Ukraine would want Crimea back, or at least part of it, IMO.

Another possible future, if Putin can't manage to extract himself and his men from this situation before a month or two, remains a partial collapse of the Russians forces on some theaters. Putin's position as generalissimo would then seem compromised.

the first two of these scenarios are disastrous for Ukraine and the third only a win if the Russians make significant compromises. So, your outlook appears no more optimistic than mine. — Baden

I'm not trying to be optimistic, i'm trying to keep my analysis fact-based. The Russians have evidently failed in their objectives so far, with the forces and weapons they have engaged. If they now start to lose ground, they might try other weapons. We'll see.

Conscription would only help after a while because you have to equip and train this new cannon fodder first.

I follow where the evidence leads. — Baden

So let's speak about evidence. One month in, and they have not even 'liberated' Donbas. They are losing men by the thousands, not counting the prisoners. They've been pushed back from the vicinity of Kyiv, in the first successful large Ukrainian counter-offensive. That's to be compared with the idea they had prior to attack, of a walk in the park among a joyful and grateful populace welcoming them.... Looks pretty disastrous to me.

The have more or less another month worth of cannon fodder to go, perhaps two. After that, that is to say, if they and the Ukrainians can both last that long, then either they launch general conscription, use chemical weapons, or sign a peace treaty under significant military pressure.

I've already stated them — Isaac

Just summarize them briefly, will you?

Have you read Popper? Probably not, or you wouldn't compare him to Ayn Rand.

I'm supporting the people who I think would be harmed by the policy I'm opposing. — Isaac

Quite a broad group of people. And what does it translates into, under the circumstances? What policy prescriptions do you make (or not make) as a result?

At least it shows that this choice of equating, say, MM. Biden and Putin by comparing them or any other leader with Nazi figures is not, in the view of some, an obviously superior choice morally, politically or philosophically speaking.

There's nothing inherently noble in neutrality.

Karl Popper wrote a whole book defending open societies against their enemies. And the main point is that open societies aka democracies, however imperfect, are perfectible while closed societies, not so much. And that gives democracies an inherent strength as compared to dictatorships.

Wow... Now that's facile IMO.

Who is Himmler and who is Goring in your comparison?

It was perfectly precise as it was. People support strategies not side, in contrast to you entire position here that anything short of wholehearted approval of Western strategy must therefore be 'siding with Putin'. — Isaac

This is not what I am saying.

I'm saying you can support whoever you want to. Or not. But don't assume that there is one good choice and only one, consisting in not chosing side. Your choice of supporting no one is in no way morally superior to another choice.

Your final sentence undermines your entire argument. People are making choices about strategy, not sides. — Isaac

More precisely, strategic choices may or may not involve chosing one side against another. But even supporting no side, or supporting both, are choices that are available.

Don't do X" is a perfectly sufficient political position. It doesn't required a "do Y instead". — Isaac

Logically, it does. It prescribes lines of action that do not involve X, as being better than lines of action that do involve X.

In other words, if Y=not X, then "Don't do X" means the same thing as "Do Y".

If I say to someone about to shoot a child "for God's sake don't shoot!" It's not a counter argument to ask "well what should I do instead?" — Isaac

Unclear, please rephrase.

You can be apolitical without any resentment, though. Or you can be complex and dwell in an amoral, anthropological state some of the time, and engage the world at other times. — frank

Yes but even if one remains 'apolitical', one must live somewhere, and chose to stay there, under this regime, rather than emigrate over there under another. This is a choice one makes even if one is unconscious of it.

Taking sides isn't much in the way of analysis though, particularly seeing as,from my point of view, the moral side to take is pretty obvious. — Baden

Obvious or unexamined? Take for instance this not-so-obvious point of yours:

Zelensky vs the Ukranian people: Think I'll stick with the Ukranian people rather than the feckless clown who could have avoided this war and now spends his time running around the world's TV screens spouting empty propaganda while his people continue to die.

This is not a true choice. Unless you want Zelensky's job and think you can do better than him, or have an alternative Ukrainian government up your sleeve, the Ukrainian government is part of the Ukrainian people and it legally represents it. You don't get to chose who's their president, they do.

People living in mature democracies are often more instrumentalist, they wouldn't cheer anyone but try and make choices, rather. — Olivier5

Of course we all do tribal politics and the whole us vs them is a simplistic and often counter-productive way to look at things. It's always us with them somehow, we share this planet.

But what I mean by making choices is simply things like voting, if we live in a democracy, or emigrating, ie voting with our feet. We have to make to choices between alternatives, between living here or there, between this party or that party to vote for.

It is never the case that we can live under no government or power system. There is always power, and it is always more or less organized, structured this or that way. So while we can chose between various forms of political organization, we cannot chose no political organization whatsoever. Unless we all go live on deserted islands.

For instance, in the case at hand, the choice for the Ukrainians is pretty clear: it's between independence as an imperfect democratic society, and subjugation in perfect Putinistan.

The choice for the Russians is also about that.

The choice for other people, such as Europeans, Americans, Aseans, Africans or Oceanians, as organized politically through states, is about which side to chose, if any. IOW should Peru or the Netherlands help Ukraine, or rather help Russia, or stay neutral? Or help both??? If they wish to help, how should they do so most effectively without compromising other interests? Etc.

The choice for a poster here is somewhat similar.

All this to say that it's not possible to have your cake and eat it too. You must make a choice, and even splendid neutrality is but one political choice amongst many, with no reason to believe it is necessarily a wise choice, whether you assess it morally or strategically.

Such neutrality only looks splendid. But it's not.

This one is for @Amity.

Thank you.

If you critique someone's ideology without presenting any alternative, you're just making noise with your mouth.

Meh...

The big advantage of political nihilism is that one can criticize other ideologies but never ever present a positive belief or alternative onself, so as to avoid critique.

You are afraid to come forth transparently, as you should be.

What I call political nihilism is the incapacity to make any political choice. The incapacity to explain one's politics to another person would be a symptom.

not cheering on a bunch of proven murderers is a baseline ideological position of mine. — StreetlightX

You attribute a lot of importance to whom you cheer. It's an unusual way to look at politic, very youthful and teenage. People living in mature democracies are often more instrumentalist, they wouldn't cheer anyone but try and make choices, rather.

PLEASE don't leave Amity. I love you. There are not too many folks I like here. If you go I might as well.

The toxicity is high here, on this particular thread, not everywhere. We all take a break from this specific thread once in a while to protect our sanity. That IS advisable. But please don't go.

I didn't ask for a label but for your ideology. You are welcome to describe it with or without labels.

You see, we all have some ideology. It's like metaphysics, even the hatred of metaphysics is a metaphysics, and likewise even the hatred of all political ideology is ideological.

For instance, your dislike of the West is ideological.

You're quite confused, I would agree.

What's your ideology?

this outrage - entirely valid - comes packed in an apologia and ideological flag-waving for Western power. — StreetlightX

Which is entirely natural. Not everyone can be a political nihilist. So we often raise some flag or another, you included probably.

Could be a scene in Orwell's 1984, or from Brazil (the movie).



"They asked me, 'Why do you hate us?'
The director of the Kherson theater recounts his abduction
By Faustine Vincent, 25 March, le Monde (your daily source for French propaganda)

Oleksandr Kniga, local figure and member of the Kherson regional council, the first major Ukrainian city to fall under Russian control, was kidnapped Wednesday March 23. Released the same day, he spoke to Le Monde by telephone about a rather sureal interview.

... At 7 a.m. he saw a dozen armored jeeps arrive at his home in Olechky, near Kherson. ... There were so many Russians then that he asked them what they were afraid of. “They searched the whole house, talked to me for a bit in my library, checked our social networks, then told me to pack my things and took me outside. Almost the entire area was cordoned off."

His captors took him to a car with three Russian soldiers inside. “We drove to Kherson. Ukrainian radio was playing a song about the Bayraktar” drones. This song, released on March 1 , insults the Russian army and criticizes the invasion. It has become very popular in the country.

The convoy stopped at the regional administration of Kherson. Blindfolded, the captive was put in an empty cell. “They asked me who I was, took my fingerprints and photos." His captors were masked, but Oleksandr Kniga understood, during the interrogation, "that they wee not simple soldiers but officers, probably from the secret services".

Why did they kidnap him? “They were looking at me as a public figure." The director of the theater was probably all the more suspicious since many employees of his establishment take part in the demonstrations that take place every day against the occupation in the Kherson region. “People were tired of being scared, hearing explosions and sitting in basements. They are happy to see each other at rallies,” said Mr. Kniga.

During his captivity, a hooded man asked him: “Why are you organizing demonstrations?“ Oleksandr Kniga then tries to explain to him that these gatherings are spontaneous: “People come out by themselves, everyone can express their opinion freely." Opposite, the man shakes his head and insists: “Why are you organizing demonstrations?"

“I don't think they can understand,” sighs Mr. Kniga. The Russians were so convinced of being welcomed as “liberators” in the cities they occupied, that in their eyes the Ukrainian resistance could only be an artificial creation, orchestrated by “nationalists” who need to be flushed out. "They also asked me, 'Why do you hate us?' I answered that it was not hatred, but an immense anger made of helplessness when they bombard the maternities, the theaters and the residential districts.»

Oleksandr Kniga's interrogation then takes the form of a "long conversation about everything", including theater. “They asked me if people from Kherson often go there." The Ukrainian then explains that his theater is reputed far beyond the city, and that the actors sometimes play up to 40 plays a month on five different stages. ...

Unlike many other victims of kidnappings in the occupied regions, tortured by their executioners, Mr. Kniga reports to have been treated “correctly”. “They did not threaten me and remained polite." Is it because the occupants hope to encourage him to collaborate? He excludes this option. "It's out of the question," he says. "The members of the regional council held a meeting on this subject and reaffirmed that “Kherson is Ukraine” and that it cannot be otherwise.»

The day was coming to an end. It was dark outside when a man brough him back a briefcase they had confiscated, which contained his phone, his passport, a tablet and his wife's laptop. “He asked me if I had a place to sleep in Kherson, and I replied that I could go to the theater, because there are always people there." His captors blindfolded him and deposited him elsewhere, far from the theater, which the Russian troops had searched the day before, convinced of finding weapons there. Oleksandr Kniga did not have time to walk there before the start of the curfew, forty minutes later. Tense and exhausted, he remembered friends living nearby and found their home.

“Now I am home again, without fear, but I am worried about my loved ones. At the start of the war, my eldest son's family had five more people. They slept in the cellar for a week because the fighting was very close, then they left. I talk too much, I must be nervous."...


https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2022/03/25/ils-m-ont-demande-pourquoi-vous-nous-detestez-le-directeur-du-theatre-de-kherson-raconte-son-enlevement_6119199_3210.html

Oh right, so just stupidity then. I can forgive that. — Isaac

Mustn't you, to survive among the rest of us?

The argument was that you raised token mantras where they had no relevance in context. — Isaac

I did not. I tried to explain to you, that prior to your post, we already had a lengthy discussion on the matter in which the most reasonable posters among us concluded that the claim was an excuse to invade Ukraine rather than something serious.

What I think should be considered cheerleading was enthusiastically promoting the idea "Russia invading Ukraine has no truth to it and is only American media hype" or the idea that the US sponsor bioweapon labs in Ukraine. Or trying to argue (several times, actually) that Vladimir Putin isn't a dictator. — ssu

Yes, there's been that too. It's been a rich debate, let's put it this way.

We were talking about Russia's rhetorical use of the Neo-Nazi issue and the most diplomatically strategic response, you blustered in with the tribal chant "there's no Neo-Nazis in Ukraine anymore!" completely ignoring both the context and the purpose of the discussion.

That - I stand by - is 'cheerleading'. Mindlessly chanting mantras supporting one side of a conflict without any relevance to the actual issue at hand. — Isaac

But that's not all what was said in this discussion. Important points were made re. Mr Putin's own closeness to neonazis, re. the marginal representation in parliament of Ukrainian neonazis, or about the obscene absurdity that bombing nations out of the blue would be a legitimate way to free them from neonazis.

This neonazi accusation is one of Mr Putin's justifications for war, as you pointed out. 'Cheerleading' would be to relay it uncritically. That would be 'Mindlessly chanting mantras supporting one side of a conflict'. We have not done that here; we have discussed this issue in some depth and have critiqued the claim made.

Have you? Did you read those points and address them?

Life in Kiev, the deserted capital
by Rémy Ourdan, Le Monde, 19 March 2022, translation Deepl
https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2022/03/19/guerre-en-ukraine-la-vie-a-kiev-dans-une-capitale-desertee_6118235_3210.html

REPORTAGE -- Bite into a croissant on the terrace of a bakery-café, do some shopping in a grocery store with raided shelves, sit down in one of the few open restaurants or paint in the sun. During the rare moments of respite, the inhabitants who have remained in the Ukrainian capital cling to a semblance of normality.

Between the two extremes of exodus and armed struggle, there is a semblance of ordinary life in Kiev, in this capital of Ukraine fighting for its existence, to the rhythm of the air raid sirens and the bombardment of the Russian artillery that strikes at the gates of the city.

The first sign of life in Kiev, every morning at dawn, appears at the central station Pasazhyrskyi. While the Russian army gradually cut off the roads leading to the city, the trains were still running. If the station was, with the convoys of buses, the symbol of the exodus during the first weeks of the war, it has almost returned to its original appearance. The ticket offices and platforms are no longer besieged by desperate crowds trying to flee before the Russians, as the Kievians feared, razed or invaded the city. The capital has already been emptied of almost half its population: 1.6 million inhabitants have left and 2 million have remained, according to the city hall. Seeing the darkened buildings and unlit windows in the evening, this is probably a minimum estimate.

In the train station, where soldiers and policemen keep watch, the stores are closed. Pavlo, the only shopkeeper now, serves coffee to the few travelers. He used to work in a shop in the city, and believes he has not lost out. "They say that the train station is the safest place in town. Well, that's what they say... Well, yes," adds Pavlo, "I heard that the best anti-aircraft defense in the city is around the station." He himself smiles at this popular belief, as if the railway station was better protected than strategic buildings, places of power or military bases.

The five cab drivers beating the pavement in front of Pasazhyrskyi station are out of work. No one uses cabs in town anymore," says Volodymyr. The only customers are refugees fleeing the suburbs" because of the Russian military advance, and those who come to catch a train to the west of the country. The idle driver laughingly mutters a few phrases of French that he used to quote to tourists. How far away do those times of peace seem now...

The city wakes up. The winter cold is still biting but, since a few days, the weather has changed from snow to sunshine. The bakery-cafe La Fabrique opens its doors. With the old French owner back home, three employees decided a few days ago to reopen this place where chic ladies come to buy bread and pastries. "People are so happy that we are open, they come from all over Kiev," says the waitress. Bread is one of the hard-to-find commodities in the city, where only a few bakeries continue to operate.

Mainly military activity

While at a table in front of the shop window, three women are having a morning coffee and laughing out loud, the customers come and go. Baguettes, rye bread, "classic" French croissants and Ukrainian-style filled croissants are all in demand. In a few hours, there will be nothing left. If the success of the bakery is confirmed, the three employees are thinking of relaunching the pastry shop as well.

Kiev lives in a very strange atmosphere. Once the shock of the declaration of war on February 24 and the first air raids had passed, followed by two weeks of exodus for some, or life in the shelters for others, it is as if a certain normality was returning to a capital that is almost deserted, at least from the point of view of civilian life. For the activity in the city is essentially military, in the face of columns of Russian tanks that have arrived about ten kilometers from the city limits, to the northwest and northeast. The time has come to engage in territorial defense, to fortify military positions and checkpoints, to engage in armed resistance. Without knowing what awaits the capital, between an encirclement effort - which is currently extending to the western flank - or a brutal assault attempt.

In Victory Square, where the city's liberation from Nazi occupation by the Red Army is celebrated every year - on November 6, 1943 - and which is ironically today one of the axes of a possible invasion by the Russian army, the Silpo supermarket tries to provide for the needs of the inhabitants. One saleswoman says that the main items missing are "potatoes, onions, eggs and milk," but there are still pasta and canned goods, and even some fruit and vegetables.

The first aile to be stormed at the beginning of the war, as in all grocery stores in Kiev, was tobacco's. It is rarely restocked, and immediately raided. "It's normal, the cigarettes go first to the soldiers," says a young girl. Others pout. The lack of cigarettes becomes a problem that makes some people nervous. "I still have tobacco," says a young man, "but no more leaves to roll." He seems distraught for a brief moment, before picking himself up and smiling, aware that this is not really here nor there when Kiev's survival is at stake.

At the Musafir restaurant, one of the very few establishments still open in Kiev, near another highly symbolic square, that of Independence and the "Maïdan revolution", families and loving couples come to taste Crimean Tatar cuisine. Despite the scarcity of food, there are still tcheboureks and yantiks - beef or mutton turnovers, classic or fried - and cheese naans. Musafir serves them with Georgian tarragon- or vanilla-flavoured lemonade. The war seems far away for a few moments, until a new air raid siren sounds.

Islands of survival

In the Ukrainian capital, partly deserted and turned in on itself, La Fabrique and Musafir are islands of survival appreciated by the rare inhabitants who dare to go outside. There is also the "X", an underground café that very few know about - and whose name and location we will not mention, as the place is illegal -, the only bar to serve alcohol clandestinely. Alcohol has been forbidden in Kiev since the government and the mayor's office distributed tens of thousands of Kalashnikovs to the territorial defense volunteers, not necessarily all of whom are familiar with the use of weapons.

Larysa Pukhanova laughs at the sirens. After three weeks "cloistered knitting socks", this painter felt "inspired by the return of the sun". She picked up her brushes again. After painting the monument of the founders of Kiev, on the bank of the Dnipro river, she set up her easel in the Shevchenko park. She paints the statue of the poet and the red facade of the national university. She never goes down to the shelters anymore. "I think no one goes there anymore."

Apart from the gardeners and the artist, only the birds in the park remain to keep company to the spirit of Taras Shevchenko.

"At my death, stand up, brothers,
Tear off your chains,
Let the enemy's blood sprinkle
A free and healthy life," he wrote in Testament.

Ukrainians often refer to the famous poet, seeing in Taras Shevchenko, a long-time prisoner in Russia who never stopped writing clandestinely about Ukraine, the embodiment of their taste for freedom.

A siren sounds. Larysa quietly continues to paint. "I'm not afraid anymore, it's over."

After the battle of Lepanto, the Venetians were ecstatic, but a year later, the Turks had rebuild their fleet.

The Turkish grand vizier told a Venetian envoy: "In wresting Cyprus from you, we cut your arm off; in defeating our fleet [in Lepanto], you have only shaved our beard. An arm when cut off cannot grow again; but a shorn beard will grow all the better for the razor."

the idea that anyone will win is propaganda. Everyone will lose on both sides, because that's what a war of attrition is, the last man standing takes possession of the smoking ruins. — unenlightened

Amen. The problem is how far the ruins will go.

People are not entitled to their own facts, though. So unless you are prepared to research and discuss facts, it's nothing but opinion against opinion.

One fact is that nobody here is cheerleading -- whatever you mean by that, which remains to be seen -- and that this charge has been levelled unfairly in a facile rhetorical manner. That is a fact. At least in my book.

Another fact is that the reporting coming from certain western and other channels is of high quality. There's some topnotch journalism being done, including by Al Jazeera, or Indian media if you don't like CNN. Of course there are huge data /field access limitations and filters, but these too are being analysed and reflected upon in the best news source. Free press is one of the (many) reasons why democracy is ultimately superior to autocracy, at least on the long run. And that's where I object to a facile and false symmetry between power structures, 'oh it's all propaganda' style. There's a difference between free press and propaganda.

I never claimed you were cheerleading, RogueAI was though in my view. Again, read the last few pages. — Baden

I've read them. People are entitled to an opinion, especially when they present facts buttressing them, as @RogueAI did.

the fact of strongly supporting a particular idea or person: — https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cheerleading

So the charge is that we have strong opinions? Meh...

For you, maybe. I'm quite happy with the claim and prepared to stand by it. — Isaac

Alright, that's welcome. Who then do you accuse of 'cheerleading'?

It is high time we have this conversation. If you do a search, the term 'cheerlead' appears 41 times, and the gerond 'cheerleading' 40 times in this thread. That's a whole lot. Now do explain who cheerleads whom where, with quotes. Or just drop the accusation.

If aggressed, I defend myself. Sorry about that.

Just stop lying. You don't need to. I am not cheerleading, you are not cheerleading, nobody is cheerleading. Okay?