Gave Annihilation (2018) (sci-fi) another spin.
Had forgotten how creepy the screaming bear-thing is.
Also reminds me a bit of Solaris (2002).
I suppose, in a way, it renders something we would likely think of as alive, a lifeform of sorts, whether we (can) recognize it as intelligent or not.
Defying our/human understanding, hard to relate to in an anthropocentric sense, alien.
Relatings-to is by the human characters and their interactions.

, would it be better to say that there are lots of fools (of whatever sort) around?
It's not confined to people that are extremely ignorant, though. Intellectuals may find faults all over (+ focus/magnify), and hence stoke fires all over. Fault-finding isn't that hard anyway.
So, choosing the right battles matter.
(Incidentally another reason that mudslinger-politicians are a turn-off, to me, more so than politicians that focus on what their programs are.)
Anyway, if the US was significantly weakened on the international stage (which could happen by domestic division or foolery), then others would just jump right in. In the present environment, I'm not all that optimistic in case that was to happen, but I guess we'll see (or might).

Understanding these arguments is the easier part, agreeing is harder.

Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly
^{— Vladimir Putin · The Kremlin · Feb 29, 2024}

Here is a good example of their hypocrisy. They have recently made unfounded allegations, in particular, against Russia, regarding plans to deploy nuclear weapons in space. Such fake narratives, and this story is unequivocally false, are designed to involve us in negotiations on their conditions, which will only benefit the United States.

We are also aware of the Western attempts to draw us into an arms race, thereby exhausting us, mirroring the strategy they successfully employed with the Soviet Union in the 1980s. Let me remind you that in 1981–1988, the Soviet Union’s military spending amounted to 13 percent of GDP.

We all know that their claims are utterly baseless. And at the same time, they are selecting targets to strike on our territory and contemplating the most efficient means of destruction. Now they have started talking about the possibility of deploying NATO military contingents to Ukraine.
But we remember what happened to those who sent their contingents to the territory of our country once before. Today, any potential aggressors will face far graver consequences. They must grasp that we also have weapons – yes, they know this, as I have just said – capable of striking targets on their territory.
Everything they are inventing now, spooking the world with the threat of a conflict involving nuclear weapons, which potentially means the end of civilisation – don’t they realise this? The problem is that these are people who have never faced profound adversity; they have no conception of the horrors of war. We – even the younger generation of Russians – have endured such trials during the fight against international terrorism in the Caucasus, and now, in the conflict in Ukraine. But they continue to think of this as a kind of action cartoon.
Indeed, just like any other ideology promoting racism, national superiority or exceptionalism, Russophobia is blinding and stupefying. The United States and its satellites have, in fact, dismantled the European security system which has created risks for everyone.

Others might comment·suggest·mention·talk ("space weapons", "ground troops") and be recast (in the extreme), or consistently shut up. Either works for the Kremlin as long as the recast is taken seriously. I don't think people are going to shut up. For that matter, the Kremlin circle isn't shy about dishing out nuclear and other threats.

Did "not ruling out troops on the ground" hit a nerve? Maybe "troops on the ground" is a major concern (fear) of theirs after all. Not NATO though, I think it was just French, maybe some Baltics, and everyone else declined. Well, "our territory" isn't Ukraine; French soldiers in Ukraine isn't French soldiers in Russia; ask anyone but the land grabbers, the significant majority.

With Gorbachev a kind of optimistic attitude — not Russophobia, but Russo-hug — aired in the world in terms of Russia. Now there's a kind of Kremlin-phobia, largely due to the (present) Kremlin circle, especially in Ukraine. (Is Putin sort of looking for "payback" for the cold war, having learned from that...?)

As mentioned before, the clear threat to them is against the Kremlin's free reins to bomb, grab land, sham, destabilize, their neo-colonial ambitions, etc. That's one primary "threat" they're faced with. And related to bona fides peace.

Only they, along with North Korea, are doing nuclear posturing. With the attitude on display, what's to stop them from nuclear blackmail anyway? Hopefully North Korea won't jump on South Korea (whether on a signal from Moscow or not).

Don't they wonder why their claims·arguments·sentiments are so markedly outnumbered? And apparently need friends like Kim Jong Un? Maybe if they wonder in public they'll go the way of Navalny (not the best way to avoid revolutions).

Some US-Europe efforts after the 2nd world war that came to mind...
• keep it from happening again
• the Marshall Plan
• keep the USSR from taking over
How much was in good/bad faith? NATO has helped dull national attention to defense in Europe, which has since been criticized (Obama, the Clown, whoever). I suppose we might compare East/West Germany (back then), North/South Korea, ...

So, to what end?

Anyway, good to see that Putin is addressing domestic issues like poverty, even if the details surrounding numbers and such are opaque.

Right wing Israeli settlers also seek to expand and these acts should be discouraged/condemned but 10/7 is in no way a justified response to settler aggression. — BitconnectCarlos

And those thefty/violent settlers should be hit by Israeli law and order as readily as we might expect elsewhere. To the extent that Palestinians would trust the justice system. Right, the Hamas attackers "should be discouraged/condemned".

, are you going by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis here...?

Putin's address to Russia's parliament
^{— Lucy Papachristou, Gareth Jones, John Davison · Reuters · Feb 29, 2024}

Uncanny how little change to the relevant parts could make it a speech by the Ukrainian president instead. Then there's that whiff of alternate world stuff again. So hard life is for poor Mr Putin :cry:. Or Mr Putin's vision, let's say.

Just about all nuclear posturing lately has come out of the Kremlin circle and North Korea. (2023Oct20, 2024Feb7)

Why would anyone in their right mind want to invade Russia? (e.g. hostile takeover)

• Whereas some reasons can be thought up, it doesn't make much sense. (Napoleon, Hitler, Danilov (ukranews 2022Dec1, news360 2022Dec1) are excused.) Besides, it would be a massive + costly undertaking. No one is particularly interested, and most would rather just the Kremlin chill out and democratize instead. Not much by way of threats to invade China, the US, India, Brazil, either.

What sort of nuclear threat is Russia faced with?

• Not a whole lot. Russia is already the world's largest country with the largest nuclear weapons stock around (and has long-range delivery). Mutual assured destruction seems a deterrence. If a country with nuclear arms is led by a paranoid/insane person, then the world already has a larger problem. No one is particularly interested in nuking Moscow (barring Ukrainian animosity due to their treatment of Ukraine), and no one is particularly interested in a nuclear world war.

Omitted above: "backstabbing" (supposed) partners of Russia; long-range attacks; threats to their land-grabbing and neo-colonialism.

Maybe it's the (present) Kremlin that's the main threat to Russia at the moment? They allegedly have popular domestic support.

Russia (including Kaliningrad) borders

• Norway ⁿ
• Finland ⁿ
• Estonia ⁿ
• Latvia ⁿ
• Lithuania ⁿ
• Poland ⁿ
• Belarus ☢
• Ukraine
• Georgia
• Azerbaijan
• Kazakhstan
• China ☢
• Mongolia
• North Korea ☢ †

Belarus borders

• Poland ⁿ
• Lithuania ⁿ
• Latvia ⁿ
• Russia ☢ †
• Ukraine

ⁿ NATO member
☢ presence of nuclear weapons (theconversation 2022Apr1)
† nuclear posturing

:D

Pesky to announce that the Kremlin is carefully considering their request to come to the aid of their operativ...err...pu...cough compatriots, ahem after a proper democratic vote of course (ending separatism), and that violations against Transnistrian brothers and sisters will be addressed.

Thanks for the history lesson, . Wash? No, observation.

Fellas, the heated he-did-she-did routine isn't really adding much. The Middle East thing has been developing (unveloping) since, let's say, the end of the 2nd world war, to the point of a tragic dead-lock/cycle of sorts, replete with bad actors and distrust on all sides. Think there's a way to regain some trust? Perhaps to dampen things at least?

Another example of tiptoeing around Russia:

Scholz Reiterates No Taurus Delivery To Avoid Ukraine War Involvement
^{— dpa via RFE/RL · Feb 26, 2024}

Although (vaguely)...

Macron refuses to rule out putting troops on ground in Ukraine in call to galvanise Europe
^{— Patrick Wintour · The Guardian · Feb 27, 2024}

Orlov isn't so vague:

Rights campaigner calls Russia 'fascist' in court
^{— Lucy Papachristou, Gabrielle Tetrault-Farber, Mark Trevelyan, Philippa Fletcher · Reuters · Feb 27, 2024}

Macron's sort-of-suggestion doesn't seem likely though, at least not at the moment.

Afghanistan — Benkei

And now the Afghans have been left in the hands of a barbaric theocractic cult. How unfortunate.



You wrote "generally [...]" which applies to an emerging European defense force that's sufficiently strong just the same. Such "a fourth power" will border the world's largest country in a few places. For that matter, it would be naïve to think they won't launch whatever (aggressive) campaigns to influence counter propagandize ... to assert power. They wouldn't suddenly start focusing on creating a democracy, because "look, friendly neighbors, kumbaya". (2024Feb21, 2024Feb23)

:point: A question: why do Moldovans get nervous and jittery when there's talk of Putin? — Feb 5, 2024

The present Europe isn't sufficiently strong. (Germany and Hungary might argue, France and Slovakia might argue, Croatia and Serbia are arguing (2024Feb25, 2024Feb26), ..., meanwhile in Moscow...) Europe should get its act together, NATO or not, though at least NATO is there for now. Has come up before, more than once, maybe you missed it... "Can't have such a strong (capable) defen...err..threat on our doorstep. Offensive!"

Furthermore, "generally [...] - until it isn't" applies to defense (which is what NATO is, and what such a future European defense force presumably would be). Sure, defense can turn to offense, defensive organizations might launch offensives (I've yet to see anyone accurately predict the future in detail). Yet, by this logic (by implication), defense ought then be abandoned. (Docility? "Peacemongering"? Spinelessness?)

Implicitly placing trust in the Kremlin and blanket distrust in NATO is plain out of whack. You can ask the good folks of the Baltics if it isn't clear enough to you (might compare with the Moldovans by the way). Let's not have more Belaruses emerging, please.

It wasn't specifically about NATO anyway. It was about the Kremlin losing control of Ukraine. (2024Feb12, 2024Feb23) Again, to what end?

^{↑ with the embedded links you can see there's not much new here}

More generally, I don't see how anyone can call an expansion of any military alliance as defensive. Expansion is by definition offensive. It is the "trust our blue eyes" we're really a defensive organisation that everyone in the West sincerely believes because it's our guys claiming it - until it isn't. — Benkei

And thus by that note, abandon defense, especially sufficiently strong ones? Nah.

We only need enough to deter. — Benkei

It's not just nuclear deterrence. But Europe should get its act together, NATO or not. I don't think you can dismiss a large, authoritarian land-grabber with a hand-wave.

the death throes of the end of an empire — Benkei

Maybe? Prophecy aside, that's certainly what the Kremlin would have (everyone think). By the way, acting on what seems like overall "European interests" isn't so straightforward. For that matter, it's quite easy to find anti-EU sentiments within the EU, and some defer to NATO for defense.

what do you have in mind when saying that Europe getting it's act together? — ssu

Cooperation for starters. I wouldn't vote against NATO, though. It's fine, for now anyway.

Supporting a country that has been invaded by a larger country that wants to annex large territories from it is enough reasons for me. — ssu

And quite a few have found reasons. (Not that this thread is particularly representative.)

Let's try some...humor...of sorts:

Lots of talk at the UN, New York ...

Ukraine accuses Russia of 'colonial conquest' at feisty UN session
^{— Bernd von Jutrczenka · dpa international · Feb 23, 2024}

Russia's aim is to destroy Ukraine and they are quite outspoken about it. The only reason for this war has been and remains Russia's denial of Ukraine's right to exist and its continued colonial conquest. — Dmytro Kuleba (Ukraine)

The reality is there are no temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. — Vasily Nebenzya (Russia)

We reiterate our demand to Russia to stop its war of aggression against Ukraine and to ensure the full, immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Russian forces and military equipment from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. — joint statement (≈ 50/193 UN)

The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine reported civilians and prisoners tortured, and more than two hundred cases of sexual violence, mostly at the hands of the Russian Federation forces. All perpetrators must be held to account. Many Ukrainians are experiencing the living nightmare of losing their children. — António Guterres (UN)

President Putin has proved again and again that to him, human lives count for nothing – neither abroad nor at home, where he now doesn't even shy away from arresting Russian children for laying down flowers to mourn the death of Alexei Navalny. — Annalena Baerbock (Germany)

This is not a man seeking compromise. Rather, this is a neo-imperialist bully who believes might is right. We must recognize the cost of giving up. Putin has said there will be no peace until Russia's goals are achieved. — David Cameron (UK)

At least there is some talk, not just Russian North Korean Iranian Belarusian bombs falling on Ukraine. What people want others to hear is communicated. Not that it'll lead anywhere for now.

War can be attractive to some, like money for family (or a promise anyway), ... There are some similarities between reported stories:

Deal ‘with the devil’: Meet the Cubans who’ve joined Russia’s war on Ukraine
^{— Eva Hartog · POLITICO · Sep 25, 2023}
Putin speeds up a citizenship path for foreigners who enlist in the Russian military
^{— Dasha Litvinova · AP · Jan 4, 2024}
Russia has recruited as many as 15,000 Nepalis to fight its war. Many returned traumatized. Some never came back
^{— Sugam Pokharel, Matthew Chance, Mihir Melwani, Nishant Khanal · CNN · Feb 11, 2024}
Delhi approaches Moscow for early discharge of Indian ‘army helpers’
^{— Vijaita Singh · The Hindu · Feb 24, 2024}

Unlikely that death as cannon fodder will benefit family here though. Anyway, same old story.

Hmm. Well. Cannon ball trajectories (roughly) form a parabola over time. The position (spatial) can be expressed as a function of time. Physics. (High school if memory serves.) Meaningful, reliable. But, yes, our expressions are descriptive, not pre/proscriptive. Anyway, carry on. :)

, I'm not quite seeing the difficulty.
When the bus arrives (temporal location) + where the bus arrives (spatial location) — the spacetime location — means I can then get on the bus, unless I went to the pub instead (spatial), or missed the bus (temporal).
FYI, I've done it a few times myself, i.e. have justification to find it meaningful. ;)
Do you not find those notions meaningful/reliable?
Also, it takes some time (duration) to get to my destination, and there's usually room on the bus (volume).
Roughly, I suppose we might say that when+duration are to events/processes (temporal) what where+volume are to objects (spatial), or something like that anyway.
On another note, I don't know if space or time are considered physical as such; in some contexts, physical tends to mean objects (or something that's conserved or persists).
Apologies , didn't mean to distract the time travel discussion.

, so a location in time and space, both?

:up: I'm thinking that duration and simultaneity are reliable/meaningful enough that we depend on them, both in everyday life and science. The ontological examination (philosophy) is another matter perhaps.

Navalny team says Russia threatened his mother with ultimatum to avoid burial at Arctic prison
^{— CBS (+ AFP) · Feb 23, 2024}

Would the authorities (also) be scared of an independent medical examination? Seems ehh...appropriate, given the circumstances.

Meanwhile in Belarus:

Ukrainian children are taught to love Russia: special camps, "Lyube" songs, meetings with the military (investigation)
^{— Maxim Savchuk, Andriy Shauliuga · Radio Svoboda (RFE/RL) · Feb 22, 2024}


I moved the following snippet over here, where it's more on topic:

but expansion of NATO has deteriorated relations with Russia several times and therefore deteriorated our safety in Europe — Benkei

More generally, I don't see how anyone can call an expansion of any military alliance as defensive. Expansion is by definition offensive. — Benkei

Sure, maybe that's an aspect of sorts, yet it was never about NATO specifically. It's about the Kremlin's vision of Russia, at least the current authoritarian leadership, and that losing control of Ukraine or parts thereof would be contrary to that.

We (the EU) need our own defensive alliance and leave the US and create a fourth power. — Benkei

Yep :up: if Europe can get its act together (I intentionally expanded "the EU" to "Europe"). Do you think Europe can create + maintain an effective defense? Hopefully so. (I don't just mean some "blue eyed" part of Europe, or Western Europe, I mean those wishing to be part thereof that can meet a set of requirements.) Yet that, all by itself, could be argued the same way by the Kremlin: "Can't have such a strong (capable) defen...err..threat on our doorstep. Offensive!" Authoritarians don't require much discussion debate bureaucracy agreement back-and-forth etc, things we've seen in North America, Europe, and elsewhere. The Kremlin, in its aggressive posturing, would further argue Ukraine wanting to join a European defense as being a "dire existential threat", "critical security offense", whatever. Again, it was never about NATO in particular, but about a grand vision of Russia's "destiny", that Ukraine has been forced into, evidently with little concern for Ukrainians or their aspirations.

No. What you've got there is a metaphor. You can mess with language, but you can't mess with physics. — Vera Mont

What am I to do over at the bus stop, when I find that the bus is scheduled to arrive in a few minutes...?
Do I deny that "events have temporal locations", and ehh head over to the pub instead? :)

Just the fact that time has no physical locations. — Vera Mont

Isn't it more that events have temporal locations?
Anyway, duration and simultaneity are meaningful enough, and suggest some temporal structure taken together.
Processes/events can be reasonably clear temporally, and less clear spatially.
Objects can be reasonably clear spatially, and less clear temporally; volume and place are meaningful enough, and suggest some spatial structure taken together.

but expansion of NATO has deteriorated relations with Russia several times and therefore deteriorated our safety in Europe — Benkei

More generally, I don't see how anyone can call an expansion of any military alliance as defensive. Expansion is by definition offensive. — Benkei

Sure, maybe that's an aspect of sorts, yet it was never about NATO specifically. It's about the Kremlin's vision of Russia, at least the current authoritarian leadership, and that losing control of Ukraine or parts thereof would be contrary to that.

We (the EU) need our own defensive alliance and leave the US and create a fourth power. — Benkei

Yep :up: if Europe can get its act together (I intentionally expanded "the EU" to "Europe"). Do you think Europe can create + maintain an effective defense? Hopefully so. (I don't just mean some "blue eyed" part of Europe, or Western Europe, I mean those wishing to be part thereof that can meet a set of requirements.) Yet that, all by itself, could be argued the same way by the Kremlin: "Can't have such a strong (capable) defen...err..threat on our doorstep. Offensive!" Authoritarians don't require much discussion debate bureaucracy agreement back-and-forth etc, things we've seen in North America, Europe, and elsewhere. The Kremlin, in its aggressive posturing, would further argue Ukraine wanting to join a European defense as being a "dire existential threat", "critical security offense", whatever. Again, it was never about NATO in particular, but about a grand vision of Russia's "destiny", that Ukraine has been forced into, evidently with little concern for Ukrainians or their aspirations.

Remove all Hamas — RogueAI

OK, or neutralize.

Remove all Israeli war criminals — Benkei

And those as well.

Nazism — BitconnectCarlos

And that. :fire:

Russia is rebuilding capacity to destabilize European countries, new UK report warns
^{— Danica Kirka · AP · Feb 20, 2024}

The Threat from Russia's Unconventional Warfare Beyond Ukraine, 2022-24 (pdf)
^{— Jack Watling, Oleksandr V Danylyuk, Nick Reynolds · RUSI · Feb 2024}

Well, the Kremlin organizing and sending operatives (destabilizing insurging propagandizing staging arming shooting), employing extremists (including locals), invading (shooting bombing all over), land grabbing (annexing intimidating referendum'ing (foretold?)) ... can pass for a variety of neo-colonialism. (← steps fairly well-documented, including in this thread, not ad hoc story-telling)

The former parts (destabilizing etc) need not lead to the latter parts (assimilation) though.

COVID-19 vaccines and adverse events of special interest: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals

^{— K Faksova, D Walsh, Y Jiang, J Griffin, A Phillips, A Gentile, J C Kwong, K Macartney, M Naus, Z Grange, S Escolano, G Sepulveda, A Shetty, A Pillsbury, C Sullivan, Z Naveed, N Z Janjua, N Giglio, J Perälä, S Nasreen, H Gidding, P Hovi, T Vo, F Cui, L Deng, L Cullen, M Artama, H Lu, H J Clothier, K Batty, J Paynter, H Petousis-Harris, J Buttery, S Black A. Hviid · Vaccine · Feb 12, 2024}

@neomac, long tedious invasion at first masquerading as uprising. Known playbook, seen before.

Don't know how much of this stuff is news around here, was to me anyway:

Former Wisconsin Republican Party chair says he was tricked by fake elector plan
^{— Anderson Cooper, Aliza Chasan, Sarah Koch, Madeleine Carlisle · CBS · Feb 18, 2024}

:D The Donald Dog Toy

For them (the West - TASS) this is about improving their tactical position, but for us this is about our destiny, a matter of life and death. I wanted people that will listen to this [interview with Carlson] to realize that. It’s not up to me to judge whether it hit the mark or not. — Putin · TASS · Feb 18, 2024

The largest country in the world...? :brow: Russia will persist, Putin is 71. Once again conflating grand (somewhat USSR-style) vision, at the expense of Ukraine (and Russia(n youth) for that matter). ^{2024Feb16, 2024Feb12, 2024Feb7}

:D Old Joe versus The Clown

Look, this is going to be a long, grueling, and mostly pointless campaign, since everyone already knows which of the two elderly candidates they prefer to barely tolerate. The one who can’t walk up stairs or the one who can’t walk down ramps.

It gets so dull hearing these talking points. The American dream is dead because Mars bars were $1 and are now $1.25.

I know what you hacks on both sides will say before they say it. Is it really healthy to blame every problem on Joe Biden?

The reason for that [more people have registered as independent voters than ever] is this kind of mindless partisanship.

We gotta get used to it, this is it, this is the race. Biden and Trump, the race is over. This is bad news for the country, I think. Very good news for people who build ramps on debate stages.

Did you know that Bill Clinton, has been out of office for 25 years, is still younger than both of them? I’m not kidding about that. That is a true fact. Their combined age is 158 years old. The first debate is going to be at the Museum of Natural History.

You know what’s trending on Twitter? Dementia Don, because Trump was talking about Nancy Pelosi during January 6, but he kept calling her Nikki Haley.

You know what else Dementia Don did this week? This is a direct quote, I don’t know what it means, no one does, he said word for word, ‘We are an institute in powerful death penalty. We will put this on.’ Even Biden was like, ‘What the f---?'
— Bill Maher (Feb 17, 2024)

(my emphasis)

would super very likely trigger a Russian invasion (plenty experts predicted this) — boethius

Not saying right/wrong, just that you keep interspersing postulates. Per earlier, the war was about loss of control. (Aren't resources/assets among the most common reasons for warring?)

, climate can terrorize if poked long enough collectively by humans.

Russian activist and Putin critic Alexei Navalny dies in prison
^{— Andrew Roth, Helen Sullivan · The Guardian · Feb 16, 2024} — Feb 16, 2024

A fictional dialogue ("When what happens in Moscow, goes to FUK3") translated to English:

Putin: "Get him out of my sight."
Unknown: "Yes, sir."
Putin: "Get rid of him but do not allow him to become a martyr."
Unknown: "Understood, sir."
Putin: "Forgotten by election season."
Unknown: "Yes, Mr President."

Some of the footage that came out of the imprisonment reminds a bit more of Hannibal Lecter treatment than a political opponent. Putin fears Navalny, Putin makes example of Navalny, Russians fear becoming another example?

, you missed the point (again), or skirted or whatever. Regardless of Kremlin CIA Mossad Sri Lanka whatever, this is what the Ukrainians wanted (again):

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of oligarchs, police brutality, and human rights violations.^(29)(30) Repressive anti-protest laws fuelled further anger.⁽²⁹⁾ — Revolution of Dignity (Wikipedia)

^{(you're free to work backward from the facts, but no matter)}
And there still was/is no independence in the grabbed regions.
So, to what end?


:/ Another one bites the dust:

Russian activist and Putin critic Alexei Navalny dies in prison
^{— Andrew Roth, Helen Sullivan · The Guardian · Feb 16, 2024}

, yes yes, I know, everyone should hate the US...and blame...at least suspect...always. Well, I've been asking "To what end" in contexts like this, and here's what they wanted (again):

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of oligarchs, police brutality, and human rights violations.^(29)(30) Repressive anti-protest laws fuelled further anger.⁽²⁹⁾ — Revolution of Dignity (Wikipedia)

Seems reasonable enough to me. Except, such a tedious lengthy damned process, surely if wanting to join modern democratic clubs and wrestle free from ghosts of the past. But the Gremlin threw a wrench in that with a roar...err war.

Anyway, the repetition is also getting tedious.

And there still was/is no such independence. Probably not really the Gremlin's plan in the first place.

Russia and West clash over Ukraine at Security Council meeting ahead of war anniversary
^{— Edith M Lederer · AP · Feb 12, 2024}

Had the Minsk agreements been implemented, Nebenzia said, “the tragedy that has taken place in Ukraine today would not have happened, a tragedy in which the U.S. and the collective West are complicit as they try to achieve their geopolitical aims at the cost of Ukraine and the lives of its citizens.” — Vasily Nebenzya

Whenever the Kremlin circle says ↑ this (emphasized), I can't help but wonder if they know how ridiculous it is. Along the lines of their alternate world type stuff. (Going by the latter part here, which isn't new.) How to talk with someone that doesn't care about truth?

Russian — not German Chinese American Antarctican Japanese — military is killing Ukrainians and the Kremlin has chosen to do so, more or less ongoingly. (besides, the attackers↔defenders relationship isn't symmetrical, attackers choose for both, defenders can't choose otherwise)

By the way, has Nebenzya considered North Korea (and Iran) to be "complicit" in "the cost of to Ukraine and the lives of its citizens"? After all, reportedly, North Korean bombs are on a killing spree, via Russian military, by Kremlin order.

So, the Kremlin circle evades/shirks their responsibility, and pseudo-offloads to others instead. I'm guessing one person could pick up the phone and change the killing in a jiffy, well, maybe. They indirectly admit to creating "a tragedy", but ... no ... (Misdirection.)

They cater to a particular argument (intended) to appeal to (against) supporters: The defense supporters cause the attacks that kill Ukrainians — implicitly, the attackers are one (unbendable righteous superior) and the killing is necessary. The defense supporters must cease and desist — remove cause and effect ("the tragedy") disappears. (Slippery slope.) Are the invaders unmovable and don't care about ("the lives of") people? In analogy, should supporters "be the bigger person" in some way, abandon the defenders, appearing to confirm the attackers' rhetoric?

It is Russia that is the aggressor and Ukraine which is simply defending its people, its territorial integrity and its freedom. — Robert A Wood

Accuse others of what you're doing. Kindergarten'ize victims. Grab land. Carry on with impunity. :ok:

Donbas secedes. It's messy, like most secessions are, but they manage to maintain their independence. They need Russian support, but so too did the US need French support; once you're a new political entity it is incumbent on you to seek out support where you can find it.

The US guards jealously its right to secede from the British; the war of independence was costly and bloody but they won (with the help of foreign powers hostile to Britain).

I don's see why I would reduce in meaning the Donbas Declaration of Independence.

Ukraine tries to reconquer the Donbas, fails, creates the inevitable intervention of Russia to resolve the situation. — boethius

There was and is no such independence, remember? :D Rather, regions were grabbed by the (regressing) Kremlin empire after their campaigns. (odd how these ↑ comments keep skirting other stuff, oh well)

Also, if Syrskyi isn't popular, it's definitely setting the stage for a coup. — boethius

Covertly, no protests or the like? After all, Zelenskyy was democratically elected. Protests seem unlikely in the current (wartime) situation. But, hey, who knows.

Looks like Yandex departs Russia, joining whatever others (ExxonMobil, McDonald's, Rönesans Holding, Payoneer, Match Group), for whatever reasons.

Faisal Islam: Russia’s war economy cannot last but has bought time
^{— Faisal Islam · BBC · Feb 10, 2024}

No doubt there are / will be effects, but they're hard to predict. Forecasts, anyone? Effects on their war efforts?

Okie then, you concur, land grab, because power and such, NATO or not. (By the way, they have other Black Sea presence + Sea of Azov.)

Their "dire existential threat" rhetoric was/is a call for nationalism (unity), without which waging wars is more difficult; goes hand in hand with their...other efforts. Also, you might have noticed that nuclear posturing is on them, though North Korea is more worrisome.

And to what end?

^(hint)

, again, it wasn't specifically about NATO^†, it was about loss of control (any such control and influence, to anyone), hence the land grab:

Protesters opposed what they saw as widespread government corruption and abuse of power, the influence of oligarchs, police brutality, and human rights violations.^(29)(30) Repressive anti-protest laws fuelled further anger.⁽²⁹⁾ — Revolution of Dignity (Wikipedia)

But, hey, a "dire existential threat" promotes a sense of urgency (fearmongering), and is also neat for picking up any anti-NATO (or anti-West) sentiments anywhere.

^{† 2024Feb5, 2023Dec26, 2023Dec25, 2023Oct15, 2023Oct11, 2022Nov13, 2022Nov4}

↑ nutn' new thread-wize

@boethius, so, in short, you say Russia is not really a threat to anyone, but NATO is an existential threat to Russia. :D *hah*

Yep, NATO is a threat: to Kremlinian free military (and such) actions, and to Putin's ambitions.

Mearsheimer has argued that Crimea would be, or is, a great geo-political-power-military asset to Russia, which the Kremlin apparently couldn't pass up. Land grab. Then a variation of "neo-imperialism" or "neo-colonialism" or whatever.

The Kremlin has instead proven a direct present tangible ongoing threat to Ukraine and Ukrainians. (And others.)

It seems unlikely that the Kremlin would have accepted this peace agreement, for example.

Maybe Kyiv's democratic (and such) aspirations are a threat to Putinian authoritarianism, to their control and influence. :D Well, their efforts threw a wrench in Kyiv's attempts to free themselves from their large neighbor.

NATO nuclear weapons in Ukraine was always and remains unlikely. Russian nuclear weapons and rattling on the other hand...

NATO was kind of simmering down over the years, but, with Putin's crap, that seems to have ended.

If Putin's Russia were to assimilate a fifth of Ukraine, then their NATO-phobic (and "West-phobic") argument would continue to apply to the remaining intact Ukraine. If Putin's Russia was to assimilate all of Ukraine, then Putin's logic could equally be raised vice versa by Moldova Poland Romania Hungary Slovakia, and hence the EU. It's open-ended perpetual crap.

And to what end?

↑ nothing new here

A recent study suggests that as women become more educated and have access to reproductive health services, they choose to have less than 1.5 children on average. — Agree-to-Disagree

It's not all that new, been a tendency for some time (also in religious demography). The "Idiocracy (2006)" movie takes a humorous shot at that (not really the best movie, but, anyway).

:D gave me a good chuckle

Strangelove limb control (1964 · 28s)


Putin limb control (2024 · 12s)