No need for ad hominem attacks. I'd say it'd be more helpful to ascertain what he means by ISW. Because if he means the Institute for the Study of War, they are apparently showing something quite different from what anonymoose thinks they are showing...
After Bakhmut [Ukraine War] | The American Conservative
- Thread starter Scott
- Start date
No need for ad hominem attacks. I'd say it'd be more helpful to ascertain what he means by ISW. Because if he means the Institute for the Study of War, they are apparently showing something quite different from what anonymoose thinks they are showing...
Yakuda
Verified User
You're wasting your time with these people. They see American Conservative and they hate it. That poster hasnt read the article and likely never will . That poster has no compelling insights or thoughts about the subject you presented.
I certainly agree that it's ok to be wrong, I imagine no human has always been right, and I likewise agree that the pursuit of truth is so very important (one could say that my signature in my posts makes this clear).
I'm guessing that you believe that one or more of the things I said in my quote above is/are mistaken?
I agree with you in part- Certainly the fog of war makes it difficult to know the truth. This is exacerbated when you have a mainstream media that is beholden to corporate interests. Based on my experience with following the various narratives in this war, I think a good way at getting at the truth is to look to see who has track records of lying and who doesn't. For the most part, I've found that the mainstream media lies through their teeth while various alternative media have great track records. I've found that antiwar.com has a pretty good track record of finding articles that are honest, which is why I started this thread with an article I found on their site.
As to Russians and Ukrainians not wanting this war, I can certainly agree that the majority of them don't. The trick is looking at who instigated this war. To do that, I think one has to look at the roots of Euromaidan, and the decisions that western powers have made to support the Ukrainian civil war that started shortly after the neo nazi forces rose to power following Euromaidan, training and arming western Ukraine against eastern Ukraine.
Last edited:
Scott Ritter: Sending F-16 to Ukraine Will Backfire
https://sputnikglobe.com/20230525/scott-ritter-sending-f-16-to-ukraine-will-backfire-1110582931.html
In Ask the Expert Ritter says that the Russians who stayed, almost all of them, say of those who left at the start of the Special Military Operation "Good Riddance", they just offloaded the weakest part of their society. Left unsaid is that the Russians dont have to take them back, and if they do come back memories will be long.
Tranquillus in Exile
New member
Presumably you're referring to Donbas, but the judgment applies more generally. Russia will have to live with what Putin has done for a LONG time.
He miscalculated, thinking he could pull off his "special military operation" quickly and easily. Instead he started a major war. Now there's no going back.
Russia is a kleptocracy which has been a brutal tyranny for most of its history.
anonymoose
Classical Liberal
I’d like to hear what you would consider a fair negotiated settlement to the conflict.
I don't think that was called for. I certainly have my disagreements with Nordberg, but I think he made a fair amount of good points here, as I pointed out in post #44.
Boo Hoo.
I don't have enough information to be sure what that would look like. However, I do believe that the answer to that question could be found by looking into how we got to where we are now, with the idea of trying to reverse some of the damage. Imagine some is sick. The more you know about what led to them getting sick, the better idea you have of knowing how to get them well. Now, I know things didn't exactly start in 2014, when those behind Euromaidan apparently engaged in a coup against the elected Ukrainian President of the time, Viktor Yanukovych. Nevertheless, I think that's probably a fairly good place to start- that is, having a new look at who was behind it. I think the following article is a good place to start:
The Hidden Truth About Ukraine, Kiev Euromaidan Snipers Kill Demonstrators. Italian Documentary Bombshell Evidence | globalresearch.ca
Once the Neo Nazis behind Euromaidan essentially became the new government, this led to more atrocities, such as what happened in Odessa:
Burned alive: How the 2014 Odessa massacre became a turning point for Ukraine | rt.com
Anyway, there have been recent peace initiatives by China and Brazil. Scheerpost published an article that gets into this a few days ago:
When Will US Join Global Call to End Ukraine War? | Scheerpost
Unfortunately, the U.S. still adamantly refuses to even support calls for a ceasefire, as can be seen from the following antiwar.com article published today:
Blinken Dismisses Calls for a Ceasefire, Says US Must Build Up Ukraine’s Military | antiwar.com
Lol
. I just think that sometimes we give those who disagree with us too hard of a time. It ends up biting us back, as they frequently proceed to do the same to us.
anonymoose
Classical Liberal
No question there were a lot of mistakes made even before 2014, that was just one of many.
I just finished reading this book, a quick read. You'd like it since it goes along with your narrative.
Problem w/ correcting past mistakes by the West is that it would ignore serious proximal mistakes made and being made by Russia. They're like a jilted lover who somehow thinks he/she will get their ex back by stalking and harassing which only further alienates the ex.
Ukraine and Russia are done. And who will rebuild Ukraine no matter who wins? Certainly not Russia.
I'm now in the process of reading this one. There's no shortage of books on the subject of this conflict. Very complicated.
Russia is doing the best they have in a very long time. What remain of Ukraine will likely be rebuilt by the Chinese, but that requires the Ukrainians to get their heads out of their asses.