How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[sfhand]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Seriously what do they teach kids these days?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

How hard is it to do a google search and go on a personal learning journey?  But instead I will go troll a forum?  Next he will come back and declare that it was an “honest question” and we are all “sheeple”.  “Jesus was not actually born on 25 Dec!  Thalidomide!  United Fruit Company!  C’mon man, it was the ‘global elitist’ who started this war to distract from fluoride in the water!!”

And here, no evidence of a good faith discussion to be found. Start out assuming the worst possible motive and ATTACK!!! And I am a kid? How old are you? I'm betting I am older, and better looking to boot.

Really, have a great day!

 

[The_Capt]

54 minutes ago, sfhand said:

Steve,

I'm sure you appreciate my being a loyal customer of BF. You've stated so on this forum on more than one occasion if I remember correctly. So let me get this right, the hostility here, not necessarily from you, has nothing to do with my support for your business and my enjoyment of your products but over a political question? Really?

In my first post by design I did not address the topics of your current statements. Living in the US I have been exposed to all of the statements you put forward in some form or another. I have also been exposed to ideas that run counter to those statements. To get to the point, there are a few things that are ubiquitous in every war. Those things include death, suffering, and propaganda. I like to avoid all 3 when I don't have a dog in the fight, and in this case I don't have a dog in the fight. In short, I don't have a problem with anyone believing or disbelieving in the narrative you laid out.

I note and applaud you for having done the work to earn a degree in History with a particular concentration on the Soviet Union and Russia. Unless I am mistaken, on this topic you disagree with Prof. John Mearsheimer whose credentials are as impressive as yours, if not more so.

On to the statements according to my current understanding of the world:

1.partially true partially false

2. disproven by brics

3. sure

4.partially true partially false in part depending on what one considers a provocation (not universal; see individuals per inverse Plato's Republic) and what one considers violations of treaties and ethnic cleansing

5.I am not going to look up the UN definition of Genocide, a bridge too far, sorry, I am not a human rights lawyer

6.purely speculative

Now about that hostility. This is not directed at you Steve. Like the rest of you I have my big boy pants on. Like the rest of you I don't really give a rats behind what your opinions are about anything other than Combat Mission, and in most cases even that's questionable. What I was curious about is how so many can be so certain while living in a world so riddled with disinformation and propaganda. A few have resorted to varying forms of ad hominem, keep it up it reveals who you are and the absence of any cogent argument you might make, but most importantly the thinness of your skin.

I sincerely hope everyone is having a great day!

 

 

And once again we get another “believer” posting their opinion like it really matters.  Not a single citation or source for these alternate viewpoints.  Not even willing to do a 10 min search on the legal definition of genocide.  This is not discourse or improving the conversation one wit.  It is pure and simple ignorance…”BRIC”…really. Based on your reply you really have zero idea of what is actually happening in this war, but desperately want to believe you do.

FFS your response to whether Russia is waging an illegal war is “partially true”.  Yet you offer no proof or elaboration of this position.  

Finally, same question for you that I ask every one like yourself who has come through here…why are you here?  How are you actually adding anything to this discussion?  If you offered some credible evidence or even some logical positions it might be a start.  But no, you roll in with some grade 12 philosophy and tossing “doubt” around like you actually know what you are talking about.

To you core question of “who am I to believe”?  Assuming this is genuine, I would suggest that you start by listening…stop talking.  And then listen for the really good questions.  People who really have a bead on things tend to ask the best questions - not like yours, vague and already answered in your head.

Edited April 1 by The_Capt

[The_Capt]

20 minutes ago, sfhand said:

And here, no evidence of a good faith discussion to be found. Start out assuming the worst possible motive and ATTACK!!! And I am a kid? How old are you? I'm betting I am older, and better looking to boot.

Really, have a great day!

 

So if you have been following this thread, for even a little while. You would have noted that we get ones like you in from time to time.  Bold, empty self-inflated opinions with no actual study or work behind them.  We have little patience for them.  They are laughably easy to spot and play versions of the same song.  I am attacking you because you do not belong here.  You are a bacteria for clear and objective thinking.  You, and those like you, come here with agendas and intent to spin, lie and project uncertainty with eyes on a predetermined position of some sort.  You do not come here to discuss, learn or add to the discussion.  As such you are worthy of attack, or at least your position definitely needs to be confronted.

It really won’t matter soon.  Because like the rest, you will be on your way out shortly.  And we won’t remember you because you blur with the rest.

Edited March 31 by The_Capt

[Baneman]

double

Edited April 1 by Baneman

[Baneman]

1 hour ago, sfhand said:

...

On to the statements according to my current understanding of the world:

1.partially true partially false

2. disproven by brics

3. sure

4.partially true partially false in part depending on what one considers a provocation (not universal; see individuals per inverse Plato's Republic) and what one considers violations of treaties and ethnic cleansing

5.I am not going to look up the UN definition of Genocide, a bridge too far, sorry, I am not a human rights lawyer

6.purely speculative

So, sfhand - Steve asked some questions and you waved them away. Perhaps you would clarify - for example. for Steve's Point 

1. The Putin regime is a brutal dictatorship that has increasingly less tolerance for anything that questions its legitimacy

And you decided the answer was 

1.partially true partially false

Now I'd love to hear what part of the Putin regime is tolerant or not a brutal dictatorship  ? Because if the statement is partially false, then there must be some tolerance shown. I ( we here ) have not seen any, but perhaps you have access to info we do not ?

1. Russia unilaterally launched a war against Ukraine, unprovoked and without any rational justification.

Again, you go half half

4.partially true partially false in part depending on what one considers a provocation (not universal; see individuals per inverse Plato's Republic) and what one considers violations of treaties and ethnic cleansing

Apparently you think that Russia DID have some provocation, could you state what you believe it is ? Otherwise you're just throwing in "partially false" to try and justify the war somehow.
What treaties are you referring to ? And ethnic cleansing ?

You imply these are involved somehow, but again, fail to tell us what/how they inform your opinion.

So c'mon, this forum is a pretty vigorous place for peer review - give us some facts/info to back up your position - everyone else here has.

Edited April 1 by Baneman

[LongLeftFlank]

I dunno, @SFHand has been a BFC forum regular for quite a while, so try to be kind.

(And I too have no love for clan Biden)

...OTOH, the kneejerk: 'whatever USSA supports -> support the opposite' gets a little tiresome, especially when it's a dog whistle like this.

[The_Capt]

3 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

I dunno, @SFHand has been a BFC forum regular for quite a while, so try to be kind.

(And I too have no love for clan Biden)

...OTOH, the kneejerk: 'whatever USSA supports -> support the opposite' gets a little tiresome, especially when it's a dog whistle like this.

So was John Kettler.

[Kinophile]

 

 

[sburke]

3 hours ago, sfhand said:

And here, no evidence of a good faith discussion to be found. Start out assuming the worst possible motive and ATTACK!!! And I am a kid? How old are you? I'm betting I am older, and better looking to boot.

Really, have a great day!

 

 

Quote

My plan is to have this be my only post in this thread... I've known about the thread from day one. I really only have one question about the whole thing.

I don't know what to believe now!  Was that really your plan or just a fake or is the new post an AI fake? .. oh my goodness it is so hard to discern truth these days!

[Battlefront.com]

  

6 hours ago, sfhand said:

Steve,

I'm sure you appreciate my being a loyal customer of BF. You've stated so on this forum on more than one occasion if I remember correctly. So let me get this right, the hostility here, not necessarily from you, has nothing to do with my support for your business and my enjoyment of your products but over a political question? Really?

In my first post by design I did not address the topics of your current statements. Living in the US I have been exposed to all of the statements you put forward in some form or another. I have also been exposed to ideas that run counter to those statements. To get to the point, there are a few things that are ubiquitous in every war. Those things include death, suffering, and propaganda. I like to avoid all 3 when I don't have a dog in the fight, and in this case I don't have a dog in the fight. In short, I don't have a problem with anyone believing or disbelieving in the narrative you laid out.

I note and applaud you for having done the work to earn a degree in History with a particular concentration on the Soviet Union and Russia. Unless I am mistaken, on this topic you disagree with Prof. John Mearsheimer whose credentials are as impressive as yours, if not more so.

On to the statements according to my current understanding of the world:

1.partially true partially false

2. disproven by brics

3. sure

4.partially true partially false in part depending on what one considers a provocation (not universal; see individuals per inverse Plato's Republic) and what one considers violations of treaties and ethnic cleansing

5.I am not going to look up the UN definition of Genocide, a bridge too far, sorry, I am not a human rights lawyer

6.purely speculative

Now about that hostility. This is not directed at you Steve. Like the rest of you I have my big boy pants on. Like the rest of you I don't really give a rats behind what your opinions are about anything other than Combat Mission, and in most cases even that's questionable. What I was curious about is how so many can be so certain while living in a world so riddled with disinformation and propaganda. A few have resorted to varying forms of ad hominem, keep it up it reveals who you are and the absence of any cogent argument you might make, but most importantly the thinness of your skin.

I sincerely hope everyone is having a great day!

 

 

You seem to not understand why there's hostility to whatever you posted is.  A stated position it is not.  That requires well reasoned and sourced counter to what is being discussed here and you've done nothing of the sort so far.  You're welcome to do so, of course, but you need to understand that we've seen this play out before and it doesn't go well.

What you should first do is take a look at how you've entered this discussion.  I'll focus on me because that's the only person I can speak for.

I have a degree in history and have spent most of my life (and all of my adult life) studying warfare in that context.  I built a company based on the simulation of warfare which many consider to be extremely well thought through and executed.  More recently I have governments paying for my expertise.  I can assure you that one can't do this if one doesn't know how to successfully sift through often conflicting information to arrive at something that at least approximates "objective truth" and to do so with more success than failure.  "Lucky guess" isn't a viable explanation for what I've accomplished.

Specific to this war, I wrote the backstory for CM: Black Sea and events unfolded almost exactly the same way in real life.  How did I do that unless I have a very deep understanding of the subject matter?  I mean, you surely don't think I can read Putin's mind and you gotta admit that "lucky guess" is unlikely.

I also predicted this war, though not with the same specificity as 2014/2015, for years.  As part of that I predicted that Russia would get its arse kicked, despite all the experts thinking that Ukraine would get rolled over.  Again, either I'm extremely good with "lucky guesses" or I have a firm grasp of the subject matter.

This thread has roughly 84,000 posts.  I have read probably 90% of them and reviewed materials referenced by them.  Earlier in the war I was probably spending 10+ hours a day on this topic.  Now I'm down to 1-3 hours, depending.  How much of those 84,000 have you absorbed into your world view?  How many thousands of hours have you spent studying this war, because I figure I'm in excess of 3000 hours easy.

Further, the sources of information here are very diverse and are presented by people from other countries, including the one being attacked.  The US government does not control the media and culture of the rest of the world, therefore the information presented here is by definition not a simple slight of hand by an untrustworthy US government.  Unless you believe in some sort of Illuminati type cabal of global elites that control everything.

 

Now, let's look at your position.  You have come into this thread and effectively stated that I am, kindly put, a naive chump who doesn't know his arse from elbow.  I don't know how to study war and really don't know anything about this one because I'm not smart enough to know fact from fiction, informed opinion from fantasy.  You, on the other hand, do not suffer such shortcomings and apparently don't even think it's necessary to establish a counter narrative and defend it in debate.  Instead, citing Plato and making vague references to various real and imagined narratives is sufficient.

I know you don't realize how arrogant and condescending your posts are.  How do I know you don't?  Because this is not my first rodeo.  I've seen it in this thread, I've seen it in CM related threads, I see it in real life more times than I can count. You think you're superior without seeming to understand that means you view everybody else as inferior.

If you wish to be taking seriously, explain how you view this war and how it differs from what you perceive to be the thinking here.  Support your comments with factual statements.  You appear sure of your positions, therefore I assume you've thought them through and have something to say beyond vagaries.

Otherwise, please exit this thread and let us continue to exist in the ignorance you are so sure we're wallowing in.

Steve

[danfrodo]

Some stuff here today.  Interesting piece about RU payola to folks in EU to spread propaganda.  I've seen reports (let's call this rumor for now) that Mike Johnson is getting campaign funds from a lobbying group funded by an RU oligarch --  I don't know this will turn out to be true, we'll see.  When we saw Tucker C, Sen. Rand Paul, et al, spewing RU talking points verbatum (sp?), it does make one wonder.  And some RU stuff blowing up -- a lot of RU stuff.  I am shocked at how I can now laugh at men being killed.  Even completely untouched by this war I am becoming jaded.  I am glad these RU soldiers won't be able to cause more murder and mayhem, but I am still surprised at how callous I have become.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/3/31/2232580/-Russian-stuff-blowing-up-Russia-s-biggest-armored-assault-of-the-war-ends-in-bavovna?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web

On another subject, I lit into SFHand in an earlier post.  Probably too much.  Working 60 hr week (literally) and I take a couple minutes to pop in to get some UKR news and I have to wade thru that nonsense.  Kinda made me testy.  

[hcrof]

8 hours ago, sfhand said:

And here, no evidence of a good faith discussion to be found. Start out assuming the worst possible motive and ATTACK!!! And I am a kid? How old are you? I'm betting I am older, and better looking to boot.

Really, have a great day!

 

I am going to try one more time here...

Your posts come off sounding extremely confused. You make multiple statements without any logical connection between them and you seem to know they are controversial but you do not back them up with evidence. You keep citing Plato's cave but in a way that sounds like you are copying what someone else said without understanding it.

Please offer simple and direct answers to people's questions. Imagine you are a professional writing a report for a client. You are not going to persuade anyone with long, poorly focused posts with no evidence. Because my finger is hovering over the ignore button and you only have yourself to blame. 

[sfhand]

3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

  

...

Now, let's look at your position.  You have come into this thread and effectively stated that I am, kindly put, a naive chump who doesn't know his arse from elbow.  I don't know how to study war and really don't know anything about this one because I'm not smart enough to know fact from fiction, informed opinion from fantasy.  You, on the other hand, do not suffer such shortcomings and apparently don't even think it's necessary to establish a counter narrative and defend it in debate.  Instead, citing Plato and making vague references to various real and imagined narratives is sufficient.

...

I personally think you are quite accomplished in many ways. Paradoxically, you don't know me at all yet you think you do and somehow you think I am the arrogant one here. That amazes me to no end, but to each his own. Personally, I don't put much stock in people taking other peoples inventory whether it's coming or going.

You know what heuristics are right? In your assessment of me, my "motives", and my underlying psychology, you are relying on heuristics not knowledge, and while heuristics can be one of humankinds greatest strengths heuristics are frequently one of our biggest weaknesses, as aptly illustrated by you above. I know myself far better than you or anyone here, the same can be said of us all. Knowing this as fact is not arrogance. Now if we spent any significant period of time together your opinion of me would have more weight but would still be your opinion and not fact. The biggest flaw with heuristics is logical fallacy.

Unlike you and many others here, I know ad hominem as argument is a logical fallacy as well. I am not alone in this knowledge, many other average everyday people are well aware of it, not to mention anyone who has ever studied debate whether in high school or college. Feel free to keep rocking with it though, it is your forum and you can do and say anything you want here.

Do you know  the boy's description of the ghosts in the 6th Sense? He said "They see what they want to see, most of them don't even know they're dead". I find that to be the perfect description of humanity. The ghosts were so caught up in seeking gratification it clouded their experience of reality, they didn't even know they were dead. Theoretically this could be what you and some others here are doing when you evaluate a stranger's character and assume the worst. You would see what you want to see and as a result you would feel superior. As in "Gee, I'm so glad I'm not arrogant like X." Which to me means it is possible your views on the war suffer from similar personal prejudice. Note I said possible, only you can say if it might be true.  Frankly I don't care either way. Then again, I don't have any aspect of myself tied to the war. None. That I think is the big divide here, you've got 3000 some odd pages of investment here. However, as a US taxpayer sadly I do have a financial stake in this war and all the others.

Enough with the meta, to the chase:

In the face of the current situation in Ukraine I find it absurd to say Russia is currently getting their *** kicked while Ukraine advances to the rear. The thing is, one doesn't need to study war their entire life to reach this conclusion. Nor does one need to agree with this conclusion to be a legitimate human being with valid opinions on the matter. See how easy that is? Agree to disagree and leave personal attacks out of it.

Which brings up your statements forming your narrative that you asked my views on. I didn't just arrogantly offer my views on the statements, you asked me for them. Instead of following up you then write your hagiography and attack my character. I can guess at your motives behind the switcheroo but that's not me. To each his own.

Look man, I don't need to keep this going. Unlike some here I can agree to disagree and move on. This isn't about my honor or integrity despite the many accusations and efforts to make it be so.

Like always, even when we disagree like now, I sincerely hope you have a great day.

[panzermartin]

With no intention to play advocate of sfhand, we have been many times wrong here about the "truth". 

I remember the board being very trigger happy with Iraq 2003 for instance. To their defense they admitted later that G Bush administration was at wrong. 

But we can't undo what happened now. Iraq for me was a pivotal war for the West. This is where the game of post cold war US playing the freedom/democracy bringer reached a dead end. Because of the lies, the bypassing of UN, the Bush cynical rhetoric, the scores of civilian casualties, the failed occupation /reform etc. ISIS was born out of this war, the refugee crisis ignited. Despite the quick win over Saddam, US reputation was seriously damaged there. 

Imo Putin invasion wouldn't happen without US being so damaged in international reputation as a Democracy guarantee power. 2014 and green men wouldn't happen too. I dare to say even Trump wouldn't happen. US just lost focus and steam, started questioning itself, started polarizing etc. 

The truth then was that Iraq was a threat to the World with WMDs and Saddam was an evil dictator (which he was). The war ended Saddam but opened a whole new can of worms and a crack in the western camp that widened with a lengthy and fruitless Afghan campaign. 

Our truth now is that Russia is a military threat to the world, a threat to global democracy and our duty is to smash them to pieces before worse things occur. Maybe that's the right truth but I'm not convinced of the outcome of the path we have taken. I believe what we have in the West as spiritual descendants of Athenian democracy, European rennaisance, French revolution, American revolution etx, is precious and must be protected. If this escalating war ends up destroying all this, then this isn't the right war for us. 

And beneath this war on the surface, there are deeper issues threatening our societies. For me rampant capitalism, privitization of health and natural resources, outsourcing everything to the East,  cultural decay and the widening gap between rich and poor will be more decisive in people not believing or not joining the fight in a possible World War. Talking to everyday people not necessarily well informed about the war, there is a big percentage that secretly wishes Russia will win, not because they like a dictatorship but because they feel that this will deal a blow to a decaying neo colonial system that slowly suffocates their existence. They could be deadly wrong of course. But If you can't convince your own people that this is a system worth defending for, then it's already a lost cause. 

Sometimes celebrating the small Ukrainian victories, the destruction of a spy plane, or sinking a warship seems so insignificant in the greater picture of events that could come. Russia has convinced its people that "evil West is stretching its dirty colonial hand to grab their vast resources" like they did a few times in the past. The more we get involved the more Russians are convinced this is another great patriotic war. For some this is a dead end against a stubborn nuclear power. For others, like most here in the forum, a frontal attack is the only way for West as we know it to survive.

This could be the only truth worth debating maybe. 

 

 

 

[Kinophile]

Seriously guys, why are we (yet again) feeding the troll?

It's not like he has anything useful or even coherent to say, or is objectively considering counter points from various people, so... Why? 

It's just clutter, now. 

 

Edited April 1 by Kinophile

[cesmonkey]

 

[cesmonkey]

So Speaker Mike Johnson said this in a interview on Fox News on Sunday Night. (Text captured via YouTube's auto-generated transcript feature).

 

Quote

actually are hopeful let's go to one
issue there are members who want to
provide Aid or loan to Ukraine and
others who do not so as the Speaker of
the House how do you decide what to put
on the floor how much of the majority is
enough and when to put it on the
floor

yeah great question look what we
have to do in an era of divided
government historically as we are is you
got to build consensus um if we want to
move a partisan measure I got to have
every single member literally um and
some things need to be bipartisan now
we're talking about the supplemental
that everybody's heard so much about um
which is the thing that the president
presented several months ago he called
it the National Security Supplemental
and he included Ukraine Israel the
Taiwan indopacific uh region and also
the border and we said Thank you Mr
President because we've all said if
we're going to talk about National
Security it begins at our own border and
so we've been trying to use that as the
only leverage we have to force change on
the border we're still trying to force
the president to use his executive
Authority and most the American people
know that he has that Authority and he's
not using it because they open the
Border intentionally but when it comes
to the supplemental we've been working
to build that consensus we've been
talking to all the members especially
now over the district work period when
we return after this work period we'll
be moving a product but it's going to I
think have some important Innovations
the repo act you know if we could use
the seized assets of Russian oligarchs
to allow the ukrainians to fight them
that's just pure poetry uh even
president Trump has talked about the
loan concept where we set up we're not
just giving foreign aid we're we're
setting it up in a relationship where
they can provide it back to us when the
when the time is right and then you know
we want to unleash American Energy we we
want to have natural gas exports that
will help unfund uh Vladimir Putin's war
effort there you know there's a lot of
things that we should do that that are
make more sense and that I think we'll
have consensus around we're putting that
product together and we'll be moving it
right after the district work
period

 

 

[cesmonkey]

 

[Tux]

40 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Seriously guys, why are we (yet again) feeding the troll? 

 

I find reading walls of naked opinion (when it even gets that far) as tedious as the next person, so I don’t mean this to sound at all like a rebuke:  however I would argue that it’s important for a forum such as this one, which prides itself on trying to be a rational and open-minded place, to at least engage with dissenting views for those first few rounds that may be necessary to determine whether they are trying to contribute in good faith, or not.  Some people just honestly aren’t aware how to express themselves constructively or struggle to isolate coherent streams of thought if they have a lot going on in their heads at once.  That doesn’t necessarily mean they have nothing of value to add, likely thought that admittedly does seem in many cases.

[Tux]

1 hour ago, panzermartin said:

With no intention to play advocate of sfhand, we have been many times wrong here about the "truth". 

I remember the board being very trigger happy with Iraq 2003 for instance. To their defense they admitted later that G Bush administration was at wrong. 

But we can't undo what happened now. Iraq for me was a pivotal war for the West. This is where the game of post cold war US playing the freedom/democracy bringer reached a dead end. Because of the lies, the bypassing of UN, the Bush cynical rhetoric, the scores of civilian casualties, the failed occupation /reform etc. ISIS was born out of this war, the refugee crisis ignited. Despite the quick win over Saddam, US reputation was seriously damaged there. 

Imo Putin invasion wouldn't happen without US being so damaged in international reputation as a Democracy guarantee power. 2014 and green men wouldn't happen too. I dare to say even Trump wouldn't happen. US just lost focus and steam, started questioning itself, started polarizing etc. 

The truth then was that Iraq was a threat to the World with WMDs and Saddam was an evil dictator (which he was). The war ended Saddam but opened a whole new can of worms and a crack in the western camp that widened with a lengthy and fruitless Afghan campaign. 

Our truth now is that Russia is a military threat to the world, a threat to global democracy and our duty is to smash them to pieces before worse things occur. Maybe that's the right truth but I'm not convinced of the outcome of the path we have taken. I believe what we have in the West as spiritual descendants of Athenian democracy, European rennaisance, French revolution, American revolution etx, is precious and must be protected. If this escalating war ends up destroying all this, then this isn't the right war for us. 

And beneath this war on the surface, there are deeper issues threatening our societies. For me rampant capitalism, privitization of health and natural resources, outsourcing everything to the East,  cultural decay and the widening gap between rich and poor will be more decisive in people not believing or not joining the fight in a possible World War. Talking to everyday people not necessarily well informed about the war, there is a big percentage that secretly wishes Russia will win, not because they like a dictatorship but because they feel that this will deal a blow to a decaying neo colonial system that slowly suffocates their existence. They could be deadly wrong of course. But If you can't convince your own people that this is a system worth defending for, then it's already a lost cause. 

Sometimes celebrating the small Ukrainian victories, the destruction of a spy plane, or sinking a warship seems so insignificant in the greater picture of events that could come. Russia has convinced its people that "evil West is stretching its dirty colonial hand to grab their vast resources" like they did a few times in the past. The more we get involved the more Russians are convinced this is another great patriotic war. For some this is a dead end against a stubborn nuclear power. For others, like most here in the forum, a frontal attack is the only way for West as we know it to survive.

This could be the only truth worth debating maybe. 

 

 

 

 

I think there’s probably an interesting discussion to be had about how best to respond to a threat to a system which many people feel frustrated with or even disenfranchised from entirely.  However I also think there’s a time and a place for that discussion and it probably ain’t while allies are fighting an existential war of defence on their own territory, almost explicitly for the right to try and join the threatened system.

War has a funny way of punishing equivocal responses and that cannot be the fault of those who are attacked.

Edited April 1 by Tux
Fat fingers

[Tux]

sfhand, I was going to try and apply a scalpel to your posts to see if I could extract a point but then maybe we should address the below two items first:

2 hours ago, sfhand said:

I didn't just arrogantly offer my views on the statements, you asked me for them. Instead of following up you then write your hagiography and attack my character. I can guess at your motives behind the switcheroo but that's not me. To each his own.

Steve asked for your views but implicit to that request was that you also add arguments and reasons for why you hold such views.  That is the only way in which someone would be able to reasonably engage with you, really.  You didn’t provide any such grist for the rational mill that this forum tries to be, so it has started to chew on you instead.
 

2 hours ago, sfhand said:

Look man, I don't need to keep this going. Unlike some here I can agree to disagree and move on.

So… would the following be a fair summary all of your posts so far:  ‘I partially disagree with some stuff but I’m happy with that and don’t want to discuss it any further.’?

Edited April 1 by Tux

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, sfhand said:

In the face of the current situation in Ukraine I find it absurd to say Russia is currently getting their *** kicked while Ukraine advances to the rear. The thing is, one doesn't need to study war their entire life to reach this conclusion.

So out of that entire wall of text this is really the only point made about the core subject of this entire thread.  The rest is as was noted, “meta”.  Again, no citations, no analysis, no insight…simply “wot I think”.  Fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how well or poorly informed.

Let’s unpack this one kernel of an actual relevant opinion. First off “absurd”.  So this statement appears to suggest that anyone who thinks otherwise is lost in a sea of misinformation.  It is clearly “obvious” that Ukraine is losing, or at least Russia is not.  You seem to be referring to the recent retaking of Adiivka and Russian winter offensive as proof of this. You also seem to infer that we are deluding ourselves otherwise - hence this whole “what is the truth?” thing.

So, if you have indeed been following this thread, you will have noted that the state of each party of this war has been a subject of intense debate. We have had plenty of injects that Ukraine is losing, on the edge of collapse and Adiivka is the “beginning of the end”.  We have had the counter opinion as well.

But let’s just unpack your central position: advancing while your opponent is retreating is a clear sign of winning. [note: you do see the irony of your heuristics argument here, right?] Any student of warfare can come up with dozens of historical examples of this position being simply untrue. A military is a very large complex machine that can still conduct offensive operations even though it is fundamentally broken - Germany 1918, Germany 1944-45, US 1950, US 1969 to name but a few.  So to take one tactical offensive, which has been gained at very high cost (or were all those casualties a “false-flag” operation with crisis actor tanks and IFVs?), as “absolute proof” that Russia is indeed not losing this war clearly demonstrates that you are taking a single phenomenon out of context and drawing a broad conclusion.

So rather than us trying to prove to you, which is always how these things tend to go, let’s go the other way. Why don’t you do the work and prove it to us?  What is the state of the Russian military? Tactically, Operationally and Strategically?  What is the state of the Ukrainian military?  Based on your assessment, how will the war likely progress?  How do the answers to those questions inform future policy?  What should those policies be? Most importantly, how can this war end positively for the West?  What are the risks and opportunities?

Now before you start typing, and I am betting you already think you know answers to these questions, we are going to need to see proof of work.  No more vague, “but the truth is unknowable” smoke screen.  You clearly have an opinion and one would hope it has been informed.  So state the facts you are employing to come to it. Cite some expertise beyond your own that supports your position.  Even those trapped in that damned cave have shadows they can make reference to.

I am very doubtful you will do any of this to be blunt. The fact that looking up a legal definition of genocide was somehow “only for lawyers and too much work” kinda situates the depths you are willing to go in all this:

https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/Genocide Convention-FactSheet-ENG.pdf

(that took about 2 mins).

So to echo your own sentiment - I really do not care what you think you know or don’t know at this point.  You have demonstrated no expertise, or leveraging of expertise in any of whatever this has been about.  You have employed classic use of “empty uncertainty” by throwing around some pretty junior philosophy and zero actual facts. You are not a military or political analyst, that much is clear.  And you do not contribute by pulling in new information.

So far you have come onto this thread with “doubt” as a form of offence - you really have not come with honest questions in search of answers…you already have all the answers you want. You basically attacked the regulars on this thread with this uncertainty and then have done the “wounded dove” act as you get pushback. You have to be at least the dozenth person to do this, and you did not even come up with an original spin. Same pattern as every other time - throw out an inflammatory unsupported counter opinion, dance around facts and dress it up as “being real”, act all hurt when you get mauled.  Now you will disappear into the woodwork to avoid the ban, or jump off the bridge because this is your hill to die upon for some reason.

Or maybe, just maybe, you will go away for awhile and come back with some new facts that create a coherent argument we can actually debate.  I would be both shocked and delighted of this were the case.  

Edited April 1 by The_Capt

[The_Capt]

2 hours ago, panzermartin said:

With no intention to play advocate of sfhand, we have been many times wrong here about the "truth". 

I remember the board being very trigger happy with Iraq 2003 for instance. To their defense they admitted later that G Bush administration was at wrong. 

But we can't undo what happened now. Iraq for me was a pivotal war for the West. This is where the game of post cold war US playing the freedom/democracy bringer reached a dead end. Because of the lies, the bypassing of UN, the Bush cynical rhetoric, the scores of civilian casualties, the failed occupation /reform etc. ISIS was born out of this war, the refugee crisis ignited. Despite the quick win over Saddam, US reputation was seriously damaged there. 

Imo Putin invasion wouldn't happen without US being so damaged in international reputation as a Democracy guarantee power. 2014 and green men wouldn't happen too. I dare to say even Trump wouldn't happen. US just lost focus and steam, started questioning itself, started polarizing etc. 

The truth then was that Iraq was a threat to the World with WMDs and Saddam was an evil dictator (which he was). The war ended Saddam but opened a whole new can of worms and a crack in the western camp that widened with a lengthy and fruitless Afghan campaign. 

Our truth now is that Russia is a military threat to the world, a threat to global democracy and our duty is to smash them to pieces before worse things occur. Maybe that's the right truth but I'm not convinced of the outcome of the path we have taken. I believe what we have in the West as spiritual descendants of Athenian democracy, European rennaisance, French revolution, American revolution etx, is precious and must be protected. If this escalating war ends up destroying all this, then this isn't the right war for us. 

And beneath this war on the surface, there are deeper issues threatening our societies. For me rampant capitalism, privitization of health and natural resources, outsourcing everything to the East,  cultural decay and the widening gap between rich and poor will be more decisive in people not believing or not joining the fight in a possible World War. Talking to everyday people not necessarily well informed about the war, there is a big percentage that secretly wishes Russia will win, not because they like a dictatorship but because they feel that this will deal a blow to a decaying neo colonial system that slowly suffocates their existence. They could be deadly wrong of course. But If you can't convince your own people that this is a system worth defending for, then it's already a lost cause. 

Sometimes celebrating the small Ukrainian victories, the destruction of a spy plane, or sinking a warship seems so insignificant in the greater picture of events that could come. Russia has convinced its people that "evil West is stretching its dirty colonial hand to grab their vast resources" like they did a few times in the past. The more we get involved the more Russians are convinced this is another great patriotic war. For some this is a dead end against a stubborn nuclear power. For others, like most here in the forum, a frontal attack is the only way for West as we know it to survive.

This could be the only truth worth debating maybe. 

 

 

 

 

Hey @sfhand this is how to post a counter-position.

2003…mistakes were definitely made.  I have to agree that 03 Iraq did far more damage than most understood.  It can be argued that it fractured the global order of the Post-Cold War for good.  Both Russia and China saw that war and voted with their feet on the new Global Order and there are coherent arguments that they had justification.

That said onto this war.  “Russia has convinced it people…” is likely what this war is really about.  There was no clear and present danger outside of Putin’s own head. Ukraine was not poised to join NATO, they had not even applied.  Neither were Sweden or Finland. The western troops in Ukraine were there because Russia took the Crimea and Donbas regions. Our greatest weakness is “The West has not convinced its people….”  This is how democracies die.  Rarely are democracies destroyed be external forces.  They are simply abandoned as a failed experiment.  So now we are being tested and our resolve is not great.

But to be brutally pragmatic…to the point I will apologize to our Ukrainian posters in advance…this war is likely not existential to the West.  It may have been had we completely sat back and did nothing.  But we did something, and even if we fail completely, that unity and small resolve cannot be undone easily.  If Ukraine completely folds up and Russia rolls to the Polish border.  Well “so what?”  Well we will create a new Iron Curtain by the next morning.  NATO will double down hard and we are essentially in Cold War 2. The West lost Ukraine, but we won Sweden and Finland.  Russian economic and diplomatic isolation will deepen to the point that we will likely cut them out completely.  So no more shopping trips or sidedoor deals. The West is a really sore loser and we will definitely show it.

Russia is broken militarily.  No modern military can take these levels of damage and not need a significant amount of recovery time.  Sure they can mobilize a million more men, but arming, training and equipping them to be able to be effective on the modern battlefield takes things Russia cannot easily replace - our unmannned systems will work just as well too.  The actual threat of Russian military action against an NATO member, even discounting the nuclear equation, is pretty low.  So we will live with the worst and keep going.  

The next problem will be China, but I for one, do not see this relationship through a Cold War lens, at least not yet. China is too big a customer to fail completely.  We do too much trade with them to easily fall into a similar situation with Russia (and, yes we did a lot of trade with Russia).  But we will have to renegotiate that relationship, which can definitely get bumpy.  The world will likely fall back into Us and Them and there are pitfalls there.

Finally, I really don’t think the West’s only play has, or will be “the Frontal”.  For every Iraq, there was an East Germany.  We can and have employed other strategies.  We can entice and cooperate.  We can incorporate - in fact most in the “this war was justified” camp cite Western encroachment on Russia as the primary reason.  The paradox of the West is that we are incredibly powerful, yet we are also incredibly lazy at the same time. The most important question is, as the former begins to wane, will we overcome the latter?

[Beleg85]

In case someone didn't read it yet, worth to check newest well-documented investigation conclusions about so-called Havana syndrome. Guess who was behind it?

https://theins.press/en/politics/270425

Edited April 1 by Beleg85

[photon]

1 hour ago, The_Capt said:

So far you have come onto this thread with “doubt” as a form of offence

One might say that denial primacy took hold in the information warfare sphere before it took hold in aerial operations.