butterweedstrover

Scot, are you saying it was ploy to exterminate the Ukrainian population? Please, tell us more.

You know Scot, maybe read some of my posts. But your answer is no. Or continue to suggest Bucha was a plan from the Russian government to exterminate the civilian population.

Yeah, he wasn't the one doing it, but again you have to believe in a malicious plot meant to exterminate Ukrainians (Russians) for no reason in particular besides the fact that they were evil. Millions died from famine under Mao due to management, was he exterminating ethnic Chinese. The only people who believed this was Banderites, Nazis, and now western liberals.

Yeah, there must be a systemic execution of Ukrainians, that is why everyone in Kherson was left alive, and Mariupol is being rebuilt, can't have anything to do with burying dead civilians and military men, no impossible.

lol, your not serious. Was Bucha part of a systemic plot to wipe out Ukrainian civilians? Why isn't it happening everywhere in Ukraine then?

Come on, you have to read a bit more. The food was distributed to help stave off famines elsewhere in the country, but the best part was Stalin wasn't aware of the affects until Khrushchev told him. In fact it was Khrushchev that wanted to pin the blame on Stalin (which is why they all threw him under the bus). Bad management isn't the same as a desire to exterminate a population, unless you want to ignore Stalin's forcible Ukrainization of eastern territory. I mean what, do you think he wanted to wipe out a population of eastern slavs? They were more Russian than him.

Again, unless you claim this was authorized from way up, then I can show you footage of American GIs firing at Iraqi civilians. But the US never wanted to exterminate the population. Russia has a ton of barrel bombs, they could level Kiev if they wanted to, but they are not trying to destroy the civilian population (like many pro-war westerners argue).

Get to know some Ukrainians. Talk to them, polling only shows one side of the data. First the government terrorizes and arrests pro-Russian elements. Then they tell their country if we don't kidnap you in the streets and send you running into the frontlines with barely any ammo, Russia will kill you all. That's a convincing sales pitch. But if you ask them about the Western goals as we known, you know their not all that excited to die in front of fortified positions.

Having the idea that this is all Ukrainian free will ignores how many Ukrainians had to be killed, silenced, or lied to. And most under false promises that not much would change, just the money. But money always comes with strings attached, countries learn this after its too late. The terrorizing of civilians in Donbas and the arming of Neo-nazis to murder political opponents is usually not in the western playbook. But desperate times I guess.

Russian military doctrine accepts high rates of causalities, it does not aim to kill civilian. This has been true since the 16th century, they use quantity to overwhelm the enemy which is less discriminatory than targeted strikes. But again, in Ukraine they are going out of their way not to kill the civilian population. There are even pro-war bloggers who are complaining this reluctance is harming Russian troops on the frontline.

Well none of this is an act of love, imperialism isn't about love. But the goal isn't to kill Ukrainian civilians, in fact Russia's military doctrine in Ukraine is vastly different from Syria or Afghanistan or Chechnya where they didn't care at all. They've gone out of their way, relative to their goal of a complete military victory, to avoid the slaughter of civilians. Not that Ukrainians who died that way care. But you'd be surprised by how many people in Odessa and even Lvov are more scared of Ukrainian draft call sending them as cannon fodder to the frontlines than they are of a stray Russian missile.

Fine, you've got the same ideology as the Romans, convert less civilized cultures to the enlightened ways. Same with Cortez. Maybe that is moral, but then that severely damages the rhetoric that this war is about independence and sovereignty or 'freedom'.

Russia's aim is to win the war, and their military doctrine requires lots of civilian causalities. But there is no systemic targeting of Ukrainian civilians. Infrastructure works as a military goal, but most of the buildings hit are either a miss shot aimed at something else or, more likely, a Ukrainian anti-missile defense system going haywire or damaging a rocket so it doesn't propel far enough and hits some random apartment. Now you can say this is going to lead to Russia's loss. But their aim is absolutely not to destroy the civilian population. As for Bucha, you'd have to believe that was an order from way up for that to fit your world view.

You know the reason Russia has always struggled with depression and death (as is a major theme in Russian literature) is the struggle of being part of a country not focused on the material well-being of its people but the glory and independence of its state. Fighting against a more powerful enemy just to stay in the fight has caused much grief for its people, but that doesn't mean they are doomed. Corruption can be beat back and people can find meaning in suffering and find joys in life. Russia has been beaten down before, and this current mafia (created by western reforms) won't be around forever. Lol, gross overexaggerating. Lots of liberals in Moscow actually. But you're not completely wrong either. A lot of the stuff Russians see on media, the pride parades filled with public nudity, the twerking on children, the chemical injection into minors, etc. has made the more scared of the west. This is just their perspective, you can disagree, but Ukrainians are also like this. Even if you don't know them, you can read it on their social media. It's in Cyrillic though. I know a lot of Ukrainians, more recently a bunch of refugees from Lvov. My extended family too. And yeah their are the hardcore nationalists who would be part of the right sector and enjoy getting into bar fights. But there are a lot of them who just want the war to end and are far less obsessed with revenge than a westerner like you who is living vicariously through this war like its a Rambo movie or something.

Russia has had close to five hundred years to do that. Instead they preserved the regional dialect. If there was no Russia, do you think the Austrian, German, Polish, or Hungarian masters would have done the same? As for today, Ukrainian nationalism is showing itself to be big threat, even if its a hybrid-fascist delusion baked up by a mentally ill person who though Ukrainians were pure slavs and Russians just Mongols (something they still say today). In the end, it will be like always, Russia will continue to promote 'friendly' Ukraine and try to separate them from the UPA types. Not gonna work in my opinion but that is their goal. They don't care to extinguish Ukrainian culture, just to make it Russia friendly. The west however absolutely want's to extinguish the Slavic culture for a more modern 'European" copy.

Defeat of Russia will be the end of Ukraine. Russia is the military force that safe-guarded Ukraine Eastern Slav culture from Poles, Hungarians, Austrians, and Germans. Yeah they folded in some regional stuff like Borscht soup but the Soviets also went out of their way to make Ukraine a distinct political unit. With Russia gone, Ukraine will just be folded in to European 'liberalism'. Also, lol at the Gregorian calendar being correct. They're literally changing it in opposition to Russia, but all they have to replace with is more latin imports from the west. Same reason they cling to Bandera, their is no Ukrainian nationalism without Russian culture. Bandera was a fake who wanted to be a Nazi pawn and even they smacked him down.

They try to make it distinct through arbitrary changes like moving the date of Christmas or banning some Russian novel. But their culture is intrinsically connected to Russia, from Borscht soup down to their military doctrine. The only way to make it distinct is destroying it and replacing it with a pseudo-European 'liberal' identity which just means the end of Ukraine as a distinct cultural unit.

Yeah, and there are a lot of successor states to Western Rome, Frankia, etc. But all this is about the spread of western culture. Eastern or Orthodox culture which comes from Eastern Rome lives on just like it lived on through Roman successor states. Christian Imperialism (conversion of the pagans) is just a continuation of Roman 'civilizing' missions in Gaul and Germania. The biggest accomplishment of the Orthodox Church (Council of Nicaea) were the conversion of the Slavs. Most everything else went to the Latins. However, the east was badly damaged from the loss of Constantinople, which is really when Moscow laid claim to the title. Rome never fell to a none Christian state, or at least not one that didn't convert.

Take a DNA test, they get the same percentage eastern Slav. That is because Belarus-Russia-Ukraine are from the same origins. Differences in Russian Borscht Soup or Ukrainian Borscht soup or Russian/Ukrainian language are far more regionally than fundamental. No doubt their is a nationalist movement to create a separate identity, but that will inevitably lead to the deconstruction of Ukrainian culture and its replacement with more 'European' standards. They are already starting with Christmas, but again mindset is much more important than food or when you celebrate Christmas, and mindset will be the biggest change (if successful). I don't know if you've met Ukrainians and Russians separately, but their incredibly alike. Their outlook, physical appearance, moral upbringing, family units, etc.

Love you too. No but seriously, I don't say I love you in a homoerotic way. Just that internet divisions don't change the fact we would probably be friends IRL. I know a LOT of Ukrainians. There are ton in my family who I have to deal with (love em' though). Also, I seem to be entangled with a group of Ukrainian gamblers I deal with in Brighton Beach, its become a weekly thing for me now. Anyways, the hardcore nationalist rhetoric is going the wayside once western powers don't need it. They hate the Banderites as much as Russians, they are just using them to win the war. After that it is all downhill. Actually Ukraine shares so much culture with Russia the only way to destroy Russian influence is to change their entire society, which many are planning. It starts with small things like celebrating a 'western' christmas and praising Lvov as their most 'European' city then it goes to all the other liberal stuff. Europe doesn't want Ukraine like they are. Actually, a lot of the UPA groups were started by ethnic Russians in Ukraine, take that for what you will. There form of nationalism will become rejecting Ukrainian culture because of Russian 'colonialism' (lol) and what are they going to replace it with exactly? Well there is only one thing: that mythical idea of 'Europe' which Doskoyvsky talked about. Soviet military doctrine isn't just soviet, its been around since the time of the Mongols.

Well I don’t agree with that assessment of my beliefs. I understand why Russia is fighting this war and why they can’t give up and I hope the Russian state survives. Not because it is doomed to be oppressed or miserable, but because it is an alternative to the western form of imperialism which focuses on a glutinous population with no sense of national purpose. Russian imperialism I like because it counterbalances Western imperialism. I think at the core of my disagreement is framing this war as a fight for Ukrainian sovereignty as a western dominated Ukraine would have as much independence as a Russian dominated Ukraine. Actually less because Ukraine shares far less with Europe than it does with Russia. Most of the tactics people use to describe the Russian military as uncivilized: human wave attacks, massive uncoordinated artillery attacks, civilian casualties, internal repression, forced mobilization, etc. is the same as Ukraine. Well the west is trying to teach (force) them to use NATO tactics but the UAF is finding that to be less than useless. You should see how the UAF handled the war in Donbas circa 2015, it would have western liberals explode with indignation. Complete disregard for civilian casualties, torture, intimidation tactics, etc.

I meant: if your side is actively pursuing ends that will lead to the destruction of Russia I can protest these actions even if Russian rule makers share blame in the outcome.

By that standard no state is legitimate. I also don't think Russia is hopelessly corrupt. I mean it is now, but that isn't its destiny to always be. It's just more likely due to its disadvantaged economy. Being geopolitically independent requires sacrifices, and economic sacrifices lead to higher likelihood of corruption. But there are still ways to fight. First goal is removing the corrupt Oligarchs who came to power thank to Western Neoliberal reforms. Putin protects them for now, but after he's gone who knows. The war has been a wake up call for much of the Russian elite. A state whose cultural and military influence can counterbalance western imperialism I think is important. As for internal repression, liberal democracies will act the same way, they just have different tactics outside of violence.

Is Kosovo illegally occupied because NATO (US) armed forces are stationed there. Crimea always had Russian troops for hundreds of years, it was handed over to the Ukraine SSR due to logistical reasons. After 2014, the goal wasn't to take land, but try to use Donbas and its population to influence the government. But the Minsk agreement didn't work. Anyways, imperial powers can use a hybrid of soft and strong power to get their way. All great strategists use their whole tool kit.

The blame game is kind of dumb. Yeah in retrospect the Oligarchs are handling this poorly. But if Western action is made with the distinct intent or at least the aim to achieve something which will result in the dissolution of Russia, then the result is the same anyways. I think or disagreement here is that the Russian state and the Russian culture are intertwined like no other country (or few others). The things you hate about Russia, it's militaristic outlook, its internal oppression, its imperialistic expansion is what makes Russia a country. Explaining the entire history of place is hard, but to be as brief as possible: Rus is a term for Eastern Slavs, a term Catherine the Great made sound European by combing Rus and Prussia. Russia, given its name, is not aiming to be the duchy of Moscow, but ruler of all Russian people. Now who are these eastern Slavs? Well they are like the Franks, the Saxons, etc. people who were Christianized and made to continue the legacy of the Roman empire. BUT, unlike them they weren't baptized by the Latin Church, but by the Byzantine (eastern Roman) church, or in other words the Greek world. These people spread the Orthodox fate, all of whom fell under domination of Muslim or Western states. The Serbs came under Austria and Turk domination, Greeks were controlled by Turk, British, and American powers. It's a tale of poverty and loss, except for one country: Russia. Rus are the descendants of Kievan Rus and make up three modern states: Belarus-Russia-Ukraine (boarder lands). Moscow laid claims to the title, and its desire for power existed in its desire to compete with the west. If it wasn't so large or totalitarian it would have been swallowed up by one western power or another. It remained independent at the sacrifice of its people's well being. Lots happened, Mongol influence, etc. but this area (all three countries really) didn't have the capitalist mindset or market economy. They had large peasant population that engaged in limited trade or ingenuity, so their economies fell behind. To compete Russia used raw numbers just to stay in the competition. This also led to a military doctrine of high civilian causalities. Their game plan when Napoleon invaded was to burn down their entire capital. No western country has a culture or mindset similar to them, none would ever do something like that. So Russian art comes from its existence as an imperial state struggling against a more powerful foe. They don't win, but they can stand toe to toe at times, and more importantly retain geopolitical independence. They do that by trying to hold together an empire, because the only thing that can confront an empire is another empire. That art you love, comes from the Russian sense of imperial destiny. They believe their goal is to uphold eastern church against the west. They find pride in struggle and pain and misery this has caused while many western intellects look in scorn because submitting to the west (joining NATO, the EU, etc.) would alleviate that pain, but it would also be the end of the Russian state. Russian literature, ballet, and art was created to help its people cope with its improbably circumstances. None of the Russian greats like Pushkin, Tolstoy, etc. advocated for the end of the Russian empire, far from it. But their literary significance comes from the innate contradiction of fighting always. Some people tend to think, like you most likely, that they why to fight pain is to change the circumstances. The eastern outlook is about not changing the circumstance but finding meaning through which the will to survive continues. Ukrainians in this respect are much closer to their Russian brothers in that respect. Now there are a breed of people called Russian liberals who want to emulate the west. But their beliefs are impossible because they want the country to remain while also being an equal partnership with Europe. That is not how it works, if Russia is not independent from European powers, it will be controlled by them, and then it would cease to exist. That is just another country under the western umbrella. Just cause your government doesn't dictate the terms doesn't mean we don't know whose side you're on. Iranian culture is promoted in the fight against the Iranian regime for example. While Russian culture is either demoted or made to be "Ukrainian" or something as if the people of Rus were fundamentally different and don't have a shared culture. I don't know what you mean here.