Russia is now bombing Ukraine

[ignatius]

On 4/6/2024 at 7:59 AM, may be rude said:

here's a well-produced documentary about the ukrainian children abducted by russia. at least 19,505. hard not to suspect human trafficking. 

https://kyivindependent.com/uprooted/

 

here's a youtube link to the ^^^ video

 

the next episode of Frontline covers same topic

https://watch.opb.org/video/children-of-ukraine-preview/

also, interesting chat.. starts out talking about the recent terrorist attack then gets to ukraine/russia geo politics a bit.. very reasonable analysis. 

 

Edited April 7 by ignatius

[Walter Ostanek]

Quote

What threats? What evidence is there that Putin wants to invade these places

Do I really need to list examples? Start with the at least weekly threats of nuclear war against various states on primetime state TV (often made by sitting government figures). Or you could play a game where you google "Medvedev [country] tweet" to come up with a list of threats that the (drunken?) head of russia's security council has made to a broad swath of countries over the last couple of years. And to think that I used to admire the chap as fairly level-headed.

It's not about ability, it's about intent, and knowing that they will do it when they gain the ability to. Because they say that they want to. And I don't think it will end in nuclear war, because their hybrid attacks have already demonstrably worked. That's why I find it funny that some people still care about these maps of the whole world peppered with US military bases. The material context has drastically changed. Hard power is heavily undermined in a world of troll farms and deniable PMCs. Imagine russia using twitter to conjure up an acute domestic political crisis in Lithuania and then have mysterious masked gunmen start appearing in out-of-the-way villages a la Donbas? Does Russia need to nuke anybody to take it over? Does NATO's Article 5 have any meaning at all in that situation? 

As for georgia, the oft-overlooked point is that they were quite cuntish to their autonomous regions prior to 2008, and those vague NATO invitations were stupid. Russia's meddling there was grim but somewhat understandable.

Quote

Obviously the terms would not be in Ukraine's favor, but it would stop the killing

It wouldn't, though. In exactly the same way as a Gaza ceasefire will not stop Israel from peppering civilian crowds with bullets in occupied territory whenever it pleases.

Quote

Call it what you will (imperialism or sphere of influence), would you rather have Russia and China be the dominant force in the east and then rest of world or the United States. That is what is at stake, and the way that America chooses to make war with Russia instead of cooperating and driving a wedge between Russia and China, is foolish and also incompetent. It creates and sustains military conflict and leeches off the material profits of these unnecessary wars.

Not sure how any of that leads towards a more desired outcome. In some parts of the world, the decline of US imperialism would be a great thing. And if anything, russia and china being in opposing camps seems like a higher risk of nuclear war...

Quote

Europe has enough power collectively to challenge American policy. They are essentially America's bitch at this point, and ironically the war in Ukraine accelerated this trend especially concerning the cost of energy oil and natural gas

Agreed and this is what infuriates me to no end. Germany's Energiewende was one of the dumbest political decisions of this century. That's what got them hooked on russian gas, and drastically constrained the political agency of Europe as a whole. I hoped Nordstream would force Europe seriously onto a path of energy independence (not to say decarbonising), but (to a first approximation anyway) it hasn't. Although another aspect of that is Russian shenanigans in a swath of Sahel states, i.e. the neo-colonies France relied on for its nuclear power. Europe has collectively failed miserably to assert itself, part by russian design but part by truly pathetic short-sightedness

Quote

America's sec of state just announced today that Ukraine will be a NATO member. 

Weird to imply it's being shoved down their neck when they really want it. Whether they should want it or not is another matter, hybrid warfare is demonstrating its uselessness. I also simply don't buy the line that Russia is scared of NATO given their aforementioned mastery of hybrid power, and additionally the fact that Putin very eagerly worked alongside NATO during the War on Islam Terror - something that has been weirdly airbrushed. There were "NATO Bases" on Russian soil in the 2000s... Putin invited them there!

[ignatius]

 

[Walter Ostanek]

If I may recommend the following series of fantastically researched videos that are mega worth a watch, like crack out a couple of six packs and strap in for an evening. I've had Ukes and Russians tell me that they learnt tonnes about their own history from watching these

1: The Orange and Maidan revolutions and the role played by oligarch factional bullshit and its relationship to russia[n meddling]
(That fight in the Rada halfway through this vid, I remember Tony Hawks (of Round Ireland with a Fridge fame) taking the piss out of that at the time, on his shitty show on Auntie Beeb)

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exJ024Zdzdk&rco=1

2: Girkin's fake revolution in Donbas, creeping direct russian involvement, plus good points on timescale manipulation in the media.

Fuck, I was watching all this shit on Vice during the aphex soundcloud dump, and it's been absolutely nuts to get to know people as refugees who were there through all this at the time
(also on this topic, I highly recommend reading "Hybrid Warriors" by Anna Arutunyan, who attempted to interview Girkin)
(also, I lost my job at the time because of those post-MH17 sanctions lol)

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ_ZRBLFOXw

3: The way the "NATO started it" argument went from semi-plausible to total-wank, plus why Mearsheimer et al are cunts

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVmmASrAL-Q

4: The way Iraq, and LaRouchian horseshoe-theory conspiracy nuttery, influenced Russian and far-right US thinking, and provided a lot of the ideological backdrop to the invasion

The LaRouchian view of "colour revolutions" is absolutely central to this - Putin's utter incapability of grasping that the masses might have agency, and the LaRouchist denial of agency to the masses as a point of principle. Like, to debunk it, just talk to someone who was there FFS

Christ, I didn't realise Glazyev was a LaRouchist until I saw this

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OFyn_KSy80

 

[ignatius]

3 hours ago, Walter Ostanek said:

If I may recommend the following series of fantastically researched videos that are mega worth a watch, like crack out a couple of six packs and strap in for an evening. I've had Ukes and Russians tell me that they learnt tonnes about their own history from watching these

1: The Orange and Maidan revolutions and the role played by oligarch factional bullshit and its relationship to russia[n meddling]
(That fight in the Rada halfway through this vid, I remember Tony Hawks (of Round Ireland with a Fridge fame) taking the piss out of that at the time, on his shitty show on Auntie Beeb)

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exJ024Zdzdk&rco=1

2: Girkin's fake revolution in Donbas, creeping direct russian involvement, plus good points on timescale manipulation in the media.

Fuck, I was watching all this shit on Vice during the aphex soundcloud dump, and it's been absolutely nuts to get to know people as refugees who were there through all this at the time
(also on this topic, I highly recommend reading "Hybrid Warriors" by Anna Arutunyan, who attempted to interview Girkin)
(also, I lost my job at the time because of those post-MH17 sanctions lol)

  Hide contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ_ZRBLFOXw

3: The way the "NATO started it" argument went from semi-plausible to total-wank, plus why Mearsheimer et al are cunts

  Hide contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVmmASrAL-Q

4: The way Iraq, and LaRouchian horseshoe-theory conspiracy nuttery, influenced Russian and far-right US thinking, and provided a lot of the ideological backdrop to the invasion

The LaRouchian view of "colour revolutions" is absolutely central to this - Putin's utter incapability of grasping that the masses might have agency, and the LaRouchist denial of agency to the masses as a point of principle. Like, to debunk it, just talk to someone who was there FFS

Christ, I didn't realise Glazyev was a LaRouchist until I saw this

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OFyn_KSy80

 

Chipping away at these. It’s all so crazy. Complex series of events. Captured media makes a huge mess. 
edit: this all dovetails well with Adam Curtis’ “Trauma Zone”

Edited April 14 by ignatius

[Satans Little Helper]

Interesting piece in the economist by a Chinese expert on Russia. Consider this a sign that China's relationship with Russia is under strain. Note that the fact this piece comes from China is what makes it meaningful. Or rather, carry considerable weight.

Quote

Russia is sure to lose in Ukraine, reckons a Chinese expert on Russia

Feng Yujun says the war has strained Sino-Russian relations

...

The war is a turning-point for Russia. It has consigned Mr Putin’s regime to broad international isolation. He has also had to deal with difficult domestic political undercurrents, from the rebellion by the mercenaries of the Wagner Group and other pockets of the military—for instance in Belgorod—to ethnic tensions in several Russian regions and the recent terrorist attack in Moscow. These show that political risk in Russia is very high. Mr Putin may recently have been re-elected, but he faces all kinds of possible black-swan events.

Adding to the risks confronting Mr Putin, the war has convinced more and more former Soviet republics that Russia’s imperial ambition threatens their independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Increasingly aware that a Russian victory is out of the question, these states are distancing themselves from Moscow in different ways, from forging economic-development policies that are less dependent on Russia to pursuing more balanced foreign policies. As a result, prospects for the Eurasian integration that Russia advocates have dimmed.

The war, meanwhile, has made Europe wake up to the enormous threat that Russia’s military aggression poses to the continent’s security and the international order, bringing post-cold-war EU-Russia detente to an end. Many European countries have given up their illusions about Mr Putin’s Russia.

At the same time, the war has jolted NATO out of what Emmanuel Macron, the French president, called its “brain-dead” state. With most NATO countries increasing their military spending, the alliance’s forward military deployment in eastern Europe has been greatly shored up. The addition of Sweden and Finland to NATO highlights Mr Putin’s inability to use the war to prevent the alliance’s expansion.

The war will also help to reshape the UN Security Council. It has highlighted the body’s inability to effectively assume its responsibility of maintaining world peace and regional security owing to the abuse of veto power by some permanent members. This has riled the international community, increasing the chances that reform of the Security Council will speed up. Germany, Japan, India and other countries are likely to become permanent members and the five current permanent members may lose their veto power. Without reform, the paralysis that has become the hallmark of the Security Council will lead the world to an even more dangerous place.

China’s relations with Russia are not fixed, and they have been affected by the events of the past two years. Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, has just visited Beijing, where he and his Chinese counterpart once again emphasised the close ties between their countries. But the trip appears to have been more diplomatic effort by Russia to show it is not alone than genuine love-in. Shrewd observers note that China’s stance towards Russia has reverted from the “no limits” stance of early 2022, before the war, to the traditional principles of “non-alignment, non-confrontation and non-targeting of third parties”.

Although China has not joined Western sanctions against Russia, it has not systematically violated them. It is true that China imported more than 100m tonnes of Russian oil in 2023, but that is not a great deal more than it was buying annually before the war. If China stops importing Russian oil and instead buys from elsewhere, it will undoubtedly push up international oil prices, putting huge pressure on the world economy.

Since the war began China has conducted two rounds of diplomatic mediation. Success has proved elusive but no one should doubt China’s desire to end this cruel war through negotiations. That wish shows that China and Russia are very different countries. Russia is seeking to subvert the existing international and regional order by means of war, whereas China wants to resolve disputes peacefully.

With Russia still attacking Ukrainian military positions, critical infrastructure and cities, and possibly willing to escalate further, the chances of a Korea-style armistice look remote. In the absence of a fundamental change in Russia’s political system and ideology, the conflict could become frozen. That would only allow Russia to continue to launch new wars after a respite, putting the world in even greater danger.■

Feng Yujun is a professor at Peking University.

 

[may be rude]

good info

 

[ignatius]

13 minutes ago, may be rude said:

good info

 

haven't listenede yet but worth mentioning the american enterprise institute is a well known think tank not free of agendas. 

https://www.aei.org

but so is everything i guess.. but just mentioning.. not a statement about the podcast though bill crystal.. well.. sort of sane republican if there's such a thing. more or less classic conservative. certainly more reasonable than current tranche of lunatics.

edit: listening now. these nerds spend all day doing this stuff. digesting data and finding reliable data etc. i think i'd lose it. 

Edited May 8 by ignatius

[may be rude]

On 5/7/2024 at 10:51 PM, ignatius said:

bill crystal.. well.. sort of sane republican if there's such a thing. more or less classic conservative. certainly more reasonable than current tranche of lunatics.

edit: listening now. these nerds spend all day doing this stuff. digesting data and finding reliable data etc. i think i'd lose it. 

bill crystal is quite brilliant. there absolutely are sane conservatives, many openly are telling voters to vote democrat because there is an important distinction between conservatism and the national republican party. they are two distinct things. sane conservatives are where i'm finding a lot of the best takes in the last few years, like the bulwark circle. people who come from conservatism but recognize where the republican party is at right now. 

yeah in that podcast the guest is like a serious military type who seems very well-informed on the current state of the ukraine war as well as its place in the broader context of us international diplomacy and military strategy. great example of the difference between real info and pretend junk that goes around

btw bias is an extremely commonly used manipulation trick. everyone has implicit bias. it's something you can say about anything. this is how the real manipulators and deceivers are tricking people into: not following journalism. it's a nice trick because you can't prove anyone is not biased. 

one of the treacherous aspects of the modern info space is that it's not hard to slander someone or something. so, it's easy for bad actors to undermine good sources of information that inconveniently report on their bad actions. one of the root causes of problems in the world right now is that people don't know who to believe, because good sources of info are targeted by bad actors.

anyway i'm not an expert on the thinktank  and to do a thorough analysis of bias is kind of a red herring and ad hominem fallacy. either facts are well supported and analysis is accurate and insightful or they're not. i can tell you bill crystal is a great person to follow for insight these days.

at the end of the day, what you want is people who act in good faith and know how to be careful with information. people who will accept being corrected. journalism is either fact reporting or analysis. fact reporting can be verified. analysis is either insightful or it's not. it's utterly possible to get good at identifying people who are sloppy with info or who are willing spreaders of junk. but then even good people sometimes are wrong. there's that too. it's rough out there for people to figure out what's real in 2024. there are the deceivers, the marks, and the in-between. in-between is an interesting segment, careless people offering the koolaid, drinking the koolaid, and shirking responsibility for the quality of the info they share. the whole dynamic changed in the last 20 years, info previously was propagated very differently and we had arrived at some checks and balances, however imperfect, through trial and error over hundreds and thousands of years. now we need to do that again in this new more complex space and in new ways that we don't even understand yet.

one of the new social norms for this modern world is to tell people about good or bad info sources, and to share good info sources, so i appreciate you opening that up for conversation. i shared that video specifically because crystal is one of the great commentators right now and that episode has great info on the present moment of the ukraine conflict.  

Edited May 9 by may be rude

[may be rude]

 

[may be rude]

On 4/13/2024 at 10:34 PM, Walter Ostanek said:

If I may recommend the following series of fantastically researched videos that are mega worth a watch, like crack out a couple of six packs and strap in for an evening. I've had Ukes and Russians tell me that they learnt tonnes about their own history from watching these

1: The Orange and Maidan revolutions and the role played by oligarch factional bullshit and its relationship to russia[n meddling]
(That fight in the Rada halfway through this vid, I remember Tony Hawks (of Round Ireland with a Fridge fame) taking the piss out of that at the time, on his shitty show on Auntie Beeb)

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exJ024Zdzdk&rco=1

2: Girkin's fake revolution in Donbas, creeping direct russian involvement, plus good points on timescale manipulation in the media.

Fuck, I was watching all this shit on Vice during the aphex soundcloud dump, and it's been absolutely nuts to get to know people as refugees who were there through all this at the time
(also on this topic, I highly recommend reading "Hybrid Warriors" by Anna Arutunyan, who attempted to interview Girkin)
(also, I lost my job at the time because of those post-MH17 sanctions lol)

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQ_ZRBLFOXw

3: The way the "NATO started it" argument went from semi-plausible to total-wank, plus why Mearsheimer et al are cunts

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVmmASrAL-Q

4: The way Iraq, and LaRouchian horseshoe-theory conspiracy nuttery, influenced Russian and far-right US thinking, and provided a lot of the ideological backdrop to the invasion

The LaRouchian view of "colour revolutions" is absolutely central to this - Putin's utter incapability of grasping that the masses might have agency, and the LaRouchist denial of agency to the masses as a point of principle. Like, to debunk it, just talk to someone who was there FFS

Christ, I didn't realise Glazyev was a LaRouchist until I saw this

  Reveal hidden contents

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OFyn_KSy80

 

thanks for posting these. these are well done.

23:17 in "A Short History of the War in Donbas 2014 2022" is a nice tear on the military significance of modern info campaigns

obama on urkaine vs russia, around 55:20 in "The American Origins of Putin's Madness" (circa 2014), was good

 

Edited May 27 by may be rude

[chenGOD]

On 5/9/2024 at 3:07 AM, may be rude said:

bill crystal is quite brilliant

I don't know about billy crystal, but BIll Kristol is anything but brilliant. He's a warmongering chickenhawk (he was one of the strongest voices in support of the Iraq war, wanted to invade Lebanon, wanted to launch strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities etc etc),who founded PNAC, opposed Clinton's health care (which was Obamacare in the 90s and would have made a huge fucking difference to American public health), supported Sarah Palin for VP, and supported Nikki Haley.

He opposes trump because he doesn't want his version of the Republicans to lose power, but don't fucking whitewash his neoconservative bullshit as brilliance.

[usagi]

b-but what about the info???

[chenGOD]

1 hour ago, usagi said:

b-but what about the info???

Serious info from serious men for serious people who think seriously about serious info.

[usagi]

1 hour ago, chenGOD said:

Serious info from serious men for serious people who think seriously about serious info.

stop joking about this, ok. you sheeple don't realise the importance of good info. it could save civilisation.

[chenGOD]

1 hour ago, usagi said:

stop joking about this, ok. you sheeple don't realise the importance of good info. it could save civilisation.

If I may actually speak seriously, it’s funny because Kristol and Robert Kagan (brother of Fred Kagan, the other old dude in the video) put out an article or two in The Weekly Standard (a Murdoch backed publication ran by Kristol) back in 2002 about “Hussein supporting a terrorist training camp in Iraq for non-Iraqi radical Muslims”, which was not good info (it was in fact, a lie).

old news I know, but they are two old men who have had way too much influence on American foreign policy. 

[usagi]

I mean this sort of my point as well, speaking non-ironicalistically. being like "info is important!" and then just devolving at bottom into the same basic hivemind stances: Dems good, Russia bad, literally shaking rn cos Trunp said/did xyz, etc etcl. even when the source of a piece of info might be suss, simply eating it up because it fits with your lego block picture of the world.

[may be rude]

12 hours ago, chenGOD said:

I don't know about billy crystal, but BIll Kristol is anything but brilliant. He's a warmongering chickenhawk (he was one of the strongest voices in support of the Iraq war, wanted to invade Lebanon, wanted to launch strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities etc etc),who founded PNAC, opposed Clinton's health care (which was Obamacare in the 90s and would have made a huge fucking difference to American public health), supported Sarah Palin for VP, and supported Nikki Haley.

He opposes trump because he doesn't want his version of the Republicans to lose power, but don't fucking whitewash his neoconservative bullshit as brilliance.

i'm not speaking for bill kristol 20-30 years ago. rather, now.

 

for those following the horse race, and strategizing activism, the bulwark is widely regarded as one of the best places to look. kristol is one of the sharp people doing work over there. i'm we're not soul mates.  

Edited May 28 by may be rude

[ignatius]

16 minutes ago, may be rude said:

i'm not speaking for bill kristol 20-30 years ago. rather, now.

hmmm. well, he's still the same guy who did what he did and said what he said it's just that he's known more recently for being a "true conservative" in the classic sense of that.. and he doesn't like trump and has spoken out about it often.. so, he seems more reasonable than the typical foaming at the mouth wacko in the republican party.. but he's still the same guy he always was.  it doesn't mean he isn't capable of being right about something or being part of something presenting real information.  but he's not so special. he seems to support the norms of doing business in congress like things used to be but i'm sure it's possible to dig up all kinds of shit where he's hardlining the issues etc he's been around a good while and has said and written a lot in his life. 

but sure, he's embarrassed by the current state of the republican party.. unless it starts to support his ideas.. then he'd be fine w/it. 

[auxien]

anyway

looks like Russia’s maybe used chemical weapons?

& Zelensky skipped an election?

neither of these things looks v good.

not read more than headlines on either tho…anyone in the loop on that stuff?

[ignatius]

37 minutes ago, auxien said:

& Zelensky skipped an election?

kinda figured that would happen.  Martial law, which is what's happening because of russia's actions, doesn't allow for elections under Ukraine laws... or that's what wikipedia says. of course putin is saying ukraine should hold the election. he would say that. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67440357

 

[auxien]

4 hours ago, ignatius said:

kinda figured that would happen.  Martial law, which is what's happening because of russia's actions, doesn't allow for elections under Ukraine laws... or that's what wikipedia says. of course putin is saying ukraine should hold the election. he would say that. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67440357

i see, yeah it looks good that most are in line with the idea of martial law, and at least there's bits in that article acknowledging this isn't a long term solution, they need to adjust things to allow for a potential election even under martial law. i hadn't initially considered how many were still displaced outside of the country either, all certainly complicates things...but also, you also can't expect the war will be over any time soon, the way things are going. obv that's the hope, but it looks better as the leader if he's pushing for a fair election ASAP, war or not. not trying to throw any shade, but fair and regular elections are absolutely paramount to any type of a democracy, as far as i know.

[chenGOD]

6 hours ago, may be rude said:

i'm not speaking for bill kristol 20-30 years ago. rather, now.

 

for those following the horse race, and strategizing activism, the bulwark is widely regarded as one of the best places to look. kristol is one of the sharp people doing work over there. i'm we're not soul mates.  

Bill Kristol is Bill Kristol and he and his posse intentionally misinformed Americans to drag them into a war in Iraq, and there’s no reason to suspect they’ve changed given everything they’ve done over the past 20 years. 
 

if you want accurate “info” that clown school is no place to get it. 

[may be rude]

39 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

if you want accurate “info” that clown school is no place to get it. 

wrong af and i'm growing more and more disappointed with this forum

 

like do you even know anything about the bulwark?

 

 

i don't concede that he deliberately mislead people, but i'm not getting diverted onto that. the public and media were manipulated by the bush administration about iraq. kristol was possibly careless, not any more than you're being by slandering the bulwark with 0 fucking awareness of it. fuck you chen. you think i like or liked the iraq invasion? no. suppored it? no. but we're fighting american tyranny and that means forming an anti-trump coalition. righties like kristol are significant and effective members of that coalition. you're here pretending to know stuff while harming this positive action. seriously fuck you

 

Edited May 28 by may be rude

[ignatius]

21 minutes ago, may be rude said:

like do you even know anything about the bulwark?

?? were we talking about the bulwark? is bill kristol associated w/them? how many pages back was the bulwark mentioned?  i haven't watched much of their stuff. the bit i watched long ago didn't inspire me to dig in. sorta mainstreamy topic of the day talking points type coverage like cable news.  there's a handful of popular youtube channels that do that kind of thing and they often come across more or less the same w/minor differences... depending on where they fall left or right of center. 

but what are we talking about them for?