The point is that nobody is cheerleading.

You use the word, so you must know what you mean by it. Give it a go, explain the charge if you dare.

I'm reminded of when you cluelessly accused me of not knowing English — Baden

That was meant as a joke.

Anyway, what's nasty is referring to a war like it's a cliche scene from a movie, learning absolutely nothing about what's going on, refusing outright to engage in any critical thought whatsoever, and using that basis of pure ignorance to call for its continuation. — Baden

Don't be so hard on yourself.

If you don't like propaganda, don't lie. Otherwise what does that make you?

Nobody here is cheerleading anything. If you want to pretend we are, give proof. Use the quote function. A lie oft repeated is just another lie...

You can go down your high horse now.

@StreetlightX

When the whole country looks like that, the cheerleaders here might actually get bored and change their mind, moving on to the next shiny object to get their armchair kicks from. — Baden

Could you please stop lying, both of you? Nobody here is cheerleading anything. We just have different opinions than yours, that's all. No need to get all nasty and insulting. Go discuss the baldness of the kings of France somewhere, will you?

There is more adrenaline to fight hard for one's own land than to ruin someone else's. — Bitter Crank

There must be a lot of anger in those kids sent to die in an absurd war. Of course you could say all wars are absurd, but in their case, the nationalist ideology or worldview underlying the attack isn't even anything clear. I mean, you can disagree with Communism -- ir fascism -- but these were relatively clear, unambiguous ideoligies. Putin's megalomania has failed to translate into clear ideas. Some ideological amorphous marshmallow, some vague, faux-grandiose delirium mixed with paranoia doesn't a Trotsky or a Lenine make. Ideological marshmallows won't help the soldier much on the battlefield either.

This war is absurd and the guys fighting it knows it.

Having about 7% of the population displaced to other countries is also no small thing,

Plus all the internally displaced.

Western propaganda>It's a complete disaster
Russian propaganda>It's all going to plan
Any non-idiotic impartial observer>Neither of those is true. They are both just propaganda. — Baden

I for one believe the prevalent military analysis among experts, ie that this war is going very badly for both sides, while the expectation was that of a relatively easy take over from the Russians.

The dynamics can only turn worse for the latter now, the way I see it. If they haven't won by now, chances are they will never win. Russian troops cannot sit duck in defensive lines for long. A total breakdown of the Ukrainian forces could still happen I guess, but it's not happening... What seems to be happening is that long supply lines are easy targets for them. There is also a huge difference in troop morale between the two sides. The Russian army doesn't know why they fight. The Ukrainians do. It makes a difference.

deleted

What basis do you have for the idea that because Russia isn't currently threatening to use nukes, it won't do so? — Baden

I propose to cross that bridge if and when we ever get to it.

As of now, lots of news outlets in the West want you to be very afraid of the Kremlin 'madman' and want you to think that he's going to use nukes, chemical weapons, biological weapons etc. These are good headlines for media businesses.

And maybe, indeed, at some point Mr Putin will try and scare folks by making them think he's crazy. But i don't think so. To threaten nukes on Ukraine is to look weak, not strong.

Russian Minister of Defence Sergei Shoigu disappears from view, rumored to have 'heart problems.'

Apparently the same applies to Valery Gerasimov, Chief of Staff... Neither of them have been seen in public for nearly two weeks. Maybe there's a epidemic of heart diseases in the Russian top brass.

They communicated, in NATO's general direction, that they will not use tactical nukes in Ukraine. So I don't think they want NATO to believe that they will use nukes in Ukraine.
Or is that too logical?
— Olivier5

I was talking about the future, not now. Is that too logical? — Baden

I see. Another poster who needs an English course.

We normally use WILL to speak about the future. It is always combined with another verb.

Examples of Will:

I will go to the cinema tonight.
He will play tennis tomorrow.
The Kremlin spokeman said they will not use tactical nukes in Ukraine.

They communicated, in NATO's general direction, that they will not use tactical nukes in Ukraine. So I don't think they want NATO to believe that they will use nukes in Ukraine.

Or is that too logical?

As I said, learn to read.

Where did I say he is a monster? And where did I say he is for sure a decent person?

Learn to read. I said: PERHAPS he's got SOME decency left. Do you need an English course from me?

I don't expect Putin to use nuclear weapons but I do expect him to make us think he will if that's what it takes. — Baden

His spokeperson said yesterday that they will use nukes only in case of existential threat. He didn't mention failing to take Kyiv as an existential threat.

:smile: I'm a humanist, sorry about that.

As for decency, don't make me fucking laugh. — Baden

He is still a human being.

. I don't believe we're built for a confrontation with Putin and I don't believe he doesn't know that. — Baden

We're not built for it but neither is he. Putin is weaker than he thinks. If his army can't subdue Ukraine, it can't defeat Belgium. His regime cannot survive critiques, but ours can.

What would stop Putin from shooting a 1 MT tactical nuke into Kiev or Mariupol if he can't do it by conventional means? — Benkei

Pride, I think. Doing so would be to accept that he lost the regular fight. Perhaps he's got some decency left, also.

Then what did you mean by:

Unless you can convincingly argue that Putin will not escalate until he's assured of victory, it's exactly this fantasy that will lead to unnecessary deaths of civilians. — Benkei

You're not quite rational if you believe that anything said here can have any impact on the battlefield.

The people I'm speaking to (you lot) are encouraging continued Ukrainian resistance (and continued Western arms supply). I think that will lead to more innocent deaths for no (or minimal) gain, so I oppose it. — Isaac

Ok, so you think the Russians can't be beaten.

Just watch.

Rather, it's what you haven't said. You keep talking about Ukrainians as if they were the only ones dying, the only ones who can stop this, the only ones in need of surrendering... What about the Russians? Won't you advise them to surrender too?

the millions more who wouldn't give a shit about being considered "Little Russians" if it meant their sons and daughters were not killed in war. — Isaac

Millions of Russians don't want to die for Donbas either, but you don't seem to care for their lives so much.

Russia will come to regret this Nazi adventure.

Dismissing them on the grounds that they're just 'some guy' renders the entire format redundant. — Isaac

But why would anyone post the opinion of other person than himself, of some random dude out there? Yuliy Dubovyk is welcome here if he wants to contribute.

2. Keep fighting revolutions to make it not matter what government they are under the control of.

The latter has the advantage of freeing millions more from misery — Isaac

We have a few guillotines left, we could lend them to the Brits if they seriously want to get rid of their kings and queens.

Documented, recorded, with satellite images backing it...

Your buddies are taking a beating, me think.

So what? A guy says something and?

It seems the Ukrainians are successfully dismantling the group west of Kyiv, and have retaken Irpin.

An intercepted phone call recording was released by Ukraine’s Security Service late yesterday, indicating total disarray on the Russian side in this area.

Ukrainians have agency alright. The Russians, not so much. An army of slaves.

And the Brits call the French Frogs, and the French call then Roastbeef. Cry me a Dniepr river.

By the time when the multilayered Clearstream affair hit, lots of folks started to unplug from the judicial sagas, that developed mani pulite style in the 90's. That's because at this point, the judicial cases were becoming part of politics, used to throw suspicion on political opponents. The original Clearstream list was genuine but as you quoted from wiki, some names were added by shadowy figures who shared various lists with the press... The press who wanted some scoop... The whole 'let's clean up the République project' became a kafkaïen nightmare, a game of smoke and mirrors overnight.

Since then, justice has scored some points, out of the media frenzy that marked those days.

Hence Macron now of course. But there are many other reasons. Like the French economic elite being tired of being ignored and milked. They support him 100%.

The whole Chirac crew were small time crooks, and they did many dirty political tricks. Chirac was long embroiled in trials then let go on account of his age. Also his faithful lieutenant Juppé took the blame for him. Coming to think of it, this 2003 riff with the US and UK on Iraq is the one good thing this administration did. (and it didn't even work but they gave it a brave try)

Sarko and co. were big time crooks, with several very serious judicial cases ongoing.

argument ["masu" not sure what it means] of Vladimir Putin, — boethius

Une massue = a big club

Un argument massue = a sledgehammer argument ?

He's got a point there. The contempt paid to the South is coming back to haunt us. The whole western condescension, the hypocrisy, it's been palpable for decades. Villepin doesn't mention Palestine but there's been that as well.

For his way of packing everything together, highest principles and trivial details, sort of overwhelms interviewers and news anchors and he can make his point.

If you try to really get into the mechanics of the argument, there's all sorts of missing pieces, but the point and structure of the argument is clear; you can easily fill in the blanks ... and certainly "sounds" smart. — boethius

Definitely so. He is convincing. He believes in what he says. His aura in France is that of a looser magnifique, a flibustering poet-diplomat. A bit passé now of course.

The book above is a good one, if you are interested in diplomacy. Respectful of Villepin, and also disrespectful in a light way. Same with the US. This is not a brutal caricature, it's a soft, very smart one, including with emotional intelligence. Artistic intelligence I should say, truly. Real, but funnier.

I should try and read some of his poems...

No, I was responding to the odd accusation of political nihilism. — Baden

Apologies if that was a miss.

A lot of the arguments against NATO here boil down to: the US is worse. Or: the West is worse. Or: there are many other wars why do you care for this one? The general impression is of westerners doubting the west. Of people living in democracies (I suppose) whining on social media about the social media (built by democracies) and doubting whether democracy means anything. It's a form of First World navel gazing political nihilism.

Once again, sorry if I misunderstood you.

The war isn't contributing to Russian socio-economic organisation. It was a fascist military oligarchy before the war started.

Ukraine was a democracy in name only. Riven with corruption. — Benkei

The totalitarian screw is tightening in Russia, and the economy will suffer. I am truly worried about the aftermath in Russia as well, not pretending. Their cities weren't bombed, it's true.

Ukraine is a democracy. No need to treat people with contempt. No democracy is perfect. There is corruption in France, the US, Germany, everywhere.

Villepin — boethius

I can't get out of my mind Villepin's caricature in Quai d'Orsay, a graphic novel on the French foreign ministry under Villepin during the build up to the Iraq war. Written by the guy to whom it happened. He was hired to write Villepin's speeches but cannot follow the guy's thoughts, Villepin goes way too fast and changes constantly and switches from the highest concepts to the most trivial details all the time -- as transcribed in a post upthread, his elocution is that of a scatterbrain. Not stupid by far, but a poet more than a mathematician.

The whole life of this poor speech writer becomes a rollercoaster between New York, Paris, Berlin, while the diplomatic push and shove happens. An English translation was released, under the name Weapons of Mass Diplomacy. Highly recommended.

https://www.selfmadehero.com/books/weapons-of-mass-diplomacy

It's the opposite of politicial nihilism to look beyond propaganda to actual real people and how they are affected by real things like bombs and suchlike and make their welfare the priority rather than some nationalistic ideal that is antithetical to their interests. — Baden

Let me guess: you think that I am not doing precisely that? That @ssu isn't looking beyond propaganda? That @frank behaves as a valet of US imperialism? That we don't care for the fate of ordinary Ukrainians and Russians? That we are the pro-NATO folks?

Think again. You're not the only one with his eyes open.