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.
To be clear, the hidden posts that debunk me are in a graveyard?
The problem with your narrative is I want ACCESS to those posts. Because the narrative you were painting doesn't fit anymore. And I want to show everyone.
My argument isn't hidden either, its that this was a covert build up into a US ally based attack on Russia. Its starting to be said in more mainstream media now. It was just outlandish sounding because of the controlled
It is? Do you have any examples?
I'm not making a statement about mainstream media. I'm saying its getting to be more normal people and indie, rather than anonymous accounts.
And then we are seeing countries starting to sanction the use of attacks on Russian territory.
This will change the moral sentiments of my peers as they didn't realize that would happen.
I'm not making a statement about mainstream media. I'm saying its getting to be more normal people and indie, rather than anonymous accounts.
And then we are seeing countries starting to sanction the use of attacks on Russian territory.
This will change the moral sentiments of my peers as they didn't realize that would happen.
I actually follow Sachs on X. Not because I agree with him, but I do think it useful to get other perspectives than what I agree with. It is just when you used the term "more mainstream," Tucker interviewing him isn't what came to mind.
And he seems to generally argue the west forced Russia's hand, by attempting to push NATO East, breaking promises they wouldn't. You seem to be taking it further and arguing Ukraine actually is the one attacking Russia.
I actually follow Sachs on X. Not because I agree with him, but I do think it useful to get other perspectives than what I agree with. It is just when you used the term "more mainstream," Tucker interviewing him isn't what came to mind.
That was my bad language. I wasn't saying 'more and more outlets that are mainstream'. I was saying, outlets that aren't as far away from the mainstream as in the past.
And he seems to generally argue the west forced Russia's hand, by attempting to push NATO East, breaking promises they wouldn't. You seem to be taking it further and arguing Ukraine actually is the one attacking Russia.
My understanding is that at this time, nations that were fueling, funding, training, strategizing, etc for ukraine, are now lining up to vocally sanction Ukraine strikes in russia. So yes my understanding is that Ukraine is now attacking russia in russia which again my peers won't really be able to resolve.
Why won't they be able to resolve this?
It can still be an unprovoked not-a-proxy-war even if Ukraine is allowed to attack the person invading them in the locations where Ukraine is being invaded from.
Can you explain how you are arriving at these conclusions without using your own conclusions as evidence for how your arrived at your conclusions?
Can you explain how you are arriving at these conclusions without using your own conclusions as evidence for how your arrived at your conclusions?
How would you help one who is observing this and failing to come to the conclusions you are coming to arrive at the conclusions that you are arriving at by oberserving these things?
In particular, how could one who is watching countries allow Ukraine to fire an extremely limited distance into Russia with their weapons (although really any distance) come to the conclusion that this is proof that this is a proxy war?
I dunno, but its just getting obvious I think. I usually think more of the long plays. Like getting caught being right over time.
Russia shouldn’t have invaded Ukraine after getting Ukraine to surrender its nukes
Fact is we let Russia do it in 2014 when they took Crimea with minimal consequences from us.
After that it was only a matter of time for them to regroup, fortify their presence there, prop up their militaries, and make us another casus belli to justify further invasions to the jb of the world (they care a lot about the narrative because support for Putin in many countries is very relevant to the success of Russian operations, same as support for Hamas is for theirs)
It started before that, but that should have been a wakeup call for sure.
Dear colleagues, please share this text on your social networks.
“Joe Biden @POTUS, your leadership at the Peace Summit is crucial for lasting peace in Europe and the future of global stability. Join your fellow world leaders in Switzerland on June 15 #PeaceNeedsJoe”
I am busy but will try to moderate this thread more closely for a while. Insinuating that BGP controls this thread in some way is false and not allowed. Saying that Russia was provoked into invading Ukraine is false and not allowed, short of some new facts or actual intelligent analysis. To JBouton more specifically, making posts which continually hint at some argument but never make the argument is akin to trolling in my view as you aren't actually advancing a discussion but instead aggravating the readers.
How would you help one who is observing this and failing to come to the conclusions you are coming to arrive at the conclusions that you are arriving at by oberserving these things?
In particular, how could one who is watching countries allow Ukraine to fire an extremely limited distance into Russia with their weapons (although really any distance) come to the conclusion that this is proof that this is a proxy war?
A limited proxy war is still a ….. proxy war
I am busy but will try to moderate this thread more closely for a while. Insinuating that BGP controls this thread in some way is false and not allowed. Saying that Russia was provoked into invading Ukraine is false and not allowed, short of some new facts or actual intelligent analysis. To JBouton more specifically, making posts which continually hint at some argument but never make the argument is akin to trolling in my view as you aren't
wait wait what? there are actual theories of what happened that aren't allowed to be discussed?
I mean I am the first to contest that theory but why is it not allowed to discuss it???
Read the entire sentence.
Ty gansta.
wait wait what? there are actual theories of what happened that aren't allowed to be discussed?
I mean I am the first to contest that theory but why is it not allowed to discuss it???
At least in the vague, conspiracy-ish ways it's been discussed over the past 1-2 days. Such things never go anywhere productive. A rational discussion that includes facts is fine.
It would be Ukraine as the proxy of the USA.
IE the USA want to have a war with Russia but use Ukraine for that.
In some semantic sense that's a reasonable assessment of why the war is still going on (no american help = war would have ended a while ago; and the USA gain if russia isn't allowed to win easily).
It's not of why the war started though
