Ukraine-Russia War Take 2
Here is what the preliminary take on the Ukraine thread disappearing is:
The site was hit with a massive spam attack where hundreds of spam threads were created. In the case where, for example, I see a single spam thread and delete it, that is called a soft delete, and mods can still see them but forum members cannot. Those deletion can be undone.
When a massive attack hits with hundreds of threads, an admin uses a different procedure where the hundreds of spam threads are merged and then hard deleted, where the threads are gone, and no note is left behind. As I have mentioned with my own experience of just soft deleting a large number of posts, sometimes a post or thread gets checked or merged accidentally and is deleted by mistake. Dealing with hundreds of spam threads takes a sledgehammer, not a scalpel.
It appears that our Ukraine thread may have gotten caught up in that recent net of spam threads. If so, it is likely gone for good. I cant say this for sure, and am awaiting comments from admins on this issue. Yes, this sucks. And hopefully there was some other software glitch that caused the disappearance, and we may recover it in the future.
But in the meantime, I have created this new Ukraine-Russia War thread to enable the conversation to continue. Obviously continuity with earlier discussions will be lost. There is no way around that. So as best as possible, let's pick up the conversation with recent events and go from there.
If you have any questions about this, please post them in the mod thread, not here. Let's keep this thread going with posts about the war, not the disappearance of the old thread.
Thanks.
crazy scenes out of Georgia again
just 1 more cop bro...
whats going on there?
Georgians elected a government which promised to join the EU, which over 80% of Georgians want.
After Russia invaded Ukraine, overnight the government completed changed their tune: extremely anti-western, moved to being against joining EU, began violently quelling protests, pressuring journalists, controlling media, issuing guilty verdicts to people who are clearly innocent and recently they have attempted to pass a law very similar to one passed in 2012 in Russia which forced all NGOs out of the country.
EU saw this and said Georgia should not pass this repressive law.
The vast majority of citizens do not want to pass this repressive law since they know it will destroy any attempt at democracy as there will be no transparency.
Peaceful protests result in tens of thousands of people showing up in the capital, and eventually in provinces as well.
Protestors and parliament members get beaten:
Bill gets passed anyways.
A lot of police and what people suspect are paid Russian thugs appear to start quelling the protests.
Propaganda regarding this event mirrors the Revolution of Dignity almost exactly.
People ITT say this is just democracy at work, there's no proof that Russia is coercing anybody, and Georgians should just go home and wait for the next election to fix things.
After Russia invaded Ukraine, Georgia immediately applied for EU membership (something the government was elected to do, but had delayed to play "both sides" with Russia and the EU).
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/polic...
The EU rapidly said "ok, we could put you as candidate officially if you address a couple of things we think you should address" (normal for us to make requests to join our club).
Georgia started addressing those priorities as outlined by the EU, and was given candidate status at the end of 2023.
Georgia now passed the law which the EU dislikes, and we will see the effects of this on it's candidate status.
But it's democracy all the way, whether any one of us likes what is passed by parliament or not. And it's democracy even if foreigners are limited in the influence they can finance in a country. Even if it was absolutely illegal for foreign entities to finance Georgian associations, that would still be democratic. There is no "right to get foreign financing" in the universal declaration of human rights.
What motivation do you think these parliament members have for passing such a wildly unpopular bill?
What motivation do you think these parliament members have for passing such a wildly unpopular bill?
as before, the "play both sides" idea.
They are trying to appease EU concerns on one hand, and to delay/prevent becoming the next Ukraine. They don't want to end up either like Ukraine or Belarus. And they want to see what's going to happen in Moldova which is very probably the next hot spot.
Are they correct in doing so this way ? no idea. Do i understand they are between a rock and a hard place? yes, absolutely. They know having the EU on your side doesn't mean you are safe (until you are by joining). They know the process is very long and Russia has all the time in the world to just crush them if they start the process nilly willy. They also know Hungary and Slovakia (and maybe others in the future) can prolong the process a lot if not veto their entrance outright at some point down the line.
Would you gamble your citizens lives "doing the right thing" of basically following the EU script, while at any time Russia can just bomb you to death? maybe you would and maybe it would be the right thing.
But they decided not to so while they kept executing on the EU priorities, they also tried to pass something that Russia likes (and which btw isn't anti-democratic in the sense you want it to be).
Big focal point will be october elections, how they are conducted and the results, and if there is passage of power, how it ends up.
Why does Russia like this bill?
Is "bombing to death" a form of coercion?
Because it reduces the cultural influence of what Russia perceives to be an actual assault to its values, of some western entities.
While election monitors, actual pro-transparency institutions and so on can still operate in the clear with nothing to fear, pro LGBTQ lobbies , pro immigration lobbies and the like can't with this bill passed, as a big part of what they do is they secretly buy the influence of otherwise unsuspectable normal people.
And now if they want to do so it will all be tracked down to the last dollar or euro cent. So (example) Soros funds can't anymore end up in the pocket of some institutions linked to some political parties without everyone knowing that's the case, to promote trans-ness or immigration from muslim countries and what not.
If you remember a similar thing happened in Hungary a while ago. And while the EU found the hungarian laws in violation of EU rules (especially when it treated intra-EU donations as foreign), the whole idea was very similar: stopping foreign money to fund culturally obscene (for the government) propaganda.
Russia isn't only about the actual physical attempt of an "empire", it's also about cultural influence. So Georgia bet here is something like "we want to join the EU for the money, the free trade, the movement of people and so on, but we aren't radical cultural leftists". Will it work? no idea.
But what Georgia is trying to signal to Russia is "our intent is to join the EU and become another Hungary, a somewhat russian-leaning, or at least not russian-hating, part of the EU".
Which Russia could actually agree with, maybe.
Because it reduces the cultural influence of what Russia perceives to be an actual assault to its values, of some western entities.
This means democracy.
While election monitors, actual pro-transparency institutions and so on can still operate in the clear with nothing to fear, pro LGBTQ lobbies , pro immigration lobbies and the like can't with this bill passed, as a big part of what they do is they secretly buy the influence of otherwise unsuspectable normal people.
This is not true, see the examples above. Any document must be handed over.
And now if they want to do so it will all be tracked down to the last dollar or euro cent. So (example) Soros funds can't anymore end up in the pocket of some institutions linked to some political parties without everyone knowing that's the case, to promote trans-ness or immigration from muslim countries and what not.
This is completely backward. Since the NGOs that track this thing will not be functioning in Georgia, what you are claiming this bill is fighting is far more likely to happen.
If you remember a similar thing happened in Hungary a while ago. And while the EU found the hungarian laws in violation of EU rules (especially when it treated intra-EU donations as foreign), the whole idea was very similar: stopping foreign money to fund culturally obscene (for the government) propaganda.
Russia isn't only about the actual physical attempt of an "empire", it's also about cultural influence. So Georgia bet here is something like "we want to join the EU for the money, the free trade, the movement of people and so on, but we aren't radical cultural leftists". Will it work? no idea.
But what Georgia is trying to signal to Russia is "our intent is to join the EU and become another Hungary, a somewhat russian-leaning, or at least not russian-hating, part of the EU".
Which Russia could actually agree with, maybe.
I find this to be an extremely optimistic view, and also a wildly unpopular view in Georgia apparently. I'd say we will see at election time, but unfortunately we won't.
A lingering threat of physical violence can be considered maybe a form of coercion, but also a lingering massive payout of many billions of euros can
In other words, Russia has coerced Georgia's parliament to enact a bill which Russia previously passed to end transparency, threatening Georgia's democracy.
Your view of what EU is saying/doing is not correct.
Because it reduces the cultural influence of what Russia perceives to be an actual assault to its values, of some western entities.
While election monitors, actual pro-transparency institutions and so on can still operate in the clear with nothing to fear, pro LGBTQ lobbies , pro immigration lobbies and the like can't with this bill passed, as a big part of what they do is they secretly buy the influence of otherwise unsuspectable normal peo
Do svidaniya.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/05/2...
Russian Neo-Nazis Participate in ‘Denazifying’ Ukraine – Der Spiegel
At least two neo-Nazi groups are fighting for Russian forces in Ukraine, throwing into question Moscow’s claims of “denazifying” its neighbor, German weekly Der Spiegel reported Sunday, citing a confidential intelligence report.
The document shared with German ministries by the BND intelligence service does not provide the exact number of far-right fighters, but identifies them as the Russian Imperial Legion and Rusich groups.
Their involvement “makes the ostensible reason for war, the so-called ‘denazification’ of Ukraine, absurd,” BND is quoted as saying.
Both groups are thought to have participated in the war between Moscow-backed, pro-Russian separatists and Kyiv that broke out in eastern Ukraine in 2014. Several reports have linked Rusich with Wagner, a shadowy, Kremlin-linked private military company.
I think we will be seeing the first F-16s sometime in June.
transparency is bad bc Putin.
Orwellian.
As it pertains to this discussion, transparency refers to openness and accountability to the public. A law designed to give the government access to any private file, and allow any government surveillance, is not transparency; it is the direct opposite of transparency. Don't take my word for it though, read the articles by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
Orwellian surveillance states are not transparent.
now it would be a good time to point out that presidential veto should require supermajorities to be overcome by parliament, the Georgia constitution only requires another simple majority vote (like the Italian one)
It is pretty much a footnote in the whole affair: on top of the vast majority of the citizens opposing the bill, the president also opposed it.
It is pretty much a footnote in the whole affair: on top of the vast majority of the citizens opposing the bill, the president also opposed it.
it isn't. it's part of core checks and balances and if passing over the veto required a supermajority, it couldn't happen currently.
Georgia government only has 84/150 MPs backing it. Pretty far from the typical 2/3 veto proof majority requirement of many American states, and for federal legislation.
this would be a stereotypical case of elected, legitimate governments with fairly narrow majorities trying something people dislike a lot, and failing because of checks and balances, in a mature democracy.
the takeaway for me isn't to claim the outcome isn't democratic, is how to write democratic rules better to achieve desired outcomes and/or avoid bad outcomes
lol she was literally a foreign agent
Is this what I think it is?
Saw an Israeli flag tho
where is that?
Las Begas at a rave
What do you think it is?
