view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
A phrase said by soldiers in Ukraine at the beginning of Russia's main invasion: "We're lucky they're so fucking stupid." I feel this applies here a bit. It's a good thing Republican strategists aren't all that bright. I chuckled when JD Vance was announced.
My favorite quote of the invasion, a close second is "Russian warship, go fuck yourself"
This is already obsolete because it turns out Russia still has 3 times more population, N times more money and the war is happening in Ukraine, not in Russia.
And how do we know what people at Russia's helm thought?
Maybe they wanted to brutalize Ukraine so that it wouldn't become a democratic competitor state for Russian speakers, sort of how West Germany and South Korea were. Then ruining the Russian-speaking half of Ukraine, killing so many people there and producing this amount of hate are outcomes useful for that goal.
And then those who think that it's bad for Russia to lose so many men - for Russia as a whole maybe, but the ruling group has gotten itself a very rich supply of thugs, hitmen, candidates for posts and so on. When those people return from war, it's going to be dark. Crime levels, general depression, the amount of shellshocked people. Nobody will feel good enough to question their legitimacy for some time.
OK, I know you weren't talking about Russia.
3x the population but at least 3x the casualties by conservative estimates, to be fair. Ukraine is clearly winning this war from a strategic standpoint by maximizing their superior education and innovation on the fly. Forget the fact that the nature of playing defense under most situations always lends to a numbers-advantage that most strategists say require 3-to-1 military odds even IF matching strategic parity — which again, Russia is not.
Let's not forget the fact that Ukraine is being bolstered by broader NATO forces, especially the US, UK, France, Germany — all who have far larger economies than Russia. In fact, Russia's economy is smaller than that of the single state of California. Considering how galvanized Western support is for Russia, Ukraine has no financial issues; they also have technological superiority in nearly every aspect of this conflict — air-defense, long-range artillery, and soon to be fighter jets/bombers. Forgetting the fact that NATO intelligence and ISR is clearly superior as well.
Bear in mind the mightier USSR collapsed under a weaker opponent during the Soviet-Afghan War.
You're right that dark times are ahead for Russia, and I sympathize with those who cannot escape. I understand over 1 million people have fled Russia when they could, and that's one of the largest brain-drains since Einstein fled Nazi Germany. I understand that Putin is not just attempting to commit genocide and territorial expansion in Ukraine, but views this scenario as "win-win" because he's always purging dissents and undesireables within Russia itself. Liberals, academics/scholars, political opposition, sincere journalists, ethnic minorities, etc... That is why I expect this war to sadly continue because it's not touching the rule-class of Russia... Yet. Nevertheless I believe Russia will now be relegated to global pariah and its standard-of-living and technological innovation will drop off akin to North Korea.
Edit: If anyone wants me to reply to the user's comment below let me know and I can, but it's not really worth it for me alone short of an audience on the fence.
This is a bit old news. The frontline innovations in tactics and instruments are more or less similar between sides.
There's an issue with news about wars - they are always distorted. Maybe if such a thing as independent journalism existed today, but it really almost doesn't.
Ukraine's offensives were pretty similar to Russian ones, as in "meat grinder".
Neither side is winning right now. But Ukraine's economy is in very bad shape, while Russian isn't.
It's not that galvanized, this support ; also Russia's economy is sufficiently supported by more or less all the world except West. Including NATO member Turkey.
If Ukraine could fight indefinitely and economical issues were the only issues, then yes, but it's losing men and will to continue, and it's devastated. Russia doesn't have that problem because, again, no Russian cities have been razed by artillery fire.
It was the other way around - the Afghan war started and ended at various stages of USSR's collapse. Were there no war in Afghanistan, that collapse may have been less dark, again, without all the traumatized veterans, but who knows.
I wouldn't say all the best have emigrated, and I wouldn't say those who emigrated are all from the best.
I don't think he sees things at such low level. Rather the whole situation of war makes many things different for him.
See, liberals and political opposition here are quite close to the ruling class. They've sort of distanced themselves from it, but this is a poisoned field. Same with journalism, many of those "sincere journalists" are plainly suspicious people. It has all been suspicious since late 90's, when Starovoitova and Politkovskaya and who not were killed, and others successfully defamed or driven out of relevance.
Also the case with those who emigrated.
But true - those dying are poor people mostly.
I don't see that happening yet.
Americans will believe just about anything, so long as it's coming from someone on their team.
As a general rule, losing a big chunk of your youth population is horrible for a whole host of reasons. Hell, a brutal war of attrition on the Russian border was what ultimately brought down the Romanov Government. The Bolsheviks were (somewhat paradoxically) militant anti-war activists.
I don't exactly predict another October Revolution soon. But the long term health and wellness of the Russian Federation is degraded with every month of utterly fruitless artillery exchanges. Ukraine ain't doing too hot, either.
I meant that the losses may not have the same proportion of various groups or intelligence as in the general population, so, for example, if only RG and FSO troops were sent there and were dying there, it would be arguably a positive result.
However, this is not what's happening, people from poorest and most depressive places and social layers go there, which means that while many of them will die, some will get back with combat experience. Lots of crime.
Nothing paradoxical in that, about bolsheviks.
Well, see, it wasn't going to be good anyway. Those people who've ran from Russia to the West and pretend to be good and civilized were able to play opposition exactly because they were compromising on some old issues (like Chechen war, lustrations and crimes of the Soviet state), and they were mostly people with relatives from Soviet and modern Russian elites. By the way, elites in Baltic countries are from the same flock, and seeing Kaja Kallas in EC is kinda intimidating.
Real opposition back then was simply murdered or defamed on federal TV or even put into prisons and asylums, some just died of old age. There's very little remaining from them and their political ideas and points. Again, Starovoitova, Novodvorskaya, Politkovskaya, Sakharov, one can go on.
Note how those being arrested for sabotage or protest in Russia over the last two years don't have anything in common with the opposition of the Sobchak kind. And they have some similarities with those people who were successfully dealt with in the late 90s.
Navalny's organization was better, but they sadly stained themselves by associating with that "fashion opposition" of 2012 too. This may be the reason they didn't succeed. People may not say anything, not even think anything, but feel vary over such associations.
Are we really doing eugenics on war dead?
Always. Have you not read anything about Roman army in frankly any period?
Anyway, I'm not doing eugenics, I'm thinking how those losses affect society in general because they are not even close to equally distributed.
By the way, since I mentioned RG and FSO troops - I don't think those have been sent to war in any significant numbers.
Maybe that's Putin's way to postpone civil war or revolution - send to grinder those who'd fight against him.
Ah, you're one of those. Thinking phrenology is 2500 years old.
No, the poor were always preferred to be sent to die in wars. Which is what I'm talking about, I'm not responsible for what your associations are.
That's not actually true
???
!!!