Imagine doing this same stupid exercise for the Iraq war? What does this prove exactly, that broadcasted rhetoric and strategic ambitions are not the same? Why do you cherrypick this rhetoric and take it at face value buy not all the “de-nazification” nonsense?
Putin didn’t write a manifesto years ago about de-nazifying Ukraine, then make it required reading for everyone in the Russian military.
2 Likes
This is really fucking stupid. Obviously Finland itself wont be invading Russia, that’s the whole point of NATO, is that really something you don’t get?
Pretty fucking lame than this shit is not only the unrelenting spew from this thread but that you take shots when someone who disagrees with you is banned for it. Putin-esque even.
I spoke out against his ban.
Maybe read the whole thread before going off unhinged because you seems really confused about the point I’m making about Finland. You literally just argued against Bill Haywood’s point that deep down Putin is scared NATO will invade Russia.
What was the point you were making about Finland?
That there is no reasonable reason anyone should be scared NATO is going to invade Russia. You seem to agree.
I had a dream last night where the news on television was announcing that Russia would be launching nuclear weapons imminently.
Oh, you said “finland” wasn’t going to invade, now you are saying NATO won’t invade. And the evidence you posted to support this was Finland, another Russian border country, potentially joining NATO. Very odd.
It was making fun of the idea that countries join NATO because they want to invade Russia. Which is supposedly Putin’s secret fear. Which is why BH was arguing that what’s happening now is actually the West’s fault for expanding NATO.
1 Like
Tbh, and shhhhh don’t tell anyone, there actually was good reason. Ukraine and Russia have been at war for 8 years now on Ukrainian soil. If Ukraine joined NATO, then Ukraine could have instantly called on NATO to defend it from Russia in this war. And there are areas in this war, namely Crimea, that most Russians believe should be Russian (and with fair reasons).
Edit: changed to past tense, pre-invasion. Ukraine calling on NATO to defend it in the current world if it were somehow a member would obviously be defensive.
1 Like
Beautiful architecture. Very depressing. Is there a google map address? Hopefully it was empty?
This would go great!
Nonono.
NATO gets 20% of the blame for the Ukraine invasion according to Bill. Gotta find a way to blame the west somehow because America Bad!
All those NATO maps that have tank lines drawn to moscow is part of that 20% blame.
The anti NATO, pro communist sympathizers like Noam Chomsky and his ilk are having a real bad time right now.
troll farms for tech recruiting/marketing have been doing this for a while. half of those cold emails you get from tech recruiters are AI generated profiles, and if you have any meetup account you have 100% been spammed by them
This is fine.jpg
https://twitter.com/photo_military/status/1498629767804903424?s=20&t=XmMRATXE55ASJXKLRtPR0Q
(Photo on the left is a bunch of whiffed Russian missiles on a Ukrainian airfield. Not sure what the other one is, I guess a US attack on something.)
Looks to be Kharkiv Regional State Administration at 64 Sumska St.
Some good stuff here on the prediction markets, and grading the pundits who claim to be experts in the sphere.
Interesting that all the pundits either thought Putin would invade because UKR resistance would be a pushover, or Putin would not invade because he knew UKR resistance would be strong.
My very quick search didn’t find any pundit who successfully predicted both the Russian invasion and the strong Ukranian resistance. I couldn’t even really find anybody who predicted one correctly and was silent on the other (I think Clay Graubard of Global Guessing managed this, but he’s a superforecaster, not a pundit). If you know someone in this category, please let me know so I can give them an appropriate amount of glory.
One important thing I’ve learned again and again about prediction is that successes are usually less about being smart, and more about having a bias which luckily corresponds to whatever ends up happening. Lots of people failed based on their political precommittments, but I suspect the successes were also based on political precommitments.
Guess that optimism Ukraine had kinda got battered down with that strike on Kharkiv.
I think this book from 1997 has been cited before, but it’s quite interesting. Foundations of Geopolitics - Wikipedia
The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia is a geopolitical book by Aleksandr Dugin. It has had significant influence within the Russian military, police and foreign policy elites[1] and has been used as a textbook in the Academy of the General Staff of the Russian military.[1][2] Its publication in 1997 was well received in Russia. Powerful Russian political figures subsequently took an interest in Dugin,[3] a Russian eurasianist, fascist,[4] and nationalist[5] who has developed a close relationship with Russia’s Academy of the General Staff.[6]
Military operations play relatively little role. The textbook advocates a sophisticated program of subversion, destabilization, and disinformation spearheaded by the Russian special services. The operations should be assisted by a tough, hard-headed utilization of Russia’s gas, oil, and natural resources to bully and pressure other countries.[9]
The book states that “the maximum task [of the future] is the ‘Finlandization’ of all of Europe”.[9]
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because “Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics”. Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[9
Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke “Afro-American racists”. Russia should “introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics”.[9]
3 Likes