Democracy’s Fiery Ordeal: The War in Ukraine 🇺🇦

[yall]

Some of you are absolute pieces of *****. I needn't specify, because you all know.

 

 

 

 

[Coffeesforclosers]

1 hour ago, yall said:

Some of you are absolute pieces of *****. I needn't specify, because you all know.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, generally everyone posting in this thread is pro-Ukraine and pro-Peace. Where we differ in is in what peace looks like, and the sort of role America should play in reaching it. 

 

We've also got some serious cases of Trump Derangement Syndrome and AltRight QAnon Twitter brain. But that's the internet these days so what are gonna do right? 

[B-Man]

 

 

Will Hungary be vindicated again?

 

Hungary has staked out a lonely position on the war in Ukraine. As every other European power calls for escalation, it has called for peace. That is why Hungary’s foreign minister, Peter Szijjarto, was so in demand at the U.N. this week, where we sat down for an interview.

 

“Our position is crystal clear: We should put an end to the suffering of the people: first with a ceasefire, then peace talks,” Szijjarto told me.

 

“Of course, we stand by Ukraine. We condemn the war. We support territorial integrity and sovereignty … but what we have to prevent is this regional war becoming a global war.”

 

Hungary’s government, led by Prime Minister Viktor Orban, is used to standing alone. In 2015, it was roundly condemned by its fellow members of the European Union for refusing to receive migrants. Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister, accused Hungary of failing to “respect Europe’s common values.” Orban’s policy stood in stark contrast to that of Angela Merkel, who welcomed migrants with the declaration, “We can do this!”

 

Eight years on, the politics of migration have radically changed. Hungary’s policy is quietly imitated by other European countries, not because they have elected “far-right” governments, but because mainstream parties have silently adopted anti-migration measures.

 

Will Hungary be vindicated on Ukraine as it was on the migrant crisis? If so, it will likely be because Europe finds the costs of war too heavy to bear.

 

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/will-orban-be-vindicated-again/

 

.

[B-Man]

 

 

UKRAINIAN HERESIES

 

 

I’ve seen several perspicacious queries about media coverage of the Ukrainian war, namely, why don’t we see very much battle footage—or very much front line footage for that matter? All we seem to get are some set-piece videos, practically b-roll at this point, of long-range artillery being fired. Are there no reporters embedded at or near the front lines? Back in the primitive days of Vietnam, when any film footage had to be developed and shipped back to the U.S., we still got a lot of front line footage from journalists like Dan Rather and Morley Safer. Why not in this case?

 

Another comparative question: back in the Vietnam War, the media was relentlessly hostile to the U.S.-aligned leaders of South Vietnam, especially President Thieu. We heard endless reports about his authoritarianism and corruption. But if anyone today raises the same issues with regard to Ukraine’s government of President Zelensky, you are immediately accused of being a pro-Putin apologist. Look, I think Zelensky is doing a good job leading the country (and especially playing to American media and thought leaders—you’d expect no less from someone with a TV entertainment background), but isn’t the media canonization of him more than a bit thick?

 

Moreover, does anyone have confidence in Biden Administration’s ability to manage the conflict? Seems to me they are making the exact same mistakes as the Democratic defense and foreign policy geniuses of the 1960s—the “best and the brightest” in David Halberstam’s memorable phrase—did in thinking we could “calibrate” our involvement in Vietnam through their doctrine of “flexible response,” and thereby manage a favorable outcome. How’d that work out for us—and for Vietnam?

 

So it comes as something of a surprise to see Timothy Garton Ash, one of the leading analysts of Eastern Europe since the 1980s, depart slightly from the Ukraine Party Line recently in the New York Review of Books. Here are the relevant excerpts:

 

Ukraine is asking questions of the West, but there are also questions for Ukraine. Many Ukrainians are privately asking themselves these questions, as are many in the West. But when I suggested to a Ukrainian political analyst who was articulating a sharply skeptical view of President Zelensky that I should write about these concerns, his reaction was, “Oh no, Russian propaganda will pick that up!” Here’s an age-old trilemma for a political writer: how to stand with the oppressed, yet continue to speak the truth, yet not give comfort to the enemy. In the long term, no one is well served by propagating a myth of the immaculate victim. Our lodestar should be the George Orwell of Homage to Catalonia: fight for the right side but remain honestly critical of its shortcomings.

 

More at the link:  https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/02/ukrainian-heresies.php

 

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2023/02/23/ukraine-in-our-future-timothy-garton-ash/

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

10 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

UKRAINIAN HERESIES

 

 

I’ve seen several perspicacious queries about media coverage of the Ukrainian war, namely, why don’t we see very much battle footage—or very much front line footage for that matter? All we seem to get are some set-piece videos, practically b-roll at this point, of long-range artillery being fired. Are there no reporters embedded at or near the front lines? Back in the primitive days of Vietnam, when any film footage had to be developed and shipped back to the U.S., we still got a lot of front line footage from journalists like Dan Rather and Morley Safer. Why not in this case?

 

 

 

 

You are complaining there are not more Dan Rather's and Morley Safers? Really? The hated left wing media being longed for now? 

 

 

[Coffeesforclosers]

13 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

UKRAINIAN HERESIES

 

 

I’ve seen several perspicacious queries about media coverage of the Ukrainian war, namely, why don’t we see very much battle footage—or very much front line footage for that matter? All we seem to get are some set-piece videos, practically b-roll at this point, of long-range artillery being fired. Are there no reporters embedded at or near the front lines? Back in the primitive days of Vietnam, when any film footage had to be developed and shipped back to the U.S., we still got a lot of front line footage from journalists like Dan Rather and Morley Safer. Why not in this case?

 

Another comparative question: back in the Vietnam War, the media was relentlessly hostile to the U.S.-aligned leaders of South Vietnam, especially President Thieu. We heard endless reports about his authoritarianism and corruption. But if anyone today raises the same issues with regard to Ukraine’s government of President Zelensky, you are immediately accused of being a pro-Putin apologist. Look, I think Zelensky is doing a good job leading the country (and especially playing to American media and thought leaders—you’d expect no less from someone with a TV entertainment background), but isn’t the media canonization of him more than a bit thick?

 

Moreover, does anyone have confidence in Biden Administration’s ability to manage the conflict? Seems to me they are making the exact same mistakes as the Democratic defense and foreign policy geniuses of the 1960s—the “best and the brightest” in David Halberstam’s memorable phrase—did in thinking we could “calibrate” our involvement in Vietnam through their doctrine of “flexible response,” and thereby manage a favorable outcome. How’d that work out for us—and for Vietnam?

 

So it comes as something of a surprise to see Timothy Garton Ash, one of the leading analysts of Eastern Europe since the 1980s, depart slightly from the Ukraine Party Line recently in the New York Review of Books. Here are the relevant excerpts:

 

Ukraine is asking questions of the West, but there are also questions for Ukraine. Many Ukrainians are privately asking themselves these questions, as are many in the West. But when I suggested to a Ukrainian political analyst who was articulating a sharply skeptical view of President Zelensky that I should write about these concerns, his reaction was, “Oh no, Russian propaganda will pick that up!” Here’s an age-old trilemma for a political writer: how to stand with the oppressed, yet continue to speak the truth, yet not give comfort to the enemy. In the long term, no one is well served by propagating a myth of the immaculate victim. Our lodestar should be the George Orwell of Homage to Catalonia: fight for the right side but remain honestly critical of its shortcomings.

 

More at the link:  https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/02/ukrainian-heresies.php

 

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2023/02/23/ukraine-in-our-future-timothy-garton-ash/

 

 

 

 

The comment section on the powerline op/ed was pure gold. Thanks for that! 

[B-Man]

 

 

No fake air raid sirens ???

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

No fake air raid sirens ???

 

 

 

You got any proof that a city that is being bombed by Putin used faked air raid sirens? 

[Tiberius]

Ya sure. Just like Obamacare will be done on day one of his administration 

 

 

[Tiberius]

Can we assume that the "great" Russian offensive is and has been underway? Just throwing men into the meat grinder to prove what a tough leader Putin is? 

 

 

[Tiberius]

Just saw a report that Russia is losing between 600 to 1,000 soldiers a day

 

wow 

 

For almost no gains 

[Doc]

34 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Just saw a report that Russia is losing between 600 to 1,000 soldiers a day

 

wow 

 

For almost no gains 

 

They're killing their future.  Their population was already declining but killing off their young men will only make it worse.

[All_Pro_Bills]

35 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Just saw a report that Russia is losing between 600 to 1,000 soldiers a day

 

wow 

 

For almost no gains 

A couple days ago I saw a report quoting a former US Marine fighting for Ukraine that stated the Ukrainian government is conscripting teenagers and the average life expectancy of a soldier arriving at the front is 4 hours. 

 

Knowing full well both sides spew propaganda during times of war how can anyone know what the truth is or what to believe about anything being reported about either side? 

[Tiberius]

34 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

A couple days ago I saw a report quoting a former US Marine fighting for Ukraine that stated the Ukrainian government is conscripting teenagers and the average life expectancy of a soldier arriving at the front is 4 hours. 

 

Knowing full well both sides spew propaganda during times of war how can anyone know what the truth is or what to believe about anything being reported about either side? 

Past actions can be used as a measure of present news. Putin doesn't seem very adaptable, so these reports do ring true for me. 

[All_Pro_Bills]

29 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Past actions can be used as a measure of present news. Putin doesn't seem very adaptable, so these reports do ring true for me. 

Past actions, present news?  Like those inflated body count totals the Pentagon fed to the US networks for the evening news every night during the Vietnam War?  Its very important to never believe your own propaganda.  1,000 kills per day?  You can believe what you want to believe but I prefer to believe in no such over the top claims without a shred of proof.  Ultimately, in the end what we believe won't matter.  

[Tiberius]

7 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Past actions, present news?  Like those inflated body count totals the Pentagon fed to the US networks for the evening news every night during the Vietnam War?  Its very important to never believe your own propaganda.  1,000 kills per day?  You can believe what you want to believe but I prefer to believe in no such over the top claims without a shred of proof.  Ultimately, in the end what we believe won't matter.  

Are the Russians attacking? Yes

 

Are they making significant gains? Nope 

 

Do people get killed attacking well equipped and dug in troops? Yup 

 

What are you crying about again? 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

We need a rule or something in this new world of wars without congressional votes

 

Maybe something along the lines of the voices arguing for war, put some skin in the game and volunteer for that front line. 

 

you know, vs keyboard commando arguments to send others to the slaughter.

 

just an Idea.

Edited February 28, 2023 by Chris farley

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Chris farley said:

We need a rule or something in this new world of wars without congressional votes

 

Maybe something along the lines of the voices arguing for war, put some skin in the game and volunteer for that front line. 

 

you know, vs keyboard commando arguments to send others to the slaughter.

 

just an Idea.

Sure, Putin would love it if we handicapped ourselves that way! 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

4 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

We need a rule or something in this new world of wars without congressional votes

 

Maybe something along the lines of the voices arguing for war, put some skin in the game and volunteer for that front line. 

 

you know, vs keyboard commando arguments to send others to the slaughter.

 

just an Idea.

I’ve mentioned this before on here. Everyone needs to watch the original Star Trek episode entitled “A Taste of Armageddon”. Yes, that series was purposefully made corny at times for mass consumption, but they were spot on in predicting so many of the future technologies and the issues of today. 

[Tommy Callahan]

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Sure, Putin would love it if we handicapped ourselves that way! 

 

 

dont hold back. dont just cheerlead, volunteer. they could use your help.

 

here you go.  link included.

 

https://fightforua.org/