont get any improvement of quality of life out of it).

I don't know if you've read much Robert Sapolsky, the well-known researcher on stress, but one of his more salient points is how economic inequality really is bad for everyone, in terms of quality of life as measured by stress levels and such. In the US, the struggle of the poor is obvious. But the rich almost have to isolate themselves from both the poor and the average person, which is very bad for both your stress levels and a general sense of trust in society, which affects everyone.

The rich tend to live longer, though.

As for money and quality of life, it goes something like this: starting from zero, the more money you get, the more your quality of life improves until you reach a point where you have a home with no debt and you can manage your ordinary bills and living expenses without any trouble (and pay for your children's education, if you live in a country where that is necessary). After that, extra money has almost no effect at all on your quality of life.

(I think it was Sapolsky who also pointed out how average income is funny in countries like Mexico and Russia because although it obviously and mathematically exists and has to exist, no one actually earns that kind of money in these countries. Most people are much, much poorer, and a select few are ridiculously rich.)