The Ukraine Crisis

[kalm]

Yep. Just one small, insignificant hurdle to successfully implementing true Marxism: overcoming human nature.

Should be a snap, right? You two…flagellating each other like a couple of twinks.

Yea, true Marxism has never been implemented on a significant scale because it goes against human nature so I'm not sure how it could be a reaction to crony capitalism.

As for where it's been attempted, I'm not sure you could call Tsarist Russia or the Republic of China crony capitalist states

Human nature or culture?

One might also argue that it’s within human nature and certain societies to live within their resource needs and in a communal society where labor and tools are shared.

Marxism was directly tied to division of labor, materialism, property, and the prediction of class conflict as a resolution.

You are correct that true Marxism doesn’t exist. Neither does true capitalism. (Thank god for both.)

You can make a case however that crony capitalism exists in Russia, China, the US, and Somalia.

[SDHornet]

@ houndie quoting my post like 5 times.

You're losing it old man.

UkRaInE iS wInNiNg

[SDHornet]

[SDHornet]

New York Times running the lack of Intel story now. American intelligence apparently knows little about what Ukraine is up to. Hmm.

Now Biden is saying Zelensky wouldn't listen to US advice.

Double Hmm.

How long until everything is Zelensky's fault?

Going to be entertaining watching the Biden admin throw him under the bus.

[UNI88]

Yea, true Marxism has never been implemented on a significant scale because it goes against human nature so I'm not sure how it could be a reaction to crony capitalism.

As for where it's been attempted, I'm not sure you could call Tsarist Russia or the Republic of China crony capitalist states

Human nature or culture?

One might also argue that it’s within human nature and certain societies to live within their resource needs and in a communal society where labor and tools are shared.

Marxism was directly tied to division of labor, materialism, property, and the prediction of class conflict as a resolution.

You are correct that true Marxism doesn’t exist. Neither does true capitalism. (Thank god for both.)

You can make a case however that crony capitalism exists in Russia, China, the US, and Somalia.

Nature. Humankind is by nature ambitious and will pursue power and wealth in a capitalist or socialist society. The difference is that in a capitalist society that pursuit can and often does lead to innovation and progress.

Tsarist Russia was more imperial/feudal than capitalist (crony or otherwise). You could make a case that modern Russia is also feudal with Putin and his lords (friends) in charge.

You can make a stronger case that capitalism exists in the Nordic countries than you can in Somalia.

Your arguments are like sieves. Maybe if you put a little more original thought into them rather than parroting illberal talking points.

[kalm]

Human nature or culture?

One might also argue that it’s within human nature and certain societies to live within their resource needs and in a communal society where labor and tools are shared.

Marxism was directly tied to division of labor, materialism, property, and the prediction of class conflict as a resolution.

You are correct that true Marxism doesn’t exist. Neither does true capitalism. (Thank god for both.)

You can make a case however that crony capitalism exists in Russia, China, the US, and Somalia.

Nature. Humankind is by nature ambitious and will pursue power and wealth in a capitalist or socialist society. The difference is that in a capitalist society that pursuit can and often does lead to innovation and progress.

Tsarist Russia was more imperial/feudal than capitalist (crony or otherwise). You could make a case that modern Russia is also feudal with Putin and his lords (friends) in charge.

You can make a stronger case that capitalism exists in the Nordic countries than you can in Somalia.

Your arguments are like sieves. Maybe if you put a little more original thought into them rather than parroting illberal talking points.

I sincerely apologize you are offended by ideas.

Capitalism is a few centuries old. Communal idealism is much older. Hunter gatherer cultures both historic and modern have embraced it. It’s actually one form of anarchism which is an OG view of non-government ideology. Hint: you’re supposed to enjoy less government AND the commons.

Imperialist Russia was also feudal.

Capitalism certainly encourages innovation but innovation also occurs in the public sector. To take your .com boom as an example…didn’t part of that innovation cone from the military? How about publicly educated engineers and research universities? Or public sector pension funds that invested in it? Pretty sure all of those remain an impact.

If you are truly a centrist you’ll agree with everything I just said. Nothing wrong with capitalism and it’s freedoms and innovations. As long as it’s regulated enough to meet the needs first and then desires of all its citizenry. When it doesn’t, the pitchforks come out. Deserved or not.

[SeattleGriz]

Narrative shift.

This is the same Stoltenberg who in early April said that NATO must prepare for a ‘long haul’ in Ukraine. Who then said that the war could drag on for years. Jens Stoltenberg, who told us in May that we must put values over profits, is now talking about peace for territorial and sovereignty concessions.

[UNI88]

Narrative shift.

This is the same Stoltenberg who in early April said that NATO must prepare for a ‘long haul’ in Ukraine. Who then said that the war could drag on for years. Jens Stoltenberg, who told us in May that we must put values over profits, is now talking about peace for territorial and sovereignty concessions.

If I'm Ukrainian I don't buy the territory for peace idea. Russia might settle for now but they'll be back for more later and won't stop until they've gobbled up all of Ukraine. They might not be winning but they're making Russia pay. This is their moment ...

[houndawg]

@ houndie quoting my post like 5 times.

You're losing it old man.

UkRaInE iS wInNiNg

When the stupidity is that concentrated it it requires a salvo to penetrate, like reactive armor.

[houndawg]

Narrative shift.

If I'm Ukrainian I don't buy the territory for peace idea. Russia might settle for now but they'll be back for more later and won't stop until they've gobbled up all of Ukraine. They might not be winning but they're making Russia pay. This is their moment ...

Taking territory is one thing, holding it is another thing entirely and I don't see how the Russian economy can bear the load

[kalm]

Narrative shift.

This is the same Stoltenberg who in early April said that NATO must prepare for a ‘long haul’ in Ukraine. Who then said that the war could drag on for years. Jens Stoltenberg, who told us in May that we must put values over profits, is now talking about peace for territorial and sovereignty concessions.

[GannonFan]

If I'm Ukrainian I don't buy the territory for peace idea. Russia might settle for now but they'll be back for more later and won't stop until they've gobbled up all of Ukraine. They might not be winning but they're making Russia pay. This is their moment ...

Taking territory is one thing, holding it is another thing entirely and I don't see how the Russian economy can bear the load

It's not that hard to hold territory once you completely eradicate, or move, all the people who were living in that territory and replace them with folks loyal to you. I don't see how Russia loses the ground they have right now unless someone moves them from it. The Ukraine, if they want that land back, is going to have to push the Russians off of it, and unfortunately, I don't see a lot of offensive capability from the Ukrainians to do that. And once Russia has had the chance to cleanse the area of people not amenable to Russian rule then the easier it will be for them to maintain it. Heck, it would probably cost the Russians more to pick up and leave than it will be to hunker down and stay there. They didn't seem to have any issue holding on to Crimea over the past 8 years despite the rest of the international community saying it wasn't theirs.

IMO, the only long term hope for Ukraine is to make sure they get added to the EU and NATO at the end of this. They may not be able to get their land back, but the only way to make sure this doesn't end up like a Crimean appeasement, where Russia, a few years down the road once they can recruit more cannon fodder to brutally march forward decides they want to keep taking parts of the Ukraine, is to make sure that Russia knows the rest of the Ukraine is NATO protected, just like the other former Soviet satellite nations that used to be subjugated to the Russian empire are similarly protected and preventing Russia from attacking them. The EU membership, in addition to the NATO security, will give Ukraine the stability to get people to come back and live there and make it a stable nation. We can't make the same mistake we made this time - sanctions hurt Russia, but people are still being killed by the tens of thousands and Russia is still making advances, regardless of the butcher's toll it takes.

[houndawg]

Taking territory is one thing, holding it is another thing entirely and I don't see how the Russian economy can bear the load

It's not that hard to hold territory once you completely eradicate, or move, all the people who were living in that territory and replace them with folks loyal to you. I don't see how Russia loses the ground they have right now unless someone moves them from it. The Ukraine, if they want that land back, is going to have to push the Russians off of it, and unfortunately, I don't see a lot of offensive capability from the Ukrainians to do that. And once Russia has had the chance to cleanse the area of people not amenable to Russian rule then the easier it will be for them to maintain it. Heck, it would probably cost the Russians more to pick up and leave than it will be to hunker down and stay there. They didn't seem to have any issue holding on to Crimea over the past 8 years despite the rest of the international community saying it wasn't theirs.

IMO, the only long term hope for Ukraine is to make sure they get added to the EU and NATO at the end of this. They may not be able to get their land back, but the only way to make sure this doesn't end up like a Crimean appeasement, where Russia, a few years down the road once they can recruit more cannon fodder to brutally march forward decides they want to keep taking parts of the Ukraine, is to make sure that Russia knows the rest of the Ukraine is NATO protected, just like the other former Soviet satellite nations that used to be subjugated to the Russian empire are similarly protected and preventing Russia from attacking them. The EU membership, in addition to the NATO security, will give Ukraine the stability to get people to come back and live there and make it a stable nation. We can't make the same mistake we made this time - sanctions hurt Russia, but people are still being killed by the tens of thousands and Russia is still making advances, regardless of the butcher's toll it takes.

The only mistake to be made is to not do our best to help Ukraine bleed Russia. As you say, they aren't going to give up until they've taken it all so we should fight them now while they're weak and have been exposed as nothing special militarily. Move them (Ukraine) to the front of the line for NATO membership

[SeattleGriz]

If I'm Ukrainian I don't buy the territory for peace idea. Russia might settle for now but they'll be back for more later and won't stop until they've gobbled up all of Ukraine. They might not be winning but they're making Russia pay. This is their moment ...

Taking territory is one thing, holding it is another thing entirely and I don't see how the Russian economy can bear the load

I think it depends on how far Russia goes. Pretty obvious the territory Russia now has, is filled with ethnic Russians that were treated very poorly by Ukrainians nationalists over the years.

So bad, they are using them as human shields as Russia grinds in.

[kalm]

Also…NATO is sending pre-positioned forces to the eastern front for the first time since the end of the Cold War.

[GannonFan]

It's not that hard to hold territory once you completely eradicate, or move, all the people who were living in that territory and replace them with folks loyal to you. I don't see how Russia loses the ground they have right now unless someone moves them from it. The Ukraine, if they want that land back, is going to have to push the Russians off of it, and unfortunately, I don't see a lot of offensive capability from the Ukrainians to do that. And once Russia has had the chance to cleanse the area of people not amenable to Russian rule then the easier it will be for them to maintain it. Heck, it would probably cost the Russians more to pick up and leave than it will be to hunker down and stay there. They didn't seem to have any issue holding on to Crimea over the past 8 years despite the rest of the international community saying it wasn't theirs.

IMO, the only long term hope for Ukraine is to make sure they get added to the EU and NATO at the end of this. They may not be able to get their land back, but the only way to make sure this doesn't end up like a Crimean appeasement, where Russia, a few years down the road once they can recruit more cannon fodder to brutally march forward decides they want to keep taking parts of the Ukraine, is to make sure that Russia knows the rest of the Ukraine is NATO protected, just like the other former Soviet satellite nations that used to be subjugated to the Russian empire are similarly protected and preventing Russia from attacking them. The EU membership, in addition to the NATO security, will give Ukraine the stability to get people to come back and live there and make it a stable nation. We can't make the same mistake we made this time - sanctions hurt Russia, but people are still being killed by the tens of thousands and Russia is still making advances, regardless of the butcher's toll it takes.

The only mistake to be made is to not do our best to help Ukraine bleed Russia. As you say, they aren't going to give up until they've taken it all so we should fight them now while they're weak and have been exposed as nothing special militarily. Move them to the front of the line for NATO membership

I think we're doing that - I don't think Russia is making great gains here and they are taking a lot of losses. However, that's the Russians MO, it's what they do. They aren't terribly efficient but the are determined. They'll sacrifice tens of thousands of lives of their own soldiers and an arsenal of equipment just to move a little bit. And I think they're patient - they waited 8 years after Crimea before going on the offensive again. Even if it's another 10 years after this one, they'll still move ahead with taking another small piece of Ukraine. Keep repeating this and eventually they'll have it all.

I don't think we (NATO) are ready to put boots on the ground to defend Ukraine. However, there will be a pause again as Russia can't take the whole country now. We use that pause to put Ukraine in NATO so that Russia knows next time there will be boots on the ground should they invade. And like I said, side by side enter them into the EU so that there's actually a stable, livable country for all those refugees to go back to, otherwise what would be the point of fighting for it in the first place?

[GannonFan]

Taking territory is one thing, holding it is another thing entirely and I don't see how the Russian economy can bear the load

I think it depends on how far Russia goes. Pretty obvious the territory Russia now has, is filled with ethnic Russians that were treated very poorly by Ukrainians nationalists over the years.

So bad, they are using them as human shields as Russia grinds in.

I don't buy that narrative. Russia has been agitating at the Ukrainian eastern border for 20 years now. Ukraine is allowed to try to hold on to their territory and that's what that territory was and is still. The only real thing ethnic Russians weren't allowed to do was to hand over their land to Russia. That narrative is as gaslighting as the de-Nazification narrative that Russia has been pushing to justify the unprovoked attack. There's nothing that can justify Russia's invasion and partitioning of Ukraine.

[SeattleGriz]

I think it depends on how far Russia goes. Pretty obvious the territory Russia now has, is filled with ethnic Russians that were treated very poorly by Ukrainians nationalists over the years.

So bad, they are using them as human shields as Russia grinds in.

I don't buy that narrative. Russia has been agitating at the Ukrainian eastern border for 20 years now. Ukraine is allowed to try to hold on to their territory and that's what that territory was and is still. The only real thing ethnic Russians weren't allowed to do was to hand over their land to Russia. That narrative is as gaslighting as the de-Nazification narrative that Russia has been pushing to justify the unprovoked attack. There's nothing that can justify Russia's invasion and partitioning of Ukraine.

We disagree because we're talking two different things. I'm saying what Russia currently has gained, won't be as hard to defend as the Western side due to ethnic Russians. This was a reply to Houndie saying it would be hard to keep Ukraine.

In regards to the human side, how would you describe the Minsk II agreement that wasn't followed and what happened over in the Donbas for the last eight years?

[UNI88]

I don't buy that narrative. Russia has been agitating at the Ukrainian eastern border for 20 years now. Ukraine is allowed to try to hold on to their territory and that's what that territory was and is still. The only real thing ethnic Russians weren't allowed to do was to hand over their land to Russia. That narrative is as gaslighting as the de-Nazification narrative that Russia has been pushing to justify the unprovoked attack. There's nothing that can justify Russia's invasion and partitioning of Ukraine.

We disagree because we're talking two different things. I'm saying what Russia currently has gained, won't be as hard to defend as the Western side due to ethnic Russians. This was a reply to Houndie saying it would be hard to keep Ukraine.

In regards to the human side, how would you describe the Minsk II agreement that wasn't followed and what happened over in the Donbas for the last eight years?

Using that "human side" argument, Mexico would be justified to invade the US.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[kalm]

Taking territory is one thing, holding it is another thing entirely and I don't see how the Russian economy can bear the load

I think it depends on how far Russia goes. Pretty obvious the territory Russia now has, is filled with ethnic Russians that were treated very poorly by Ukrainians nationalists over the years.

So bad, they are using them as human shields as Russia grinds in.

Filled with ethic Russians, 70% of whom consider themselves UKR.

[SeattleGriz]

I think it depends on how far Russia goes. Pretty obvious the territory Russia now has, is filled with ethnic Russians that were treated very poorly by Ukrainians nationalists over the years.

So bad, they are using them as human shields as Russia grinds in.

Filled with ethic Russians, 70% of whom consider themselves UKR.

Linky please.

[SeattleGriz]

We disagree because we're talking two different things. I'm saying what Russia currently has gained, won't be as hard to defend as the Western side due to ethnic Russians. This was a reply to Houndie saying it would be hard to keep Ukraine.

In regards to the human side, how would you describe the Minsk II agreement that wasn't followed and what happened over in the Donbas for the last eight years?

Using that "human side" argument, Mexico would be justified to invade the US.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Please expand on that. Not understanding specifically what you are referring to.

[UNI88]

Using that "human side" argument, Mexico would be justified to invade the US.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Please expand on that. Not understanding specifically what you are referring to.

Just as "ethnic Russians that were treated very poorly by Ukrainians nationalists over the years", ethnic Mexicans have been treated very poorly by Americans over the years. If poor treatment of you ethnic relatives justifies an invasion then the US and a lot of other countries deserve to be invaded.

[kalm]

Filled with ethic Russians, 70% of whom consider themselves UKR.

Linky please.

An old friend who lived in Kharkiv and got out and to Poland a week after it started.

[SeattleGriz]

Please expand on that. Not understanding specifically what you are referring to.

Just as "ethnic Russians that were treated very poorly by Ukrainians nationalists over the years", ethnic Mexicans have been treated very poorly by Americans over the years. If poor treatment of you ethnic relatives justifies an invasion then the US and a lot of other countries deserve to be invaded.

Is that a rules based order point and were we shelling Mexicans on the border?