They abstained, but the point is that they haven't supported, not that they have condemned. It was widely believed China would support Russia, so even the abstention is a bit of a kick in the teeth for Russia. I.e. it speaks to China not being "on board" - i.e. not supportive, as I take that phrase to imply. Not supporting does not mean one needs to condemn it... which is where abstention comes in.
Yeah, they did. They invaded a foreign sovereign territory. Prior to that they had annexed part of the country, and also helped prevent any peaceful solution in the eastern states by arming the insurgents, giving Russia the "false flag" pretext they jokingly tried to use as an excuse for their invasion. The Zelensky government was installed in 2019 when his party won the election. It was the first time a party in Ukraine had won an outright majority. He became President of Ukraine when he beat the incumbent Poroshenko by c.3:1 in the election, also in 2019. In 2014, the population overthrew the government of the time in what has been dubbed the "Revolution of Dignity", when the President (Yanukovych) suddenly turned the country away signing a deal forging closer ties with the West in preference of closer ties with Russia. This was, seemingly, due to overt pressure by Russia, and facilitated through the widespread corruption within the Yanukovych circle. The Ukraine parliament (and populace) had overwhelmingly supported closer ties with the West, so this sudden change infuriated the majority of the population, to the extent that the regime was eventually toppled. Elections were then held when Poroshenko's party won the most seats (but not a majority). So if you want to pass blame prior to the actual start of the invasion, you need look no further than Russia managing to "persuade" Yanukovych to suddenly reject the West. I.e. Russia once again behind what started the current war.
It's clearly photoshopped. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The lettering doesn't quite conform to the perspective of the sign: either the lettering gets slightly larger as it goes left to right, or the sign is getting slightly smaller. Rookie mistake. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Sorry but any theory that rely on giving another country veto powers over the foreign policy of other countries is bullshit. Not to mention 6 of 7 countries he mentioned were only in the Russian sphere of influence because of the ussr installing communist governments. The Czechs republic and Poland were obvious countries that would want to be a part of nato. Romania’s biggest cultural influence were Greek and German bth western powers. The baltics again have been primarily aligned with western countries. Poland Germany and Scandinavian. Ukraine is the only country he mentioned that could be considered to have a naturally be a eastern focused country is Ukraine who have very legitimate reasons for not wanting to be close to Russia. I’m sorry any argument that revolves around a claiming what the Russians wanted these countries to do is more important than what they wanted is fundamentally bullshit and just trying to paint the us poorly.
Take your pick NYT reuters yahoonews telegraphindia irishtimes and many more which does not mean that I am wholly discounting mass insanity, nor bias created shared delusions. When studying science (long ago and far away) if I could graph it, I always looked into the outliers (That's where the real fun started.)
I don't personally disagree with John Mearsheimer but you (sculptor) seem to be reading more into it than he is saying I'm guessing. It's hard to tell because you aren't saying much and are just posting videos of what John is saying. He is talking about what he would call "Great Power Politics". Most of us agree that the U.S. hasn't been particularly effective and rational in our foreign polices since WWII. We get the big things right but all the war and attempts at nation building are stupid and are tactical rather than strategic. I don't agree that what is currently happening in Ukraine isn't Russia's fault however. I do agree that NATO is being stretched thin and that is wasn't a good idea to try to push it right up to Russia's doorsteps. I do agree that it is "Great Power Politics" with great powers doing what they tend to do. In other words it reflects reality. Ukraine does have the right to become a liberal democracy and to consider itself part of Europe. NATO and the EU doesn't have to extend membership however. The idea of a neutral Ukrainian democracy unaligned much like Sweden and Finland makes more sense ultimately. It doesn't make sense to offer to start WWIII if Russia messes with any country on its borders. If that were the case we wouldn't have this current mess most likely. It is true that the U.S. wouldn't stand by and allow Russian to install a government in Mexico, for example. Or to say that if the U.S. decided to move into Mexico to deal with a drug cartel (for example) that Russia would consider it an attack on Russia. That would just be poking the tiger in the eye. Mearsheimer's school of political thought is considered to be a form of "realism" as opposed to pushing liberal democracy for all with the world living as one in peace. That's just not the observed reality and it doesn't work. We think when a country embraces capitalism and lives improve that they would turn into a liberal democracy. Lives improved in China and now China is our biggest threat because now they have the population numbers and are wealthy. Mearsheimer is just arguing that Russia isn't really a threat since it doesn't have a large economy and China does. He is arguing that we, in part, turned a nonaggressive Putin into an aggressive Putin only when we pushed NATO up to his doorsteps. I think we don't have much choice at the moment as to how we are dealing with Putin but we did mismanage it which got up to this point. The sanctions are probably necessary now but ultimately try to crush another countries economy isn't productive. If a country feels threatened that is going to take precedence over their economy. It's also similar to cornering a wild animal and then being surprised when they are violent. A more strategic approach would have been to work out issues with Russia before Crimea occurred in the first place. By working out something I mean worked out some neutrality agreement while still permitting Ukrainians to have the kind of country that they want. NATO isn't going to be helpful in this situation IMO.
Did you ever spend a moment thinking about how our little corner of the Internet could fit into international disinformation conspiracies; except the point of asking would be to remind how easily calculated bullshit finds its way into mundane chatter and everyday social media—it's one thing if Russian and Macedonian troll farms with obscure working connections to American and British political influence target large sites like Facebook and Twitter, but it's hard to imagine employed trolls coming after a place like ours. At least a couple times I referred to one of our now-departed characters as a troll farm washout, someone who just wasn't up to the job. But while it seems unlikely that some troll farm, somewhere, had a Sciforums desk or anyone assigned to our little corner, our community does not exist in some vacuum; between the spam we kill, here, and some of the stuff that comes up in blog filters, it's easy to feel paranoid. Here's an analogy: There is, within "rap", a particular movement, and most days I would say never mind. These years later, though, you might think you hear elements of it in someone's song, but it's just the next generation imitating, adopting, or transforming stylistic fragments. For instance, I never went and looked to see if a particular duo was part of the movement, but the album opened appropriately, and includes in its last song a conspicuous line that can sound like affirmation; it really could just be a stylistic thing, the use of lexicon and structure that persists beyond generations. You might actually be amazed how much of rap runs through this territory, but you hear white boys saying some of it, and they're not part of it. Similarly, it is unclear, by the time certain disinformation reaches us, whether certain people are part of something, or not. And as we know from friends and family, that someone recites the propaganda does not mean they are an active participant in some conspiracy. I can think of a longtime family friend, and as long as we have known him, he has always been a sucker for crackpottery that feeds his sense of empowerment. He's not part of some swindle. He's one of its marks. And you know the punch line: He's a white supremacist, right wing crackpot whose libertarianism has always had the argumentative effect of empowering authoritarianism. In our neighborhood, that one I called a washout was not part of something; one of our longtime neighbors, in this current thread, isn't part of something even if he can be seen praising organized propaganda. The one would be an utterly sublime performance of utter futility; and this is a particularly stupid episode of the other's long antisociality. Of that other, though, there is also a question of the signal he is boosting, because yet another person most likely isn't part of anything, either. That is to say, when Sculptor↑ boosts Scorpius↑, the more likely answer is that Sculptor is just that credulous. For surely you have noticed, at least in the time of the alt-right and pepe-chans, that cynical and even belligerent self-denigration when someone insists on saying something interminably stupid in as blindly provocative and outright offensive manner as they can muster. We've seen some of that around here, over the years; in American discourse it's not unrelated to the idea that someone is not supremacist but just making a point, so learn what irony is, or can't you take a joke, and this is all everybody else's fault, especially yours! and stuff like that. The new Poe's Law isn't simply genuine or satire; it must necessarily include bots, basket cases, and provocateurs. Consider the idea that being nearly indistinguishable from paid liars and actual non-human operatives is not so much an insult as the intention. In many cases, sure, both, but ... right, nevermind. One of the things I watch for is a context in which maybe what one says has application in a more general context, but it does not seem to suit the present moment. Like when Scorpius complains↑ about links; to the one, I should probably give him some advice about that, but, to the other, he is so incorrect that it reads like a stock line referring to disinformation filtering at large social media sites. And it's possible there is something wrong in site software, I suppose, but come on: "Since this site doesnt allow links ( CENSORSHIP ) !!!! Freedom of speach is dying in america it seems." First: We don't? Next: The site is owned by a British company, and our guiding principle in re free speech is not especially influenced by the American context. A lot of people do that, and in diverse ways. But that diversity is important. Like, I have long disputed with someone else, and every once in a while he tries to zing me, or something, and, honestly, maybe a line works on some archetype or stereotype, but for as long as he's known me, he sometimes throws down these odd lines that he already knows just don't apply. Compared to being part of something, it is more likely he just isn't thinking it through. And compared to bot spam praising the food blog I never had, no, complaining about the wrong website doesn't make Scorpius part of something. Just like the the fake med student botching a debunk isn't part of something, nor that bit lately where someone writes a string of words that almost makes a sentence and then asks the same question for the nth time despite having been answered repeatedly. Which brings us back 'round to the power of Russian trolls: No, these people aren't part of some conspiracy, but they are apparently easily influenced by unreliable ideas. Watching the American right wing, for instance, fall down the trumphole, qhole, dewormhole, and now putihole, we can easily suggest the power of Russian trolls is greatly augmented by extraordinary credulity among target demographics. And if we take a moment to consider how our little corner of the Internet might fit into international disinformation conspiracies, it is simply the reminder of just how easily some people will believe whatever two bits will charge them up with even the slightest thrill of empowerment.
I dunno, maybe I just got way too invested in The Americans (though the spell was briefly broken when they used some stupid U2 song for that train sequence in the series finale--it really ought to have been set to Peter Gabriel's "Here Comes The Flood," specifically the version from Robert Fripp's Exposure), but this: only seems unlikely as perhaps literally that. The occasional presence of paid trolls proper, not so much. Moreover, I suspect that Russian trolls have long mastered the art of the stupids, American-style. But maybe I overestimate the scope of the endeavor. Edit (again): Not to say that those who echo and amplify are in any way employed thusly, but for the initial seeding of the ideas?
Yes, for you. Grab your NBC suit and run quickly to your hole in the yard and stay there. The mods will let you know when to come back out, that's assuming you have communication down there.
I would explain, but, given you're too lazy to explain your context for the following: Why should I be arsed. Google ''arsed'' and NBC suit. Stop sniffing the molten bronze fumes.
so If I got the bunker why would I need an NBC(nuclear biological and chemical) suit? brought to you by the department of redundancy department?
You intend to stay down there for good? Extra precaution when you pop out to go shopping or movies. No, army surplus store. https://www.surplusandoutdoors.com/...ear-chemical-suit-new-and-sealed-1387488.html
Literally word for word, Schmelzer was coming here and posting precisely the same propaganda against Ukraine that Putin is now using to justify his hospital bombings before subsequently denying that they ever happened in the first place. If he wasn't being paid by some troll farm to do what he did, he darn well should have been. I figure maybe he was just an insecure guy who was jealous of other societies constantly making his cousins look like worthless neanderthals wasting the globe's oxygen supply, but I can't really say for sure.
Now that the Russian army is bogged down fighting a difficult opponent for the first time since WW2, this would be a great time for Crimeans, eastern Ukrainians, Chechens, Syrians, Georgians, Finns, Chinese, Kazakhs, Poles, Tatars, descendants of Konigsberg refugees and anyone else under Russian oppression to do their thing and start taking their lands back from Russian occupiers and colonists. If Putin would use nukes to stop any of these people, that just means he was looking for an excuse and would have used them eventually anyhow, and the appropriate response would be to launch a full scale nuclear assault on his country the moment there's any indication of him prepping his own launches. Nothing would make me personally happier than seeing the dismantlement of this abhorrent entity which was built on rape, conquest and intellectual theft for the last 1000 years, whatever the cost might be to get rid of it. Just my personal vote, I'd rather have nuclear war than more compromises with these savages.
You'd rather millions, if not billions, die, just so as not to reach a compromise??? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
