Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[The Cane]

Russian propaganda proves to be some stupid shit:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61757667.amp

[WyattEarp]

I found this to be an interesting article. It analyzes the challenges ahead to bringing peace to the Ukraine. While I might prefer a more resounding Ukrainian victory, I concur with the authors that "winning small" is the most likely and practical resolution to the war.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/artic...f-ukraine-wins

Excerpt:

"But a full-scale Ukrainian military defeat of Russia, including the retaking of Crimea, verges on fantasy. It would be far too optimistic to base either Ukrainian or Western strategy on such an outcome. Pursuing it would also send the war into a new phase. Having poured billions of dollars into Crimea's development, a symbol of Russian renewal, Moscow would interpret a Ukrainian offensive in Crimea as an assault on Russian territory, something Moscow would try to prevent by all available means. The hypothesis that Russia's full-scale defeat would excise the cancer of imperialism from the Russian leadership and body politic rests on a clumsy analogy to Germany's unconditional surrender in World War II, and stems from a desire not just to end this war but to foreclose the possibility of Russia starting any future war in Europe. It is an intoxicating vision, but one unconnected to reality."

[Jmsuttr]

It's remarkable how those who delight in pointing the finger at Ukraine fall silent when it comes to Russia. The old expression, "strain at a gnat while swallowing a camel," comes to mind.

"1/ Old rations, faulty vehicles, missing radios, under-strength units: corruption has been blamed for hollowing out Russia's military and undermining its war in Ukraine. It's worth examining this problem and seeing how it's affected the Russian armed forces. 1st 🧵 in a series".

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...220632067.html

"1/ What do jewelry, cash, antiques, watches, mansions and Jennifer Lopez have in common? They've all been sought after by corrupt Russian military officials. In this second 🧵 in a series, I'll look at high-level corruption among Russia's military elite".

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...777025024.html

[Jmsuttr]

There's a reward for the sadist in your example as they get to witness the distress of the animal or insect. Your typical online troll wants feedback. If no one is responding in any way there's none, plus they don't know if anyone is even reading their posts. They'll go someplace else where the fish are biting which isn't hard to do online. In any case your analogy is false, and by default, so is your conclusion. Wink.

https://fallacyinlogic.com/false-ana...-and-examples/

P.S. Regarding humiliation, and based on standard definitions it's tough to argue that you are humiliating a person if they are experiencing no such feelings. From Webster's:

"to reduce (someone) to a lower position in one's own eyes or others' eyes: to make (someone) ashamed or embarrassed: Mortify".

Take DramaFree11 as an example. He's been here and on a thread in another forum about four months equating Ukraine and Russia in the matter of evil. He calls on the West to stop helping the former while doing the Chicken Little, claiming world economies will implode and endless lives will be destroyed if we continue the course. He was around two years saying the same about Covid BTW in the matter of mitigation efforts and with no fulfillment. But where's the new material? Where the humiliation? I just summed up his whole argument in less than one minute, two sentences. There's been no change. Rebuttals are ignored. It's just a couple of talking points one could gather halfway watching Tucker Carlson one night. No "proof" is offered beyond anecdotes and speculations. No links. So what does he get for his two to three minutes of typing each day? A three paragraph, well thought out essay from you in return. That's a good return on his investment, and all with the same two sentence argument, and for about four months. LOL But I'm sure not going in circles with someone like that. It comes down to how you want to spend your time I suppose.

You're great at posting links to various logical fallacies, but you seem to have a blind spot when it comes to the holes in your own argument.

For example, you conclude my analogy is false because the sadist takes pleasure from witnessing the outcome of his own sadism, whereas the online troll only (emphasis mine) can take pleasure if their post is responded to (feedback).

The problem with that conclusion is that you have no objective evidence to back it up. It's purely your personal opinion, nothing more. Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong but, without evidence, it's simply a window-dressed pseudo-argument in search of a factual basis. I've never claimed that the way I've decided to deal with trolls is based on anything more than my own personal experience and opinion, and the analogy I offered (for illustrative purposes) doesn't change that fact.

Also, your reliance on a strict construction of the word "humiliation," while clearly ignoring the full context of what I wrote, is disingenuous. Did I not specifically write that, since trolls lack self-awareness, my aim in humiliating them is to make them a laughingstock to others? One of the essential rules of debate is to accurately characterize the argument of the opponent, which you failed to do.

Frankly, this back and forth about the best way to deal with trolls is a quintessential exemplar of a waste of time. At least it is for me, since I've already definitively stated that I have no intention of changing. I'm fine with the fact that you have your own opinion, but apparently the reverse isn't true and you seem to feel a need to "convert" me (newsflash: ain't happening).

Since you're so concerned about the effective use of time, is it really worth your time to dig up "Captain Obvious" references to logic websites when you could simply say ad hominem (etc.) and not insult the reader's intelligence by acting as though they need your assistance to define the term? Does that not strike you as a bit pretentious, or condescending? You might find it a better use of your time to research alternatives to monosyllabic subject lines. Just a suggestion, take it or leave it as you please. In the same spirit, I'm exercising my prerogative to "leave" your suggestion (wink).

[Jmsuttr]

You are total denial. Ukraine should not be allowed to join anything until they clean up there act. Produce Oil and you defeat Russia, very easy, but you guys do not want to do that.

Secondly, if Russia can not defeat Ukraine and a few Special Force Teams, they obviously can not fight there way out of a wet paper bag. They are not a threat, unlike are ridiculous Media claims and even worse the CIA. There military is terrible.

I do not care who wins, but somebody please win. When The war stops the killing stops. I have bad news for you, Russia is now winning, and the higher gas prices go the more they win. Again I have zero compassion for the Ukraine government. I do care about the incident lives being lost. You guys are playing right into Putin hand. Sorry, but that is what the Ukraine government does is lose, steal and lie. They were winning, but as usual they got greedy and are too stupid to realize it.

It's looking very likely that Ukraine will be recommended for EU candidate status.

https://www.politico.eu/article/euro...s-for-ukraine/

Since your 100% anti-Ukraine beliefs have already been thoroughly outed, I'm sure that this development will cause you plenty of indigestion. I guess that's just too fucking bad for you, right?

If you're looking for someone to blame, you'll find him in the Kremlin. LilliPutin is solely responsible for pushing Ukraine toward the West, and solely responsible for pushing Sweden and Finland toward NATO. Oh yes, and also responsible for significant changes in other countries like Moldova, the Baltics, Poland, etc. My personal hope is that Ukraine's candidacy to the EU comes with a laundry list of conditions and standards that need to be met. I think that will be the case, with the result potentially being a win-win for both the EU and Ukraine, and a HUGE loss for Russia.

As far as producing more non-Russian oil, I'm all in favor of that (and anything else with the potential to deny revenue to Russia). But that doesn't offer an effective near-term solution to Russian murderous war-crimes aggression. Which is why the better answer is to kill more Orcs and drive them back to Mordor (ASAP), because Russians will keep killing until they've been utterly snuffed out or chased back into their holes.

While you say you don't care who wins, I highly doubt that since you exclusively advocate for anti-Ukraine solutions. In stark contrast, I absolutely care who wins, as Russia is evil to the core and has revealed that fact to the world since February 24th. I'm not ignoring Ukraine's problems, or absolving them of past sins, but no country deserves to be swallowed whole by the Orc horde.

[Jmsuttr]

NATO office boy Jens Stoltenberg, at a meeting with Finland's office boys, has said NATO will trade Ukrainian territory for peace.

Primary sources are always preferable, when available. It took all of 5 minutes to find the actual transcripts of NATO speeches and press conferences.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions.htm

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/o...ectedLocale=en

"So first to the question of whether peace is possible. Yes, peace is possible. The question is what kind of peace? Because if Ukraine withdraw its forces and stop fighting, then Ukraine will cease to exist as an independent, sovereign nation in Europe. If President Putin stops fighting, then we'll have peace. So the dilemma is, of course, that peace is always possible. Surrender can provide peace. But as we have seen, the Ukrainians, they don't accept peace at any price. They are actually willing to pay a very high price for their independence. And again, Finland is a country that really knows the price for peace and also the price for independence and being a sovereign nation. And it's not for me to judge how high price the Ukrainians should be willing to pay. I mean, we pay a price because we provide support, we see the economic effects of the economic sanctions. But there is no doubt, as you said Sauli, that the highest price is paid by Ukrainians every day. And therefore it's for them to judge, not for me, what is the price they are willing to pay, for peace and for independence? So, that's, in a way, the moral dilemma. Peace is possible, but the question, how much are you willing to forsake to pay for getting that peace? The absolute best way to achieve peace in Ukraine is for President Putin to end this senseless war. We have to remember, every morning, every day, every hour during the day, there is one man, one nation that is responsible for that and that is President Putin. Then we have difficult dilemmas, difficult choices, but it is President Putin's brutal invasion of Ukraine that has created those dilemmas. And they can be solved by. . . From his side by ending the war. Then, one more thing on this, is that as President Zelensky has stated many times, this war will end at the negotiating table. The question is what kind of position will the Ukrainians have when they negotiate a solution? Our responsibility is to make that position as strong as possible. We know that there is a very close link between what you can achieve at the negotiating table and your position at the battlefield. So our military support to them is a way to strengthen their hand at the negotiating table when they, hopefully soon, will sit there and negotiate the peace agreement. So that was 'peace is possible' that's not the question anyway, the question is: what price are you willing to pay for peace? How much territory? How much independence? How much sovereignty? How much freedom? How much democracy are you willing to sacrifice for peace? And that's a very difficult moral dilemma. And it's for those who are paying the highest price to make that judgement. Our responsibility is to support them. Then, on escalation, I think it's extremely important that we remember there is a danger of escalation. Also, as you said this morning, a horizontal escalation, we always see a kind of vertical escalation more fighting, more suffering, heavier weapons in Ukraine but escalation beyond Ukraine. And NATO has been very aware of this risk since the beginning, actually before the invasion, because we have to remember that when the invasion came, we were very prepared. In one way, we have been prepared for this eventuality since 2014, with the biggest reinforcement of our collective defence since the Cold War, with the battlegroups in the eastern part of the Alliance, more defence spending, higher readiness, new command structure and all that. And then it was, actually, when we met, I remember we met, we discussed the possibility of an invasion of Ukraine. We had very precise intelligence on the nation. Russia absolutely denied. We had the meeting in the NATO-Russia Council in January, I think it was, where that was the last serious effort from our side to find a negotiated way out of this. Russia said, 'We have no plans whatsoever to invade. ' They actually sent out pictures, days beforehand, showing some battle tanks moving over this bridge (the strait between Azov and the Black Sea, saying that they were actually withdrawing their forces. Then they invaded. And then, that morning, we activated NATO's defence plans and deployed significant additional troops, because we were prepared, and now we have 40,000 NATO troops in the eastern part of the Alliance. Why did we do that? To prevent escalation. Because we have this increased presence to send an absolutely clear message to President Putin, to remove any room for miscalculation, misunderstanding in Moscow about our readiness to protect and defend every Ally. And as long as that's clear, there will be no attack. So our deterrence is to prevent escalation. I'm sad that we are in such a situation, because it would have been better for all of us if we could spend all that money we now are spending on deterrence, more weapons, more artillery, more missiles, more troops, more ships, more planes on education, health, infrastructure. But in a more dangerous world, we have to invest in security and that's exactly what we'll do to prevent escalation. So, I know I'm being a bit long, but we are. . . NATO is actually doing two things to prevent escalation. One is deterrence. As we do and we'll also make new decisions at the Madrid summit to strengthen further our posture: investing more, more troops, more readiness. But the only thing we do, is that we don't move into Ukraine. And that's not an easy decision. In my conversations, my talks, with the Ukrainian leaders, including President Zelensky, it's not easy to tell them that we are not going to impose a no-fly zone. They asked for a no-fly zone, we said no. They wanted us to and some Allies as well there has been some proposals that we should move with creating a humanitarian corridor. We're not doing that. There have also been discussions about NATO reinforcing a naval corridor to get food out. To not do that, it's not easy, because it has a cost for the Ukrainians. But we. . . But the reason why we don't move in with NATO troops in Ukraine is to prevent escalation. So we are always, since the beginning of this war, been very mindful about the need, the moral obligation, to support a country fighting for their freedom, for democracy, for their independence. But at the same time, preventing escalation by not being directly involved in the conflict".

People can read and decide for themselves as to whether or not Stoltenberg is throwing Ukraine to the wolves. The absolute WORST source in the world, I would argue, is a certified LilliPutin dick-licking troll.

[PedroMorales]

Yours was a good and well thought out post. The replies you elicited come from American and Israeli Nazis who destroyed Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Yugoslavia etc so keep that in mind. It is hard to know which of them are the more despicable. Your girl friend is, of course, like most others. She wants to get by. Not so Israeli and American psychopaths. Abominable creatures.

More war crimes yesterday by Zelensky's Nazis shelling residential areas. Russian batteries seem to have the bead on them now so expect more tears from the Nazis and racists soon.

I'm with my Ukrainian girlfriend now in Chisinau.

[Paulie97]

To the second part: I don't dispute the attention-seeking characterization of trolls. Rather I dispute the assumption that all of them will simply go away if ignored. It's my assertion that there's a subset of trolls, most notably the hate-filled variety, who will never go away. And that's because hate needs no outside driver or stimulus. Hate is self-perpetuating because it's motivated by twisted internal factors, and it sees the promulgation of hate as its own reward. It's like a horribly troubled child who tortures cats or pulls the wings off flies. Anyone who says it's just a phase, and will go away if ignored, is just wrong.

There's a reward for the sadist in your example as they get to witness the distress of the animal or insect. Your typical online troll wants feedback. If no one is responding in any way there's none, plus they don't know if anyone is even reading their posts. They'll go someplace else where the fish are biting which isn't hard to do online. In any case your analogy is false, and by default, so is your conclusion. Wink.

https://fallacyinlogic.com/false-ana...-and-examples/

P.S. Regarding humiliation, and based on standard definitions it's tough to argue that you are humiliating a person if they are experiencing no such feelings. From Webster's:

"to reduce (someone) to a lower position in one's own eyes or others' eyes: to make (someone) ashamed or embarrassed: Mortify".

Take DramaFree11 as an example. He's been here and on a thread in another forum about four months equating Ukraine and Russia in the matter of evil. He calls on the West to stop helping the former while doing the Chicken Little, claiming world economies will implode and endless lives will be destroyed if we continue the course. He was around two years saying the same about Covid BTW in the matter of mitigation efforts and with no fulfillment. But where's the new material? Where the humiliation? I just summed up his whole argument in less than one minute, two sentences. There's been no change. Rebuttals are ignored. It's just a couple of talking points one could gather halfway watching Tucker Carlson one night. No "proof" is offered beyond anecdotes and speculations. No links. So what does he get for his two to three minutes of typing each day? A three paragraph, well thought out essay from you in return. That's a good return on his investment, and all with the same two sentence argument, and for about four months. LOL But I'm sure not going in circles with someone like that. It comes down to how you want to spend your time I suppose.

[Paulie97]

Both sides are terrible, Ukraine is one of the most corrupt governments ever or an Evil Dictator, pick your poison.

See what I mean folks? Fallacy of the ad nauseam, or proof by repetition. You've equated Ukraine with Russia dozens of times, and been refuted dozens of times. However you ignore the refutations and keep repeating the same lie over and over, and will continue to do the same until hell freezes over. But here it is again, Ukraine has a Freedom House score, which considers corruption and other measures, of 61, about on par with Tucker Carlson's favorite country Hungary. This isn't great but isn't bad for the region and is worlds ahead of Russia at 15 and their buddies Belarus at 5. It's also ahead of a number of Euro countries. So, in the end you are dishonest and refuse to engage other than to repeat the same tired and long refuted sentiments over and over. The first time can be ascribed to ignorance. Persisting after corrections you make yourself a habitual liar which isn't surprising.

https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_nauseam

[DramaFree11]

Putin has blatantly boasted that Russia's ambitions extend far beyond Ukraine. That is the reason that Poland, and the Baltics, are responding the way they are. They rightly see this war as merely the first salvo in a longer-term existential battle.

People who view this conflict as though it only concerns Ukraine are not only ignoring the facts, but also LilliPutin's own words and threats.

Solution: Defeat Russia!

There, fixed it for you (again). BTW, every time you repeat the lie that you don't care who wins, I'll continue to point out your anti-Ukraine posting history AND the fact that every one of your "solutions" would only disadvantage the Ukrainian side. So, not only are you a liar, but you're also a coward because you try to hide behind a facade of even-handedness that is blatantly false and fraudulent. If you had even a scintilla of courage, you'd be up front about your (purely) anti-Ukraine position.

As for me, the reason I'm picking Ukraine, even with their record of corruption, is that there exists at least the possibility of change. Specifically, if they want to join the EU (and they do), they'll need to pass laws and implement significant reforms to meet anti-corruption benchmarks and standards. And EU candidate status can last for years, which would give such reforms a chance to take hold. Even if you don't like Zelensky, he's not going to be president forever. So, on one hand, Ukraine (even with a poor record in the past) at least has the HOPE and possibility for change. Additionally, nothing motivates change more than a traumatic event, like a near-death experience. Ukraine is currently undergoing such an experience on a national scale. Besides, the other choice is unacceptable, as anyone who picks Russia is choosing to side with a genocidal, psychopathic, megalomaniac.

What does the future hold? I have no crystal ball and, as I've stated often, making predictions is a fool's errand. But, based on history, and the way recent and current events have played out, Russia is by far the bigger problem to Europe and the world. And their naked aggression, and commission of war crimes against civilians, demands both resistance and defeat.

P.S. If Ukraine achieves EU candidate status, I have no doubt there will be a number of audits and examinations. Will there ever be such audits in Russia? Nope, not ever.

You are total denial. Ukraine should not be allowed to join anything until they clean up there act. Produce Oil and you defeat Russia, very easy, but you guys do not want to do that.

Secondly, if Russia can not defeat Ukraine and a few Special Force Teams, they obviously can not fight there way out of a wet paper bag. They are not a threat, unlike are ridiculous Media claims and even worse the CIA. There military is terrible.

I do not care who wins, but somebody please win. When The war stops the killing stops. I have bad news for you, Russia is now winning, and the higher gas prices go the more they win. Again I have zero compassion for the Ukraine government. I do care about the incident lives being lost. You guys are playing right into Putin hand. Sorry, but that is what the Ukraine government does is lose, steal and lie. They were winning, but as usual they got greedy and are too stupid to realize it.

[Golfinho]

This is Ukraine is a sovereign nation and its territorial integrity was guaranteed by international treaty (and the Russian Federation was a signator) in 1994.

R2P Serbia. But that was different.

[Golfinho]

Pure Russian propaganda.

Of course, it is. Anything that doesn't fit the narrative you've ingested is Pure Propaganda. Baaa, baaaa.

[Jmsuttr]

As, I said I can care less how wins, find a solution.

Both sides are terrible, Ukraine is one of the most corrupt governments ever or an Evil Dictator, pick your poison. Both sides are extremely corrupt, and we should not let them drag the worlds economy down, with there stupid decisions.

Let's do an Audit of Ukraine President and Parliament, I doubt you guys will like what we find.

Putin has blatantly boasted that Russia's ambitions extend far beyond Ukraine. That is the reason that Poland, and the Baltics, are responding the way they are. They rightly see this war as merely the first salvo in a longer-term existential battle.

People who view this conflict as though it only concerns Ukraine are not only ignoring the facts, but also LilliPutin's own words and threats.

Solution: Defeat Russia!

There, fixed it for you (again). BTW, every time you repeat the lie that you don't care who wins, I'll continue to point out your anti-Ukraine posting history AND the fact that every one of your "solutions" would only disadvantage the Ukrainian side. So, not only are you a liar, but you're also a coward because you try to hide behind a facade of even-handedness that is blatantly false and fraudulent. If you had even a scintilla of courage, you'd be up front about your (purely) anti-Ukraine position.

As for me, the reason I'm picking Ukraine, even with their record of corruption, is that there exists at least the possibility of change. Specifically, if they want to join the EU (and they do), they'll need to pass laws and implement significant reforms to meet anti-corruption benchmarks and standards. And EU candidate status can last for years, which would give such reforms a chance to take hold. Even if you don't like Zelensky, he's not going to be president forever. So, on one hand, Ukraine (even with a poor record in the past) at least has the HOPE and possibility for change. Additionally, nothing motivates change more than a traumatic event, like a near-death experience. Ukraine is currently undergoing such an experience on a national scale. Besides, the other choice is unacceptable, as anyone who picks Russia is choosing to side with a genocidal, psychopathic, megalomaniac.

What does the future hold? I have no crystal ball and, as I've stated often, making predictions is a fool's errand. But, based on history, and the way recent and current events have played out, Russia is by far the bigger problem to Europe and the world. And their naked aggression, and commission of war crimes against civilians, demands both resistance and defeat.

P.S. If Ukraine achieves EU candidate status, I have no doubt there will be a number of audits and examinations. Will there ever be such audits in Russia? Nope, not ever.

[WyattEarp]

I'm with my UKRAINIAN GIRLFRIEND now in Chisinau..............

I don't try to put ideas in her head. Just let her talk. She is ethnic Ukrainian, but not nationalist. MAINLY WORRIED ABOUT HER APARTMENT IN KYIV she bought last year.............

Meanwhile, Russia reconfigures to be immune to sanctions, thus free to cause all sorts of mischief for USA. Predictably bad result for USA, but that's what happens when silly young idealists in the State Department are let to run loose.

Prior to 2014, Ukraine was merely being pressured to accept subordination to Russia, same as Canada and Mexico are subordinate to USA.

I highlighted a few words that I think might give us a bit more on your girlfriend's perspective. Nothing personal, but she might have more of a mercenary type personality. You travel the third world and find people can have no deep affinity for their own country. I'm not talking about cultural aspects like food and music. The young women have options with foreign men which further pulls them away. I don't know your girlfriend and I certainly don't know her motivations and future plans. However, I don't think my comments are a stretch.

While I don't think anyone should be cheering on this conflict, I am in the camp that Putin's Russia would keep fucking with its neighbors and it would never end. The danger is Putin stupidly underestimates Europe and his military crosses a NATO border. The Merkel appeasement is hopefully over. So there is much more here at stake than a fledgling democracy with corruption. (One by the way should look at the early histories of the democracies in Taiwan and South Korea to understand that not all democracies jump into a Jeffersonian state on day one.).

I believe this came up before. You oversell your opinion projected through your girlfriend. You are seriously comparing Ukraine's relationship to Russia with Canada and Mexico's relationship to the USA Not to mention Canada is a robust democracy, I know some Canadians that would laugh at your comparison. They are not trying to emulate or respond to the United States politically. I'm not sure the Mexicans are either.

If you said Canada and Mexico are economically dependent on the United States, of course they are having long borders with the largest economy in the world. The Ukrainians have essentially voted for closer ties with the European Union. Russia is an economic shit show overly dependent on the price of oil and gas. Why would the Ukrainians hitch their economic future to Russia?

As far as your silly mafia reference, what would one do if they had a known child molester living next door? Would you let your kids play outside unattended? Or would you try to have him arrested for approaching your children?

[John Clayton]

...After the thug-led street putsch of 2014, as punishment for their treasonous attempt to switch from team Russia to team USA, Ukraine was deprived of Crimea and put under pressure to give Donbas some autonomy and renounce treason towards team Russia...

This is Russian can't. What is the treason? Treason the crime of betraying one's country (you know, like Benedict Arnold or Trump). Ukraine is a sovereign nation and its territorial integrity was guaranteed by international treaty (and the Russian Federation was a signator) in 1994.

Despite all their disinformation about nazis, oppression of ethnic Russians, whatever, Putin has recently flatly admitted that is war is about territorial aggrandizement and restoring the historic Russian empire.