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.
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
The term 'proxy war' was coined during the Cold War, particularly in relation to Vietnam, indicating wars between client states of the US and USSR because the nuclear powers themselves could not come to blows. This isn't like that. And the USA didn't want a war with Russia. The war is entirely of Russia's making.
The term 'proxy war' was coined during the Cold War, particularly in relation to Vietnam, indicating wars between client states of the US and USSR because the nuclear powers themselves could not come to blows. This isn't like that. And the USA didn't want a war with Russia. The war is entirely of Russia's making.
Doesn't require both parties to be using proxies at all.
At least not according to Britannica definition.
Tbh using this definition the current war is 100% a proxy war.
Which doesn't have negative connotations at least not for me.
Especially because the war didn't START as a proxy war at all, which is I guess the main point of contention.
It started as an unprovoked, unilateral aggression of Russia. It would have ended quickly with a disaster on the Ukraine side.
We (USA in primis + EU) after a miracolous early defense by Ukraine (they saved Kiev by themselves , we weren't helping yet) helped stabilize, recover territory, and prolong the war.
When the USA delayed help after a while because of domestic political problems about keeping the aid spigot open, Russia gained again sensibly. Then the USA found the dignity to keep helping and here we are in a 28 months long proxy war with no end in sight
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
Ok. But I wasn't saying the BGP controls the thread. I have a history of saying the the mods control the thread in his favor. Shall I assume I'm not allowed to say that?
As for it being a nato provocation. That was Jeffery Sachs I was citing, I put up his interview and his words.
You just banned his thoughts from this thread.
The term 'proxy war' was coined during the Cold War, particularly in relation to Vietnam, indicating wars between client states of the US and USSR because the nuclear powers themselves could not come to blows. This isn't like that. And the USA didn't want a war with Russia. The war is entirely of Russia's making.
,,,
I think traditionally a proxy war can't have one country fighting for itself.
We all know the overall narrative though (albeit extremely vaguely), and it doesn't fit that either though.
Ok. But I wasn't saying the BGP controls the thread. I have a history of saying the the mods control the thread in his favor. Shall I assume I'm not allowed to say that?
As for it being a nato provocation. That was Jeffery Sachs I was citing, I put up his interview and his words.
You just banned his thoughts from this thread.
Viktor was allowed ultra pro Russia takes for months, pointlessword as well, afaik neither me nor BGP nor others pro Ukraine ever reported a post just because it was pro Russia, nor afaik was anyone banned for pro Russian content ITT, so I don't see why you think this thread was or is in any way "controlled".
The word provocation has many meanings.
In the sense of describing what you think is the mental mechanism operating in the head of Russian leadership it can make sense to claim it was provoked, same as in some sense it's "true" that a lavishly under dressed girl "provokes" a rape causally somehow.
But that doesn't mean the rape is justified in any way when it happens, it's just about going through the causal chain of events in the mind of evil people; the girl didn't ask for it, the solution isnt wearing trousers, is eliminating rapists from society.
What do you think Sachs mean then? That Russia got provoked same as a serial rapist is when he sees a nice girl with visible leg skin, or in the sense of moral justification for Russian actions?
Viktor was allowed ultra pro Russia takes for months, pointlessword as well, afaik neither me nor BGP nor others pro Ukraine ever reported a post just because it was pro Russia, nor afaik was anyone banned for pro Russian content ITT, so I don't see why you think this thread was or is in any way "controlled".
Are you referring to this thread or the deleted one?
The word provocation has many meanings.
In the sense of describing what you think is the mental mechanism operating in the head of Russian leadership it can make sense to claim it was provoked, same as in some sense it's "true" that a lavishly under dressed girl "provokes" a rape causally somehow.
But that doesn't mean the rape is justified in any way when it happens, it's just about going through the causal chain of events in the mind of ev
Try an get me banned nice try 😉
No comment.
You're first post:
Are you still holding this thread to the narrative that this isn't a proxy war for the US and the west versus Russia thru Ukraine?
You know what I think. I think you are going to be removed from this thread soon, because your higher-ups are going to find out you got everyone caught.
Just "BGP" is fine btw.
You didn't explain anything of the sort because that has not happened and is not happening now.
And if I do it "through" them then I'm still doing it. You are clearly saying in these examples what you just said you never said.
I'm definitely ready to talk about the content and move on. I'm complying with gansta.
Good read on Ukraine being allowed to fire into Russia near Kharkiv, although I don't think Russia planned to actually take Kharkiv like the article suggests:
Blinken thanked Italy for what we are doing this year with the G7 presidency in our hands, and especially for our role wrt Ukraine aid on the EU side .
It's nice to see the Biden admin is capable to work with actual rightwing allies with mutual respect for common geopolitical interests and one of the reasons I consider Biden better than Trump for the upcoming elections.
Remember when it was the g8? Why did that change?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckrr1k...
“The situation now in Russia is similar to Nineteen Eighty-Four,” librarian Alexandra Karaseva tells me. “Total control by the government, the state and the security structures.”
In Nineteen Eighty-Four, the Party manipulates people’s perception of reality, so that citizens of Oceania believe that "war is peace" and "ignorance is strength".
Russia today has a similar feel about it. From morning till night, the state media here claims that Russia’s war in Ukraine is not an invasion, but a defensive operation; that Russian soldiers are not occupiers, but liberators; that the West is waging war on Russia, when, in reality, it was the Kremlin that ordered the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
“I’ve met people who are hooked on TV and believe that Russia isn’t at war with Ukraine, and that the West was always out to destroy Russia,” Alexandra says.
“That’s like Nineteen Eighty-Four. But it’s also like Ray Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451. In that story the hero’s wife is surrounded by walls that are essentially TV screens, talking heads telling her what to do and how to interpret the world.”
Control in Russia is very far from absolute (and not for a lack of trying by Putin & his cronies). The main reason is once the population has access to unfiltered (by the gvmnt) online sources total control is basically impossible.
State media pushing a narrative aren't enough these days. Ofc some people will fall for it but that's not 1984 not even close. And the fact is we do have a country which is kinda like 1984, north korea. Russia is very very very very very far from that. China is in the middle: far more controlled than Russia but not as much as NK.
Problem for us is that on the unfiltered internet most russians can access (if they want), a lot of russian discussing media propaganda know they are lying but end up with the opposite conclusions... like they know Russia is lying about the extent of russian success in Ukraine and want more, they want tactical nuclear used on ukrainian cities and so on.
IT's not that they drink the putin koolaid, it's much worse (for us). Sensible portions of the russian population not only agree with the invasion, they actually think Putin is doing too little
It's extremely close to absolute. Even if some Russians can access outside information, it is dangerous to do so, and extremely dangerous to do anything with that information. The state media efficiently brainwashes many in Russia, especially the older generation. It's so effective that it bleeds into western discourse. It's often underestimated.
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
Russia was provoked.
The West staged a coup and they were attacking ethnic Russians.
Ban me if you'd like.
Russia was provoked.
The West staged a coup and they were attacking ethnic Russians.
Ban me if you'd like.
This is conspiracy theory nonsense. Jbouton refused to defend his conspiracy theories, but maybe you'd like to do.
Can you walk me through the sequence of events where Russia was provoked and the justified response was invading Ukraine?
The West never staged a coup, they were not attacking ethnic Russians. Can you provide evidence of this?
You have to start at fall of Berlin Wall. Check out nato and Warsaw pacts
This is conspiracy theory nonsense. Jbouton refused to defend his conspiracy theories, but maybe you'd like to do.
Can you walk me through the sequence of events where Russia was provoked and the justified response was invading Ukraine?
The West never staged a coup, they were not attacking ethnic Russians. Can you provide evidence of this?
They've been trying to start a war with Russia going back to at least the attack in South Ossetia in 2008.
Then surely you can explain how.
Can you walk me through the sequence of events where Russia was provoked and the justified response was invading Ukraine?
The West never staged a coup, they were not attacking ethnic Russians. Can you provide evidence of this?
Ok def not justified.
But provoked? Easy to argue
