From February, before the war:

Scandals and tolerance for corruption have chipped away at Mr. Zelensky’s popularity. Sixty-two percent of Ukrainians don’t want him to run for re-election, and if an election were held today, he’d garner about 25 percent of the vote — down from the 30 percent he easily won in the first round of the 2019 election. He’d still be likely to win, but the historic 73 percent he scored in the second round feels like a distant memory.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/21/opinion/ukraine-russia-zelensky-putin.html

This is common knowledge to anyone who did not suddenly get propagandized by the largest propaganda machine on Earth to love someone they had never heard of before in their life, overnight.

--

And of course, Americans, who are incapable of approaching politics in any way that does not involve celebritydom, are head-over-heels for the man. And considering the American electorate voted for a fucking cockroach in a coat to be their president, their electoral opinions on anything whatsoever are about as much worth as a shit smear on the bathroom wall, except to the extent that everyone else has to deal with the noxious, deadly fallout.

...sorry, who was the target again? — Isaac

The 99%

Lmao I was just reminded that the US unilaterally pulled out of the UNHR council back in 2018 only to have rejoined it again in Janurary of this year.

We have schizophrenia.

What, it's funny. They made such a big deal of suspending Russia.

What, it's funny. They made such a big deal of suspending Russia. — StreetlightX

I know. Trump didn't care about human rights. That's why it's good to have actual laws.

Agreed. Which makes him continuous with every other American president in history.

Just like Slobodan Milosevic was the protector of all Serbs in all of the former Yugoslav Republics. Now this actually would be totally natural, likely any country would hold some importance to people of it's own ethnicity. However with Russia, this is actively done by the intelligence services and used very aggressively. In a similar fashion as Milosevic protected the Serbs. — ssu

Please don't get met started on the Serbs and Kosovo. https://www.counterpunch.org/2008/02/18/nato-s-kosovo-colony/

Milosevic in 1987:

“we should not allow the misfortunes of people to be exploited by nationalists, whom every honest person must combat. We must not divide people between Serbs and Albanians, but rather we should separate, on the one hand, decent people who struggle for brotherhood, unity and ethnic equality, and, on the other hand, counter-revolutionaries and nationalists.

History is a tricky thing. The Serbs weren't the devils the West has ended up making them out to be.

And how conveniently you totally forget, likely on purpose, that the whole 2014 crisis happened because of a trade deal between EU and Ukraine and the part that EU played in this. Even the student demonstrations were called EuroMaidan with enthusiastic waving of EU flags (which I guess I've rarely if never seen in the EU itself). Hence it wasn't just about the alignment towards NATO, it was also the alignment towards the EU. — ssu

You're replying to a comment that specifically mentions that situtation. And of course I hadn't forgotten, it just doesn't change my view. That trade deal was rejected by the elected government in favour of a deal with the Russians, which the West then took as a good reason to foment demonstration by working closely together with Nazi-sympathisers and racist nationalists, which gave the perfect excuse for Putin to annex Crimea.

I suppose that if the US could've managed this without involving the Nazis and nationalists, things might have been different as the local support in Crimea might have been significantly lower.

So again, I think these issues are ancillary which is why I asked when was it said and who was it said to. I think it's analysing what is "sold" and who it's sold to goes a long way to telling us what's really at stake. As far as I know the artificiality and dreams of empire are recent and mostly domestic. If Putin had been waxing lyrical about the Russian empire since he came into power, I'd assess it differently. Now I just don't put much weight on it. He could have changed and this might be a big thing now but I see no indication in other facts, other than his speeches, that this is the case. You see this war as proof of it, I think the war can be sufficiently explained by different causes - mainly NATO expansion and then specifically this in the NATO Brussels Communiqué of 2021 "We reiterate the decision made at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine will become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (MAP) as an integral part of the process".

I think there's a bigger problem here for the EU by the way. Aside from all the negative effects the sanctions have on Europe as well, the lessened security, we've just been pushed even more firmly into the US' sphere of influence. Considering the US' belligerence I don't feel comfortable being its ally. There will be a reckoning and we the Netherlands might be pulled along with it. Much how they felt obligated to help in Afghanistan and Iraq. Whether its Russia or hina, I'd rather not get involved.

According to the poll, Zelensky is the first choice of fifty-one per cent of Americans, followed by President Biden at twenty-three per cent, Donald J. Trump at seventeen per cent, and Senator Josh Hawley at half of one per cent. — Olivier5

Possibly an April Fools joke? I had no idea that the American public was so.. how shall I put it .. idealistic.

The reasons for pulling out of the UNHRC are fully worth quoting here:

The US has pulled out of the United Nations Human Rights Council, calling it a "cesspool of political bias".

Nikki Haley, the US envoy to the UN, said it was a "hypocritical" body that "makes a mockery of human rights".

https://www.bbc.com/news/44537372

Another head-spinning thought the freedomland.

...but that's not the point. The point is, I haven't just claimed you did denounce NATO as a motive. — Isaac

NATO enlargement is simply a side issue here — ssu

Side issue is still an issue.

Thanks, interesting. Not a major plunge in popularity from what I can tell, but I don't have a NYT subscription.

https://archive.ph/onoLL

Use this site for most paywalls.

Agreed. Which makes him continuous with every other American president in history. — StreetlightX

Not really.

History is a tricky thing. The Serbs weren't the devils the West has ended up making them out to be. — Benkei

And do notice that 1987 Milosevic changed from the Titoist Communist line to the nationalist.

Also do note that he was deposed by an opposition openly supported by the US and specifically it's State Department ...and still the Serbs aren't with the West. The Serbian opposition gladly took the support of the US, but the country didn't go along with the US afterwards. Just shows when you bomb a country, it won't be your friend even if there is regime change. This shows agency of the individual people, and that they aren't just mindless pawns of the Great Powers. Agency which many don't give to the Ukrainians themselves here.

I suppose that if the US could've managed this without involving the Nazis and nationalists, things might have been different as the local support in Crimea might have been significantly lower. — Benkei

In this thread I've earlier discussed the emergence of the extreme-right in Ukraine earlier, which happened actually prior to the 2014 revolution. And what is again dismissed is that after elections the far right lost. But that doesn't seem to matter. Some people go with the line of Putin that nazis have a say in present Zelensky lead administration. It's similar to accusing the Biden administration supporting neonazis because the previous president said good things about them (or declined to condemn them).

If Putin had been waxing lyrical about the Russian empire since he came into power, I'd assess it differently. Now I just don't put much weight on it. — Benkei

Even with Chechnya, Putin did start with differently: the focus was on stability and economic prosperity. That economic growth happened when oil prices went up. But what Putin failed in was to reorganize the economy and create genuine new growth. Coming from the class of robbers and putting his own people into positions of wealth and power didn't help when something new ought to have been done.

Hence I think his "imperial ambitions" started to gain track when the economy wasn't so fine anymore. When he couldn't provide more prosperity, then he started to provide more glory. And starting wars has always worked for him.

When you look at Putin's comments from when he rose to power and now, the rhetoric is amazingly different.

In this thread I've earlier discussed the emergence of the extreme-right in Ukraine earlier, which happened actually prior to the 2014 revolution. And what is again dismissed is that after elections the far right lost. But that doesn't seem to matter. Some people go with the line of Putin that nazis have a say in present Zelensky lead administration. It's similar to accusing the Biden administration supporting neonazis because the previous president said good things about them (or declined to condemn them). — ssu

It's not dismissed but also not relevant as to when Putin annexed Crimea. Those elections were afterwards and the damage of fraternising with nationalist and neo-Nazis was already done; there was genuine worry in Crimea as Russians weren't Ukrainians in the eyes of the nationalist. And in a sense, there's still a Nazi problem; it doesn't seem like a good idea to arm them even if they like to position themselves as a "Christian taliban" to fight against the Russian invaders.

Even with Chechnya, Putin did start with differently: the focus was on stability and economic prosperity. That economic growth happened when oil prices went up. But what Putin failed in was to reorganize the economy and create genuine new growth. Coming from the class of robbers and putting his own people into positions of wealth and power didn't help when something new ought to have been done.

Hence I think his "imperial ambitions" started to gain track when the economy wasn't so fine anymore. When he couldn't provide more prosperity, then he started to provide more glory. And starting wars has always worked for him.

When you look at Putin's comments from when he rose to power and now, the rhetoric is amazingly different. — ssu

I agree domestic policy has been mostly absent or to the extent there was a policy it was counterproductive. What else is new though? The US is run by oligarchs as well, which is why it's so important Europe becomes a real alternative with multi-party representation instead of an effective lapdog for US foreign policy.

Thanks, nice.

The conclusion of the article:

Yet Mr. Zelensky’s behavior, odd to the point of erratic, obscures a truth: He has no good options. On the one hand, any concession to Russia, particularly over the conflict in eastern Ukraine, would likely bring hundreds of thousands of people to the streets — threatening him with the fate of Viktor Yanukovych, the president overthrown by a revolution in 2014. Any decisive move against Russia, on the other hand, risks giving the Kremlin a pretext for a deadly invasion.

The show must go on, of course. The crisis continues. But the president’s performance — strained, awkward, often inappropriate — is hardly helping.

Ha, where is the fabled 'agency' of the Ukrainians now?

--

Among the saddest things about this war is that those who champion the independence of Ukraine - without addressing the conditions of that independence in the slightest - are simply championing for the right of Ukraine to self-determine the conditions of its own exploitation. Which is - true - marginally better than having those exploitative conditions dictated from Moscow:

Q: We have learned that the Ukrainian government, in the name of a state of emergency and using martial law, has enacted a series of laws that severely restrict employees' rights. Employers can increase the working week from 40 to 60 hours, shorten vacations or cancel extra vacation days. Are you afraid that all this will serve as a basis for a more radical transformation of labour law and trade unions in the name of war?

A: Prior to the war, Ukraine already had a high unemployment rate floating around 10%, with a labour force participation rate of 65% in 2021. The issues of a highly uncertain future raised by the heavy student presence at Euromaidan have only been exacerbated due to further gutting of the universities, among many other public sector austerity programs. High informal employment rates for all age groups and non-existent pensions meant there was no way out of poverty for most of the population. In a stagnating and hopeless country, you knew your plans wouldn’t materialise, but they collapsed slowly and allowed you to pretend there were options and guarantees. War, however, completely disorients you, making you feel utterly powerless as you are thrown into a sea of new incalculable probabilities, with everything lost and everyone confused. A month in, I am still not sure whether I’ll ever be able to speak of the “after” of this war. It is future-destroying, not only by burning up precious stock market options and millions of careers but on a cosmological scale too. As comrades are swept into the ranks of another patriotic army, not only overwhelmed by the tradition of dead generations but celebrating its repetition, the possibility of liberation seems foreclosed.

That's why I am afraid the “temporary” labour laws have merely formalised already-existing practices. Nobody cares much about proper legal conduct as millions have left their homes and employers have suspended pay. The system was slightly disrupted, but quickly adjusted itself and asserted its reign once again: refugees are trying to find any work whatsoever, and exploitation limits can be dispensed with in such demanding times. It’s difficult to speak to the possibility of these restrictions continuing after the war. Still, it wouldn’t be surprising, considering the need to make the trickle of foreign investment find profitable industries. The unions are unlikely to oppose these laws, as there is almost no independent trade union movement in Ukraine, and official post-Soviet organisations are nothing but hollowed-out conservative structures. There haven’t been any strikes, even during the 2014 uprising, and largely patriotic unions are unlikely to undermine the nation’s war efforts.

This is the wonderful democracy that Zelensky presided over and for which Westerners swoon for - retroactively. At best the Russians have made a hopeless future even more so.

https://endnotes.org.uk/other_texts/en/andrew-letters-from-ukraine-part-3

The show must go on, of course. The crisis continues. But the president’s performance — strained, awkward, often inappropriate — is hardly helping.

They have a way with words. If any of the saner minds on this forum had been running Ukraine we probably would not have had a war at all. Half of us would have agreed to some sort of peace terms, the other half would have... what? Any takers?

The only thing that would have got destroyed would be the news subscriptions.

Current events remind me of the Dark Side of the Force (referenced before in the video clip of the princess with the bad hairdo)

The central tradition of mainline economics deals with only one way of making a living: namely, producing useful goods and services. But there is another way of getting ahead-- through conflict or the "dark side"--that is by appropriating what others have produced. Logically parallel or military aggression and resistance, the dark side includes nonmilitary activities such as litigation, strikes and lockouts, takeover contests, and bureaucratic back-biting struggles. This volume brings the analysis of conflict into the mainstream of economics. Part I explores the causes, conduct, and consequences of conflict as an economic activity. Part II delves more deeply into the evolutionary sources of our capacities, physical and mental, for both conflict and cooperation.

https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Side-Force-Economic-Foundations/dp/0521009170

Once you start on the dark path, forever will it dominant your destiny, consume you it will.'''' -Jedi Master Yoda

where is the fabled 'agency' of the Ukrainians now? — StreetlightX

At the end of a gun. The war has changed everything.

Possibly an April Fools joke? — FreeEmotion

It's a satirical piece.

At the end of a gun. — Olivier5

Funny, we were talking pre-invasion. Very naughty of you, invoking agency as and when it suits you.

we were talking pre-invasion. Very naughty of you — StreetlightX

Don't be so judgmental. You asked:

where is the fabled 'agency' of the Ukrainians now? — StreetlightX

OK Imma put that one down to miscommunication because I am lovely and charitable.

The machinery is operating :fire:

Mar 6, 2022 · Patriarchal Sermon on Cheesefare Week after the Liturgy at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior (Russian Orthodox Church, in Russian)

Mar 7, 2022 · Russian Orthodox Church Leader Blames Invasion on Ukraine's 'Gay Pride' (Newsweek)

Mar 8, 2022 · Moscow patriarch stokes Orthodox tensions with war remarks (ABC News)

Mar 9, 2022 · Blaming the Ukraine Invasion on … the Gays? (The Bulwark)

How many macho gays have started wars? I'm taking a closer look:



:chin: hmmm...

I think at least one.

:kiss:

What a wonderful army Russia has that writes "For the children" on the side of their missiles hitting civilians at a train station. And with the constant flow of reports on the war crimes and the evidence piling up. Well, there seem to be some lovely people in that army who really care about the Ukrainians.

I think I'm moving away from the idea that these soldiers don't know what they're doing in Ukraine, I mean, some obviously don't, but there seem to be a large part of them acting out pure terror and destruction. Mass murdering state-funded psychopaths by another psychopath. Taking out all of them is not justice, revenge, or some blood lust, but simply that such depraved people in such a massive destructive force cannot be allowed to exist as a risk. I understand how that Russian soldier felt while driving over his commander, I hope everyone drives over these monsters.

Asking price - Half a milion

Yes, one is less likely to indiscriminately bomb the second house.