Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[gearhog]

And disregarded.

[SurelySerious]

Your fact is duly noted.

FIFY. And it tracks since you ignore pretty much all other fact in favor of your bloviated opinions, but they’re definitely important since you’re clearly the only one of authority who could possibly be correct.

[gearhog]

Just now, SurelySerious said:

FIFY. And it tracks since you ignore pretty much all other fact in favor of your bloviated opinions, but they’re definitely important since you’re clearly the only one of authority who could possibly be correct.

Importance is subjective, by definition. Facts are not subjective. Either you don't know the definition of the word "importance", or the word "fact". Which is it?

I crack myself up.

[Best-22]

2 hours ago, gearhog said:

 Lame and weak. I haven't posted under the username gearpig in going on 6 years, right around the time you arrived here. You're obviously posting under a sock-puppet account because you're afraid to engage using your primary account.

"Rules Based International Order" LOL. And you accuse me of repeating talking points. You don't have an original thought or phrase that hasn't been gleaned from a political talk show. Hypocrite.

Whoops, misspelled your name sorry. Didn't know you had another account

[gearhog]

14 minutes ago, Best-22 said:

Whoops, misspelled your name sorry. Didn't know you had another account

Apology accepted. Don't worry about it.

[Boomer6]

Are you guys taking about @torqued?

[Splash95]

9 hours ago, Best-22 said:

In general I downvote bad faith arguments and people who exclusively post content that echoes Russian talking points. I don't bother engaging with gearpig or bashichuni, but I don't know you so I'll assume you're a reasonable person. I don't really have a lot free time to go in circles arguing on the internet. I appreciate the user's who take the time to counter the disinformation though and post things a little more grounded in reality. 

 

The last thing I downvoted for example: if you look at the authors other work it seems he only writes stories about how Ukraine has no chance and how the US shouldn't help Taiwan in a conflict. It seems that author would prefer the US lets Russia and China bully their neighbors while we sit at home on our hands. He's been posting with shaky logic and half truths since the start of the war about how Ukraine is doomed and we should just make concessions to Russia. It's very obvious that guy is pushing an agenda and is not an unbiased reliable source. 

 

To answer your question: I argue for a rules based international order, and supporting our allies. 

I truly appreciate you responding. I would in turn submit that your side are often the ones arguing in bad faith. Those of us who want peace in Ukraine, and question the wisdom of massive, open-ended support for an indefinite proxy war which has claimed tens of thousands of lives for little to no benefit of anyone, are (in the aggregate) not disinformation purveyors, Putin shills, etc. My opinions are my own, whether any of them happens to coincide with one held by Russians, Ukrainians, or those of other nationality. I've never been a Trump fanboy, but I think he gets it here: 

And I certainly don't hold Putin in high esteem, but when he says "The West will fight us to the last Ukrainian" (I can't find the exact quote right now), is he wrong? https://www.cato.org/commentary/washington-will-fight-russia-last-ukrainian

Edited August 18, 2023 by Splash95
added a missing I, and additional emphasis on comity with my fellow BO user

[gearhog]

43 minutes ago, Splash95 said:

I truly appreciate you responding. I would in turn submit that your side are often the ones arguing in bad faith. Those of us who want peace in Ukraine, and question the wisdom of massive, open-ended support for an indefinite proxy war which has claimed tens of thousands of lives for little to no benefit of anyone, are (in the aggregate) not disinformation purveyors, Putin shills, etc. My opinions are my own, whether any of them happens to coincide with one held by Russians, Ukrainians, or those of other nationality. I've never been a Trump fanboy, but I think he gets it here: 

And I certainly don't hold Putin in high esteem, but when he says "The West will fight us to the last Ukrainian" (I can't find the exact quote right now), is he wrong? https://www.cato.org/commentary/washington-will-fight-russia-last-ukrainian

Better said, and with more tact than I have.

[Day Man]

I don't think we have any guns to Ukrainian heads to resist...I think it's more like "Ukraine will fight to the last Ukrainian, and the west will gladly support."

[Best-22]

1 hour ago, Splash95 said:

I truly appreciate you responding. I would in turn submit that your side are often the ones arguing in bad faith. Those of us who want peace in Ukraine, and question the wisdom of massive, open-ended support for an indefinite proxy war which has claimed tens of thousands of lives for little to no benefit of anyone, are (in the aggregate) not disinformation purveyors, Putin shills, etc. My opinions are my own, whether any of them happens to coincide with one held by Russians, Ukrainians, or those of other nationality. I've never been a Trump fanboy, but I think he gets it here: 

And I certainly don't hold Putin in high esteem, but when he says "The West will fight us to the last Ukrainian" (I can't find the exact quote right now), is he wrong? https://www.cato.org/commentary/washington-will-fight-russia-last-ukrainian

I don't agree with the premise that the US is somehow forcing the Ukrainians to fight for us. I'd point to Afghanistan as an example of the fact that we can't force anyone to fight for their own land if they don't fundamentally want to as a society. I'd also argue that stopping the Russian advance greatly benefits everyone who doesn't want to be tortured in a basement.. By all accounts, life under Russian occupation really sucks, that's why they are fighting against them. If we stop sending a few percentage points of our defense budget, putin gets rewarded, aggression is normalized (risk of China becoming more encouraged to act on their dozens of border disputes) and many more Ukrainians die. They will fight to the last inch of Ukraine whether we help them or not, I'd rather see Russia lose. 

[Clark Griswold]

11 hours ago, Best-22 said:

In general I downvote bad faith arguments and people who exclusively post content that echoes Russian talking points. I don't bother engaging with gearpig or bashichuni, but I don't know you so I'll assume you're a reasonable person. I don't really have a lot free time to go in circles arguing on the internet. I appreciate the user's who take the time to counter the disinformation though and post things a little more grounded in reality. 

The last thing I downvoted for example: if you look at the authors other work it seems he only writes stories about how Ukraine has no chance and how the US shouldn't help Taiwan in a conflict. It seems that author would prefer the US lets Russia and China bully their neighbors while we sit at home on our hands. He's been posting with shaky logic and half truths since the start of the war about how Ukraine is doomed and we should just make concessions to Russia. It's very obvious that guy is pushing an agenda and is not an unbiased reliable source. 

To answer your question: I argue for a rules based international order, and supporting our allies. 

Are you saying that I or others who are arguing for a controlled cessation of hostilities with Russia likely still illegally and wrongly still holding large portions of Eastern Ukraine are arguing in bad faith with some sympathy or love for Putin / Russia or only the author I quoted?

Will disagree respectively on the author (Davis) as being a sounding board for Russian propaganda, he's been critical / not a simp for the Russian military and it's performance in Ukraine:

Putin's Ukraine War Was Truly an Early Military Disaster - 19FortyFive

An excerpt from this article he ends on:

To find the best ways to end the war on terms that most benefit Kyiv, it is crucial to understand the good, the bad, and the ugly of Russia’s conventional capacity. The objective will be to avoid Russian strengths and exploit their weaknesses. Next, we will turn our attention to a balanced assessment of Russia’s conventional power.

I don't see or read a sycophantism in his work but a professional honesty that may not be what we want but still valid to consider.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Clark Griswold

[Best-22]

2 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

Are you saying that I or others who are arguing for a controlled cessation of hostilities with Russia likely still illegally and wrongly still holding large portions of Eastern Ukraine are arguing in bad faith with some sympathy or love for Putin / Russia or only the author I quoted?

Will disagree respectively on the author (Davis) as being a sounding board for Russian propaganda, he's been critical / not a simp for the Russian military and it's performance in Ukraine:

Putin's Ukraine War Was Truly an Early Military Disaster - 19FortyFive

An excerpt from this article he ends on:

To find the best ways to end the war on terms that most benefit Kyiv, it is crucial to understand the good, the bad, and the ugly of Russia’s conventional capacity. The objective will be to avoid Russian strengths and exploit their weaknesses. Next, we will turn our attention to a balanced assessment of Russia’s conventional power.

I don't see or read a sycophantism in his work but a professional honesty that may not be what we want but still valid to consider.

I don't mean to be rude or anything, but I really don't want to get into a back and forth internet thing. I just use the vote buttons. 

[gearhog]

Moved from the Chinese thread.

17 minutes ago, Lawman said:

What a really long winded way of saying “I’m gonna post propaganda from Russia, because it supports my ideological desires, and fact checking would limit my argument too much for it to possibly be effective.”

You have a single tactic in your repertoire: "Everything I don't like is Russian propaganda". You haven't posted anything of substance to support your position and you immediately disengage from discussing actual events, specific details, and examples. If I ask you a question regarding such, you've got absolutely nothing and revert to your robotic "You. are. spreading. Russian. propaganda."

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

It’s also pretty clear you simply don’t understand or care about the impacts of sharing Russian social media propaganda across multiple sites and domains and how that effects its persistent presence in the general internet town square.

Multiple sites and domains? Which ones? If you don't agree with my position, I am perfectly fine with that. You have an unlimited amount of words and space to type your rebuke. This is a fantastic place to express and articulate your beliefs, yet you don't.  You seem to be more interested in silencing me than proving me wrong. That antidote to bad speech is more speech. The truth will eventually win, whatever it turns out to be. You appear to only want to take the intellectually lazy shortcut by saying "You shouldn't be speaking."

The question still stands:  Do you believe I should be restricted from saying the things I'm saying here because you've deemed them false propaganda and giving "aid and comfort to the enemy"?  You decision to dodge that question reveals as much your answer. If you believe my argument is dumb, do you worry everyone else on this forum is dumb enough to be influenced by it? This site is filled with smart people. I trust them to form their own opinions. They don't need you and the Ministry of Truth to police the forum.

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

It’s been pointed out to you the clear “truths” you’ve been spouting off on that are manufactured Russian disinformation campaigns or narratives. If you’re dumb enough to keep shouting about them please let everybody know you’ve turned into that crazy uncle that emails/Facebook messages chain crap they found on Reddit.

What exactly do you think you're doing here? Are you gonna "humble" me with your singular superior intellectual defense of moaning about "Propaganda!" coupled with lame insults? If you think that's going to yield desirable results, better strap in for the long haul because you're gonna be here a while. LOL. By all means, keep flailing away.

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

Oh look… your posting from Twitter. What a wonderful place for you to find “facts.”

That's the question and the reason I posted it. Is it propaganda, or is it fact? It's a pro-Ukrainian message from a member of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. It appears you're only able to identify propaganda when it contradicts your message. Are you so insecure in your messaging that you can't even allow yourself to acknowledge that propaganda exists on your own side, and is often even more far-fetched and ridiculous? The predicament being: If you do acknowledge it, I'm just going to give you more examples.

https://twitter.com/SarahAshtonLV/status/1691105018215317504?s=20

Edited August 18, 2023 by gearhog

[gearhog]

6 hours ago, Day Man said:

I don't think we have any guns to Ukrainian heads to resist...I think it's more like "Ukraine will fight to the last Ukrainian, and the west will gladly support."

There are lots of examples of Ukrainians willing to fight the Russians. There are also lots of examples of Ukrainians being forcibly conscripted off the streets and being sent to the front lines with minimal or no training.

 

[Clark Griswold]

I don't mean to be rude or anything, but I really don't want to get into a back and forth internet thing. I just use the vote buttons. 

Fair enough


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

Moved from the Chinese thread.
That's the question and the reason I posted it. Is it propaganda, or is it fact? It's a pro-Ukrainian message from a member of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. It appears you're only able to identify propaganda when it contradicts your message. Are you so insecure in your messaging that you can't even allow yourself to acknowledge that propaganda exists on your own side, and is often even more far-fetched and ridiculous? The predicament being: If you do acknowledge it, I'm just going to give you more examples.
https://twitter.com/SarahAshtonLV/status/1691105018215317504?s=20

Holy crap you’ve like quadrupled down on this now like all the rest of us need to prove something you’ve repeatedly been shown.

You are spouting off Russian Talking Points as your argument and linking to dubious Twitter/etc accounts (whoever’s they happen to be) with apparently no understanding of how social media intertwines with itself or how that very fact is abused for illicit means. I’d tell you go talk to some Psyops guys or just remember your SERE training on indoctrination and soft vs hard influence efforts, but you’re the smart one. It’s all the rest of us that are being duped.

So no share away if that’s how you want to be identified, but those of us pointing you out as a stooge will be more than happy to remind the room how willing you are to drag a hostile powers IA campaign into a discussion to achieve whatever your ideological desire happens to be. You’re a shill because it aligns with your need to rage against the current system/admin just like Tucker was. Plain and simply.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gearhog]

10 hours ago, Lawman said:

Holy crap you’ve like quadrupled down on this now like all the rest of us need to prove something you’ve repeatedly been shown.

You are spouting off Russian Talking Points as your argument and linking to dubious Twitter/etc accounts (whoever’s they happen to be) with apparently no understanding of how social media intertwines with itself or how that very fact is abused for illicit means. I’d tell you go talk to some Psyops guys or just remember your SERE training on indoctrination and soft vs hard influence efforts, but you’re the smart one. It’s all the rest of us that are being duped.

So no share away if that’s how you want to be identified, but those of us pointing you out as a stooge will be more than happy to remind the room how willing you are to drag a hostile powers IA campaign into a discussion to achieve whatever your ideological desire happens to be. You’re a shill because it aligns with your need to rage against the current system/admin just like Tucker was. Plain and simply.

Quadrupled down on what? Pointing out that you're only able to identify propaganda when it doesn't come from you? I am genuinely interested in your position, if it can stand. But childishly repeating: "Russian Talking Points" ad nauseam doesn't give you any credibility. I'm not here to change anyone else's mind. I'm not here to be agreeable. I'm here to change my own mind. I have no idea your age or what stage of your career you're in, but I was there. If 10 years ago someone was telling me the same things I'm telling you, I'd have been highly defensive as well. And, for the same reasons I explained earlier. I read a lot, I observe a lot, and my perspective changes based on an accumulation of info that I process according to my values and morality. When I present my evolved opinion here on the matter that is critical of both sides, and not just one, I fully expect it to be attacked. I wouldn't be writing these long-winded posts if I didn't thoroughly enjoy your criticisms and finding holes in your logic. 

If you're 100% unwilling to condemn propaganda on both sides instead of just one, I know you're not arguing in good faith. You calling me a "stooge" or a "shill" because I don't adopt YOUR talking points and propaganda is amusing because it's glaringly hypocritical to anyone with an ounce of integrity.

Those Psyops guys that you'd like for me to speak with... what exactly is their job? Is it only to identify enemy propaganda and counter it with the truth? I've known plenty of PSYOPS guys. I've dropped pallets full of the "truth" in the form of leaflets over the skies of IRQ/AFG. I'm well aware of their job and if you claim to not know that our current government aims a little propaganda our way as well, or you know it and are not also critical of it, you're being dishonest.

There's a thousand reasons to love the "my" country, but that doesn't mean I can't be critical of it in the instances it falls short of my expectations. And it is "mine" no less, and no more, than it is yours or anyone else's. If your defense is so delicate that you can't accept any criticism whatsoever, nor admit any fault, you are operating in bad faith and your character is maybe a little weak. I care about Russia about as little as one possibly could.

I've never mentioned or written about "Tucker". Why are you trying to inject him into the conversation? Is this a left vs right thing for you? You'll spend a thousand words decrying something being "from the Internet", "from Russia", "from Twitter", "from Tucker"....but you'll never address the content itself.

It's kinda like the rainbow hair people who scream into the camera when someone asks them a simple, logical question that defeats their position. I've been asking you specific detailed questions about your position and you ever-so consistently decline to approach them. Instead, you deflect with irrelevant nonsense about "Tucker", "Soros", "Nazis", "Illuminati," "Covid", etc. Interestingly, these are all leftist criticisms. Hmm.

Edited August 19, 2023 by gearhog

[Lawman]

Quadrupled down on what? Pointing out that you're only able to identify propaganda when it doesn't come from you? I am genuinely interested in your position, if it can stand. But childishly repeating: "Russian Talking Points" ad nauseam doesn't give you any credibility. I'm not here to change anyone else's mind. I'm not here to be agreeable. I'm here to change my own mind. I have no idea your age or what stage of your career you're in, but I was there. If 10 years ago someone was telling me the same things I'm telling you, I'd have been highly defensive as well. And, for the same reasons I explained earlier. I read a lot, I observe a lot, and my perspective changes based on an accumulation of info that I process according to my values and morality. When I present my evolved opinion here on the matter that is critical of both sides, and not just one, I fully expect it to be attacked. I wouldn't be writing these long-winded posts if I didn't thoroughly enjoy your criticisms and finding holes in your logic. 
If you're 100% unwilling to condemn propaganda on both sides instead of just one, I know you're not arguing in good faith. You calling me a "stooge" or a "shill" because I don't adopt YOUR talking points and propaganda is amusing because it's glaringly hypocritical to anyone with an ounce of integrity.
Those Psyops guys that you'd like for me to speak with... what exactly is their job? Is it only to identify enemy propaganda and counter it with the truth? I've known plenty of PSYOPS guys. I've dropped pallets full of the "truth" in the form of leaflets over the skies of IRQ/AFG. I'm well aware of their job and if you claim to not know that our current government aims a little propaganda our way as well, or you know it and are not also critical of it, you're being dishonest.
There's a thousand reasons to love the "my" country, but that doesn't mean I can't be critical of it in the instances it falls short of my expectations. And it is "mine" no less, and no more, than it is yours or anyone else's. If your defense is so delicate that you can't accept any criticism whatsoever, nor admit any fault, you are operating in bad faith and your character is maybe a little weak. I care about Russia about as little as one possibly could.
I've never mentioned or written about "Tucker". Why are you trying to inject him into the conversation? Is this a left vs right thing for you? You'll spend a thousand words decrying something being "from the Internet", "from Russia", "from Twitter", "from Tucker"....but you'll never address the content itself.
It's kinda like the rainbow hair people who scream into the camera when someone asks them a simple, logical question that defeats their position. I've been asking you specific detailed questions about your position and you ever-so consistently decline to approach them. Instead, you deflect with irrelevant nonsense about "Tucker", "Soros", "Nazis", "Illuminati," "Covid", etc. Interestingly, these are all leftist criticisms. Hmm.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/inside-a-russian-disinformation-campaign-in-ukraine-in-2014/2017/12/25/f55b0408-e71d-11e7-ab50-621fe0588340_story.html


An example of the Russian backed BS perspective you’ve been repeating on this very site. Despite all the cited examples of exactly what was being done in the wake of that situation, you’ll probably still act like the Russians were giving us some insight into “what was really going on” while alluding that WAPO writing what I linked is part of some greater propaganda and protection effort by the liberal backed media or some other nonsense.


Again, you’re clueless, and what’s worse your willful of it to achieve your political goal. Nobody is fighting you with Ukrainian disinformation, they are telling you you’re an adult sitting in the kiddie pool of “facts” trying to tell us all its unusually warm and that’s some sort of thing caused by our government while the rest of us try to warn you it’s actually just full of piss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BashiChuni]

what's the stated end goal of the "endless ukranian support" drones?

what is your goal? because endlessly throwing money at ukraine no matter what seems like a poor national security strategy.

 

[uhhello]

45 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

what's the stated end goal of the "endless ukranian support" drones?

what is your goal? because endlessly throwing money at ukraine no matter what seems like a poor national security strategy.

 

What's your stated end goal in regards to the Russian occupation of Ukraine?

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

what's the stated end goal of the "endless ukranian support" drones?

what is your goal? because endlessly throwing money at ukraine no matter what seems like a poor national security strategy.

 

And what is you end goal? Surrender a bunch of territory to Russia and do this again in 7-10 years, like when they took Crimea?

[Lawman]

And what is you end goal? Surrender a bunch of territory to Russia and do this again in 7-10 years, like when they took Crimea?

Only this time there’s a 1/5 chance it DOESN’T involve them rolling into an Article 5 country.


Quick let’s predict the Russian justification for invading Moldova. I’m gonna guess Secret NATO nuclear weapons stocks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BashiChuni]

21 hours ago, uhhello said:

What's your stated end goal in regards to the Russian occupation of Ukraine?

i asked the question.

we've spent over 100 billion supporting ukraine. to what end? how much more? what's the strategic goal?

is this the next 20 year "war"?

Edited August 20, 2023 by BashiChuni

[raimius]

A Russia that is incapable/unwilling to invade their neighbors and a China that is deterred from making similar attempts would be good outcomes, from a NATO/US/"west" perspective. 

A sovereign, western aligned Ukraine (hopefully with a little less corruption) would be good too, I suppose.  They are both a main actor and a pawn, at the same time, it seems.  Ukraine isn't a particularly vital US partner, but stopping Russia from "flipping the table" of European security is rather important to the US, since that group has a huge chunk of the global economy, influence, and US allies.

[tac airlifter]

On 8/17/2023 at 10:12 PM, Best-22 said:

I don't agree with the premise that the US is somehow forcing the Ukrainians to fight for us. I'd point to Afghanistan as an example of the fact that we can't force anyone to fight for their own land if they don't fundamentally want to as a society. I'd also argue that stopping the Russian advance greatly benefits everyone who doesn't want to be tortured in a basement.. By all accounts, life under Russian occupation really sucks, that's why they are fighting against them. If we stop sending a few percentage points of our defense budget, putin gets rewarded, aggression is normalized (risk of China becoming more encouraged to act on their dozens of border disputes) and many more Ukrainians die. They will fight to the last inch of Ukraine whether we help them or not, I'd rather see Russia lose. 

Hey bro, I really appreciate when you reply because I enjoy reading your viewpoint.  I 100% get that you do not have time/desire to get into an internet back & forth... that's me a lot if times too!

My downvote was purely out of principal:  you do it a bunch without commenting what exactly you disagree with, so I must reciprocate.  But don't take it wrong.  Free drinks to any forum participants I meet IRL 🇺🇸