I think there are some that do support Putin and do think it's time to "make Russia Great again". Or as it's put: "Defend Fortress Russia from the evil West". Just as there are those who oppose his policies.when the story is that this is "Putin's war" that no one in autocratic dictatorship Russia actually supports? :chin: — Tzeentch
Obviously the practical implementation of this is a whole other story. The European Union is a non-democratic abomination that needs to be replaced with something that is actually functional before this could ever happen, but lets leave that aside for now. — Tzeentch
Stupidity has always been dangerous — Wolfgang
↪neomac
So you agree that a European security cooperation that does not involve primarily the United States and the United Kingdom would be beneficial to Europe, and it's just the practical aspects that you are worried about? — Tzeentch
Russia was favored to win quickly. A year later, he is betting on the opposite—to wage a long war against Ukraine, exploiting the advantages that Russia’s size, resilient economy, and relative security from retaliation afford him. Victory on the battlefield has proved elusive. A counteroffensive in Donbas, combined with the ongoing campaign of terror against Ukrainian cities and towns and destruction of the country’s infrastructure, is his next best options.
In recent weeks, Russia has likely changed its approach again. Its campaign now likely primarily seeks to degrade the Ukrainian military, rather than being focused on seizing substantial new territory.
The Russian leadership is likely pursuing a long-term operation where they bank that Russia’s advantages in population and resources will eventually exhaust Ukraine.
So Russia's strategy is that a sufficient supply of bodies (Russian bodies) will eventually exhaust Ukraine's supply of shells. :sad: — Sir Balthazar Wobbly · Feb 24, 2023
At some point, he's going to have to face up to increasing costs as well, in coffins coming home to some of the poorest parts of Russia because many of the conscripts, you know, who are being thrown as cannon fodder in the front and the Donbas as well, come from Dagestan and Buryatia, the poorest parts of Russia as well.
Seems a stretch that the current situation was Putin's plan all along. (?) — jorndoe
But the question I have for you, is, are you supporting Putin's war? — Wayfarer
Because it seems to me, that you're basically repeating Russian propoganda. — Wayfarer
the price of ignorance is paid every day by the young men dying on the frontline, and civilians suffering under the war. — Tzeentch
Assuming that's true, and I suspect that it is (and probably the reason why the order of battle remains undisclosed), this means the defense of Kiev was a successful Russian attempt at diverting forces away from the east. — Tzeentch
If we are to believe Hersh's sources, it turns out the idea of the advance on Kiev being a binding operation and not an attempt at capturing and occupying Kiev - an idea that I have posited multiple times in this thread - wasn't so far-fetched after all. In fact, it might've been exactly what took place. — Tzeentch
In other words, the western media spin was pure bullshit to influence the public perception of Ukraine's chances in this war.
Let me end by saying, I find no pleasure in these hard facts. — Tzeentch
Couldn't be further from the truth. I don't take Scott Ritter very seriously. — Tzeentch
Do you? — Tzeentch
Then which other expert is explicitly supporting the "diversion hypothesis" as you do? — neomac
He also gave the figure of 60,000 Ukrainian defenders, which supports the hypothesis. — Tzeentch
Yet he doesn't think... — neomac
New intelligence reviewed by U.S. officials suggests that a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines last year, a step toward determining responsibility for an act of sabotage that has confounded investigators on both sides of the Atlantic for months.
U.S. officials said that they had no evidence President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine or his top lieutenants were involved in the operation, or that the perpetrators were acting at the direction of any Ukrainian government officials.
He goes around proclaiming Putin to be a great man and Russia being "on the right side of history", etc. I don't trust such a person's judgement. If you do, good for you. — Tzeentch
When peace talks were started in late March, that should have been the end of the war. — Tzeentch
I don't take Scott Ritter very seriously. — Tzeentch
Wouldn't have ended (supposed) Putinian NATO-phobia. Their arguments against NATO expansion would apply to the remaining Ukraine just the same. — jorndoe
The Ukrainians wouldn't have it, ... — jorndoe
... all the while Putin being hailed/encouraged as a victorious leader at home. — jorndoe
Such flirting with complicity might have consequences, ... — jorndoe
I don't take Scott Ritter very seriously. — Tzeentch
Yudin, then? Others? (Just those assigning specific blame...?) — jorndoe
U.S. officials suggests...
U.S. officials said...
U.S. officials said...
U.S. officials declined to disclose the nature of the intelligence...
U.S. officials say...
U.S. officials said...
U.S. officials described...
U.S. officials have not stated...
U.S. officials who have reviewed the new intelligence said...
Officials said...
... officials said...
After sorting and categorizing tens of thousands of data points and poring over hundreds of individual articles, blog posts and columns, I can only say with high confidence that the number of anonymous-source stories published by the Times in 2015 approached 6,000, out of roughly 88,000 individual articles, blog posts and columns from both the paper and wire services. (To view the full set of Times-authored anonymous-source stories for 2015, plus news desk and front-page analysis as well as a breakdown of bylines, go to this public Google Doc.) But I’m convinced the exact number is unknown by any mere mortal (or editor on Eighth Avenue). — https://fair.org/home/journalisms-dark-matter/
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.