I know this is a Russian invades thread but if you want to get a little bit of a different, global perspective on some of the dynamics, Putin's thinking, China's thinking etc, than I have a look at these interviews with Russian/American journalist Julia Ioffe. She's considered by many to be a Putin/Kremlin expert and she always does a fascinating job of putting things into perspective that is very easy to understand.
It wasn't that long ago that what happened in Washington mattered in Moscow and what happened in Moscow, really mattered in Washington. They were equal power centers. After the Soviet Union, that changed. Putin is looking to bring it back but so is China and India, they are looking at alliances.
We in the west need to make sure that we don't think we have a monopoly on power for generations and generations cause things change and things change rapidly.
Modern day China and it's economic expansion and influence has really only happened in the last 50 years with a HUGE portion of that in the last 30. What will the next 30 years bring? Will America and the west be able to constantly call the shots to their advantage?
While America is in constant battle within it's own boarders about literally everything. Left vs right, LGBTQ, Race/Gender/ Rich/Poor etc, the other large economic and military powers are not having the same discussions. There isn't too much worry about some of those things , right or wrong, they are focused on other things.
As for Julia Ioffee, I highly recommend these PBS Frontline interviews over the years regarding everything from election interference, Putin and 5 US Presidents, Russian invasion and much much more. I can't emphasize this enough, they are great!
Can't remember which interview it was in those links, but she said something like - People don't understand Russian people and culture. They are shocked when they behave the way they do, because physically they look like us and it's shocking when people who look like us step out of bounds. If they were purple skinned covered in dots, people could easily understand why they think and act differently than us and it would make sense. Instead, they have many physical features that we have, so it makes it harder to understand why they are the way they are.
I'm paraphrasing what she said, but that always stuck with me. Makes sense given that for the most part, most Westerns simply don't understand most aspects of russian culture or mentality so it makes it extra shocking when they do the things they do. Lots of "aren't all 'white' people supposed to think like us?".
She really is a great source of information and a valuable resource. Her interviews are very interesting and worth watching if you want to really understand russian psyche and why their has been such failure over the years trying to integrate them into our "world". Because simply, we don't understand how they think and keep trying to relate them to our own world view.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
Can't remember which interview it was in those links, but she said something like - People don't understand Russian people and culture. They are shocked when they behave the way they do, because physically they look like us and it's shocking when people who look like us step out of bounds. If they were purple skinned covered in dots, people could easily understand why they think and act differently than us and it would make sense. Instead, they have many physical features that we have, so it makes it harder to understand why they are the way they are.
I'm paraphrasing what she said, but that always stuck with me. Makes sense given that for the most part, most Westerns simply don't understand most aspects of russian culture or mentality so it makes it extra shocking when they do the things they do. Lots of "aren't all 'white' people supposed to think like us?".
She really is a great source of information and a valuable resource. Her interviews are very interesting and worth watching if you want to really understand russian psyche and why their has been such failure over the years trying to integrate them into our "world". Because simply, we don't understand how they think and keep trying to relate them to our own world view.
Good point. It's a big blind spot in western thinking; that people of other places and cultures should, and do, want the same things we want and value the same things. Our presumption that everyone in the world wants western-style democracy is the height of arrogance.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzzy14 For This Useful Post:
I don't like being on the same side of an argument as Ben but, here we are.
The problem with Ben’s position is that if you show a position where you concede land you incentivize Russia to continue fighting to improve that concession. So the official position needs to be fund to the end to avoid Russia trying to run out the clock.
But in general the concept is correct.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
The problem with Ben’s position is that if you show a position where you concede land you incentivize Russia to continue fighting to improve that concession. So the official position needs to be fund to the end to avoid Russia trying to run out the clock.
But in general the concept is correct.
If part of the deal is Ukraine becomes part of Nato - then its semi-reasonable since Russia isn't going to go after a Nato country. Of course US may not agree to that part either.
The problem with Ben’s position is that if you show a position where you concede land you incentivize Russia to continue fighting to improve that concession. So the official position needs to be fund to the end to avoid Russia trying to run out the clock.
But in general the concept is correct.
Would conceding land after all this really incentivize Russia to fight again? Russia had de facto control over the Donetsk before this all began. Russia literally had puppet governments controlling the Eastern portions of Ukraine.
Conceding land may be the only way to placate Russia and convince them they have saved face.
As for Shapiro himself, he can actually be quite a logical person, but be becomes totally logic-blind to some topics. If he'd just acknowledge that you can live your life a different way than him and still be successful and happy, he'd be a lot better off.
The Following User Says Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
Would conceding land after all this really incentivize Russia to fight again? Russia had de facto control over the Donetsk before this all began. Russia literally had puppet governments controlling the Eastern portions of Ukraine.
Conceding land may be the only way to placate Russia and convince them they have saved face.
It would probably allow Putin to declare victory within Russia, and allow him to maintain power, whereas a convincing loss (with no Ukrainian territory) would leave his regime in a much more precarious state.
So its not just about the land, its about the narrative of 'who won', which is pretty important.
Would conceding land after all this really incentivize Russia to fight again? Russia had de facto control over the Donetsk before this all began. Russia literally had puppet governments controlling the Eastern portions of Ukraine.
Conceding land may be the only way to placate Russia and convince them they have saved face.
As for Shapiro himself, he can actually be quite a logical person, but be becomes totally logic-blind to some topics. If he'd just acknowledge that you can live your life a different way than him and still be successful and happy, he'd be a lot better off.
Would conceding land after all this really incentivize Russia to fight again? Yes. You answered your question in the next sentence.
What happened after they invaded Georgia? Moldova? This is already the result of invading Ukraine the first time.
The better question would be: How would conceding territory stop Putin's expansionist aggression?
The Following User Says Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
It would probably allow Putin to declare victory within Russia, and allow him to maintain power, whereas a convincing loss (with no Ukrainian territory) would leave his regime in a much more precarious state.
So its not just about the land, its about the narrative of 'who won', which is pretty important.
For this to end. Russia likely needs to save face. Once again, Russia was already in control much of the east of the country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
Would conceding land after all this really incentivize Russia to fight again? Yes. You answered your question in the next sentence.
What happened after they invaded Georgia? Moldova? This is already the result of invading Ukraine the first time.
The better question would be: How would conceding territory stop Putin's expansionist aggression?
The other wars were nothing like this one. Russia has been pummeled and they've ran through their weapons storages and goodwill. I can't imagine another Russian leader wanting to replicate what happened in Ukraine. Except next time, without weapon stores to draw on, without most of their trained troops, and likely without support from Wagner.
Russia, for propaganda purposes, can call a withdrawal a win all they want, but it's a clear loss.
The Following User Says Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
For this to end. Russia likely needs to save face. Once again, Russia was already in control much of the east of the country.
The other wars were nothing like this one. Russia has been pummeled and they've ran through their weapons storages and goodwill. I can't imagine another Russian leader wanting to replicate what happened in Ukraine. Except next time, without weapon stores to draw on, without most of their trained troops, and likely without support from Wagner.
Russia, for propaganda purposes, can call a withdrawal a win all they want, but it's a clear loss.
Thing is for this to end for Ukraine from a security and economic standpoint, there almost can't be any loss of territory and Crimea cannot remain within Russian control. Ukraine's economic activity if Crimea were to maintain control of Crimea would be severely limited. From Crimea, Russia can threaten the entire Ukrainian East and temporarily occupied areas, this will completely hamper the economic rebuild and business investment in those areas, as many in the business community have already stated, making it easier Russia to continue the narrative those areas are ethnically Russian, despite having previously displaced the bulk of Ukrainians from those regions. This isn't to mention that Ukraine's entire coastline will be constantly under threat of a future maritime blockade by Russian naval forces in any type of economic dispute Russia would engineer.
This is just from an economic standpoint. From a military standpoint, Russia controlling Crimea in any way basically puts the entire East of Ukraine in jeopardy and the millions of Ukrainians there, also hampering rebuild and economic activity. So... the only lasting peace in which Ukraine can feasibly be prosperous enough to rebuild would have to involve the full demilitarization of Crimea and NATO membership for Ukraine. That will not be acceptable to Russia under Putin so there basically isn't a face saving measure for him.
The Following User Says Thank You to FlameOn For This Useful Post:
Can't remember which interview it was in those links, but she said something like - People don't understand Russian people and culture. They are shocked when they behave the way they do, because physically they look like us and it's shocking when people who look like us step out of bounds. If they were purple skinned covered in dots, people could easily understand why they think and act differently than us and it would make sense. Instead, they have many physical features that we have, so it makes it harder to understand why they are the way they are.
I'm paraphrasing what she said, but that always stuck with me. Makes sense given that for the most part, most Westerns simply don't understand most aspects of russian culture or mentality so it makes it extra shocking when they do the things they do. Lots of "aren't all 'white' people supposed to think like us?".
She really is a great source of information and a valuable resource. Her interviews are very interesting and worth watching if you want to really understand russian psyche and why their has been such failure over the years trying to integrate them into our "world". Because simply, we don't understand how they think and keep trying to relate them to our own world view.
Further to what you paraphrased, she flipped the script and indicated that Russians/Ukrainians/Belarussians etc understand America and it's policies more so than we understand their's. It's true.
A lot of the modern world will understand higher level American politics, sports, culture and more. A lot of American's know very little about things outside their state and their border.
I recall seeing some of the conversations American's were having about Trump's impeachment over his call with Zelensky and asking him to investigate Hunter Biden and potentially withholding aid. Personally I think it was a done move to pursue him over that specific situation as a lot of American's just didn't and still don't understand it.
People were like, Zelensky?? Isn't he a hockey player? Ukraine, where is that? Next to Russia? I thought they were Russian? So Trump had a call with the guy and wanted to send him supplies and what about Hunter Biden?
Off topic: Does anybody know how I can post the youtube videos so they actually show up in the post?
For this to end. Russia likely needs to save face. Once again, Russia was already in control much of the east of the country.
The other wars were nothing like this one. Russia has been pummeled and they've ran through their weapons storages and goodwill. I can't imagine another Russian leader wanting to replicate what happened in Ukraine. Except next time, without weapon stores to draw on, without most of their trained troops, and likely without support from Wagner.
Russia, for propaganda purposes, can call a withdrawal a win all they want, but it's a clear loss.
How would that stop Russia from building its military up and trying again? Putin not achieving his stated goals means he gives up? Now he's all, ok NATO can be in Ukraine?
And the Ukrainians having seen what Russia has done to it's citizens in occupied territory are ok with just giving up(40,000 children stolen and brainwashed, sexual abuse of very small children in front of their parents, thousands of civilians rounded up and assassinated and dumped in pits, torture, etc)? This is existential for the people of Ukraine. It's not about who wants the land
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
You would put [ YOUTUBE ]dQw4w9WgXcQ[ /YOUTUBE ] without the spaces in the tags i.e. [YOUTUBE] AND the equivalent close tag. You can also use the YOUTUBE button in the advance post "Go Advance" feature at the bottom of the post quick reply section.
Last edited by FlameOn; 07-18-2023 at 06:24 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to FlameOn For This Useful Post:
You would put [ YOUTUBE ]dQw4w9WgXcQ[ /YOUTUBE ] without the spaces in the tags i.e. [YOUTUBE] AND the equivalent close tag. You can also use the YOUTUBE button in the advance post "Go Advance" feature at the bottom of the post quick reply section.
Bless you.
I clicked hoping and praying and my hopes and prayers were answered.
__________________
THANK MR DEMKO
CPHL Ottawa Vancouver
The Following User Says Thank You to Blaster86 For This Useful Post:
In retaliation for the Kerch bridge getting blown up again, Russia withdraws from the grain deal that has enabled Ukraine to export it's grain. Since Turkey pledged to protect Ukrainian ships independently after Russia's withdraw, Putin launched attacks on the Odessa grain port transportation and storage facilities instead of the usual hospital, clinics, and civilian housing. Ukrainians aside, this is going to mean higher food prices globally and lots more starving people in poorer African nations. F Putin.
Russia announces it will be treating all ships heading to Odessa as hostile weapons smugglers to Ukraine to be blockaded and intercepted. Brave Erdogan has withdrawn from his previous pledge to escort Ukrainian shipping, hopefully at least NATO will be allowed to step in. https://english.alarabiya.net/News/w...military-cargo
