Ukraine 9: Where does it go from here

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

But there are not insignificant  people who won’t tune in to all those things because they find them boring, depressing to view.

And ever increasingly so about the Oscars!

[Corvinus85]

7 minutes ago, Zorral said:

To counter the story of the cowardly, stupid boogaloo guys who ran to Ukraine, found a real shooting war by golly, and promptly ran away again, here is this, of a veteran Marine medic going to Ukraine to help Ukranians become soldiers.

If the boogaloo boys story was mentioned here I missed it. I heard of some Swedes who decided to go home after that airbase in the west got bombed.

[Zorral]

3 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

If the boogaloo boys story was mentioned here I missed it. I heard of some Swedes who decided to go home after that airbase in the west got bombed.

I mentioned it, but I think in the US Political thread -- don't remember certainly though.  It was a big story on the twitter and 'newspaper' sites, because one of them twittered about it, how hard it was to get out and get to Poland, disguised as red cross workers.

[Varysblackfyre321]

33 minutes ago, Zorral said:

OK -- the impression I'd gotten from the OP's comment is that the Oscars were asking Zelensky to come to LA and be there in person. 

No where is that stated to have been apart of the suggestion.

33 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Nevertheless there remains this thing that he's got a war and a country to run, and taking out time to tape-and-talk to them may not be worthy enough to dump some part of his daily agenda of endless emergency and crisis.

Possibly, though virtue signaling Publicity stunts can be integral in dealing with some emergency and crisis.in some parts. If the Oscars could fit a a minute video of him talking about needing help keep babies from getting killed that over some sad music that could be cool. Though if not I don’t think it’ll break the war effort.

27 minutes ago, Zorral said:

And ever increasingly so about the Oscars!

true,lol.

[DMC]

2 hours ago, RhaenysBee said:

I also find it a little ironic that Hollywood would think that being in the oscars show is global equal to speaking to the world, being on BBC, CNN, etc and in UN summits isn’t speaking to the world, video calling the oscars is.

Well, you may be onto something there considering their ratings tanked by 58% last year.  But, usually, the Oscars are the most watched non-sporting event of the year inside the US.  I can't quickly find anything about global viewership, but it stands to reason it gets more worldwide viewers than most programs as well.  Certainly will grant more exposure than simply going on BBC, CNN, or literally any other news station.

3 hours ago, RhaenysBee said:

Do I think that the role of the academy awards is to facilitate geopolitics, military conflicts and such? No. Do I think it’s the right direction for Hollywood to be an active part taker in politics and now even military conflicts? Absolutely not. I think Hollywood can very well pull their weight and raise awareness (and money) and express solidarity, if they want to, without getting political leaders on a video call regardless of their vocation.

I know you've backed off this, but this seems a really weird position to take.  Hollywood, and even the Oscars, have always been "active" in politics.  Last year, Regina King used the opening monologue to address the George Floyd protests and recent Derek Chauvin verdict.  Was she wrong to do so?  It seems like you're putting Hollywood into a damned if they do/damned if they don't position.  If they don't address what's going on in the world, aren't they even more self-involved out-of-touch vapid celebrities playing dress up, oblivious to what's going on in the world?

29 minutes ago, Zorral said:

OK -- the impression I'd gotten from the OP's comment is that the Oscars were asking Zelensky to come to LA and be there in person.  That was what I was indignant about, myself. Nevertheless there remains this thing that he's got a war and a country to run, and taking out time to tape-and-talk to them may not be worthy enough to dump some part of his daily agenda of endless emergency and crisis. 

First, yes, let's be clear that Schumer was not talking about Zelenskyy physically attending the Oscars, but rather a satellite feed or just a video.  Second, Zelenskyy's PR campaign is a large part job and daily agenda -- and one he's been insanely successful at!  Maybe sending in a video like the one described here:

Quote

But the hand-held videos he’s made from the streets of Kyiv, which necessarily have the lowest production values imaginable, speak even more to Zelenskyy’s skills as a performer. These videos are still framed with the eye of someone who knows how to use the camera built into a phone. In the below video, he manages to direct your focus toward the various other members of the government who are with him in Kyiv, all while issuing a message of resilience. It’s compelling, and in a way that speaks to the moment more powerfully than, say, Putin’s carefully staged photo ops.

That’s before you even get to the fact that the simple optics of Zelenskyy’s being present in the streets of Kyiv carry tremendous weight when we’re used to world leaders being separated from the conflicts they are part of. If the Russian military is going to invade Ukraine, well, the leader of Ukraine being there, in the streets of Kyiv, carries an immense emotional appeal to both his fellow citizens and those of us who are thousands of miles away from the conflict.

Finally, I feel like Amy Schumer should be defended a bit.  I would not describe her as your typical "out of touch" Hollywood celebrity.  She's a pretty damn down-to-earth comedian -- frankly a little too down-to-earth lately.  But we're talking about a woman that was a regular on Greg Gutfeld's FNC late night talk show, she's not your typical limousine liberal.

[RhaenysBee]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

But, usually, the Oscars are the most watched non-sporting event of the year inside the US.  I

Which doesn’t equal the world. Then again, I speak only from my experience and just because not a soul I ever known actually watched the oscars, it may have far more traction than I realize. 

1 hour ago, DMC said:

know you've backed off this, but this seems a really weird position to take.  Hollywood, and even the Oscars, have always been "active" in politics.  Last year, Regina King used the opening monologue to address the George Floyd protests and recent Derek Chauvin verdict.  Was she wrong to do so?  It seems like you're putting Hollywood into a damned if they do/damned if they don't position.  If they don't address what's going on in the world, aren't they even more self-involved out-of-touch vapid celebrities playing dress up, oblivious to what's going on in the world?

I didn’t, I specially said I still think Hollywood shouldn’t be overtly and actively political. I don’t strictly speaking mean the award show itself when I say I don’t like the political foothold Hollywood is making, we see this in any and every production (and in an embarrassingly hypocritical and shallow way, which is the larger problem, as there’s nothing wrong with making productions about political topics, however it doesn’t feel right to surface level politicize every single production). And I also said, or probably implied but didn’t manage to get through, that raising awareness and expressing sympathy without dialing in a president live is the better choice in my view. It’s one thing to mention current events in your opening monologue, sure why not, it’s another to dial in a president to your black tie gala.

The point we are missing here is that I’m not against Hollywood actresses speaking up against the war or for Ukraine, my problem is specifically inviting a president busy with war to video call your black tie gala for 5 minutes before you move on to the awards and after parties. I feel all sorts of problems with that in terms of self awareness, intention, tone, future implications, and all that. But I do recognize, accept and respect the argument that the potential result matters more than my petty moral issues with Hollywood. 

but I also think that we wasted ten times the amount on this topic than it deserves. So I once again attempt to shut my mouth about this, no guarantee of success though. 

[Zorral]

6 minutes ago, RhaenysBee said:

it may have far more traction than I realize. 

It doesn't, not even in the US, only w/in the circles who care about this sort of thing, and care about it particularly because having others care about it matters to their own aspirations of career as commentator, critic, reviewer, publisher (like Vanity Fair Magazine) of the event and the events that latched long ago like parasites (such as Vanity Fair Magazine) upon the parent event of the Academy Awards. Among the parasites are the fashion industry, so you see how this goes.

These enclosed media bubble types hype this pretense it matters, as it as breathlessly, relentlessly as possible, demanding WE care,  if only to shore up their own declining value.  Oscar watching has mostly devolved to what I think is called hate watching, to make fun of how awful it is.

Seldom even in the past when the average person might find the self-referential ritual at least entertaining in some aspect did an Oscar win provide more revenue to a film -- though for the actors, directors, designers and producers, it did tend to provide more highly paid work in the future.

That's the last I'll say on the subject myself.

 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, RhaenysBee said:

And I also said, or probably implied but didn’t manage to get through, that raising awareness and expressing sympathy without dialing in a president live is the better choice in my view. It’s one thing to mention current events in your opening monologue, sure why not, it’s another to dial in a president to your black tie gala.

I guess I just don't see why the distinction matters.  Like, say Zelenskyy did something similar at the Super Bowl.  Would people be complaining about the NFL getting too political?  I think far less would - especially those that are typically angered by Hollywood's involvement in politics.  Moreover, support for Zelenskyy/Ukraine isn't even a controversial issue at all, it's about as united a political message you could make.

[Jaxom 1974]

Whether the Oscars are viewed in a manner that they were even 10 years ago isn't what's going to garner the reactions.  If a performer's speech goes out and makes a salient political point, it isn't the viewership that is live that is going to be spoken to (though that's also true), it's the reactions that such a speech will foster on social media.  That's what'll get the biggest reactions, how the Twitterverse that aligns with the sentiment reacts, and doubly so the sentiment of those opposed to it...

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Time chime in. I am not sure spending time on the Oscars is a good idea for Zelenskyy. 

Yes, it gets a lot of coverage, but then again, him being a war president (like in actuality not in a pretense way ala Dubya), that certainly raises the question whether he doesn't have anything better to do than spending his time on a video for the bloody Oscars? Things can't be that bad if he has time for the Oscars.

There'll be that whole line of attack plus the propaganda from Moscow, ofc he's being shwon at the Oscars, probably asking for an Oscar for all those crisis actors. 

It's probably better to send Mila Kunis to address the audience, or just rely on Schumer or the winners in their acceptance speeches to express support for Ukraine. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

43 minutes ago, RhaenysBee said:

Hollywood is making

The foothold has always been there. Did you know to get access to military equipment movie companies have hand over the scripts to movies  to the state department to check to see if the film could be used as propaganda?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hollywood-cia-washington-dc-films-fbi-24-intervening-close-relationship-a7918191.html

 

Usually politics is only a problem  in movies when they’re “progressive”

If not they’re just good old American fun; https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/how-reagan-used-the-movies-to-his-advantage/

 

34 minutes ago, DMC said:

I guess I just don't see why the distinction matters.  Like, say Zelenskyy did something similar at the Super Bowl.  Would people be complaining about the NFL getting too political?  I think far less would - especially those that are typically angered by Hollywood's involvement in politics.  Moreover, support for Zelenskyy/Ukraine isn't even a controversial issue at all, it's about as united a political message you could make.

It is how weird how overtly political  sports gets to be so long as it’s in the name of “patriotism”.

We don’t typically don’t do this for any other forms of entertainment; like it’d be weird if for every play at a theatrethe actors and audience where asked to stand during as someone plays the national anthem.

I Don’t believe even Hamilton does that.

Anyway it’d be cool if Zelensky also got the chance to send a video for the super bowl.

[RhaenysBee]

13 minutes ago, DMC said:

I guess I just don't see why the distinction matters.  Like, say Zelenskyy did something similar at the Super Bowl.  Would people be complaining about the NFL getting too political?  I think far less would - especially those that are typically angered by Hollywood's involvement in politics.  Moreover, support for Zelenskyy/Ukraine isn't even a controversial issue at all, it's about as united a political message you could make.

I don’t know how the Super Bowl works, I’ll assume it’s a similar thing to Champion’s League, not that I watch that. Either way, inviting Zelensky to give a video call speech at the Super Bowl gives me roughly the same vibes and issues as the oscars. And again support is great, one should and can express it in many ways, I just don’t think a live Oscars appearance is a great way for it. 

 

21 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

The foothold has always been there. Did you know to get access to military equipment movie companies have hand over the scripts to movies  to the state department to check to see if the film could be used as propaganda?

Oh my… That’s… that’s a whole spin off thread Ser Scott might grace us with. 

Speaking of, little face palm anecdote: Hungarian special forces actually seized fake/disabled military equipment one time that was being delivered for a Brad Pitt film that had been shot here. It was such a meme when I was at uni. Our rival uni acted it out at a lecture and the police was called to that event. What a meme it was… though the underwater part of this ice berg you mentioned isn’t really laughing material. 

[Werthead]

Interesting perspective here on the situation.

This one as well, from the Finnish President. He ponders if Putin presented the "maximalist" demands in December for NATO to return to its 1997 borders as a bluff when he really only wanted to deal with Ukraine, creating its own escalate-to-deescalate political (i.e. I may have threatened all of Eastern Europe but really Ukraine is my top priority). He also seems lukewarm on Finland joining NATO, and points out that Finland's military is, weapon to person, extremely formidable as it is.

[DMC]

51 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Time chime in. I am not sure spending time on the Oscars is a good idea for Zelenskyy. 

Well, whether or not it's a good idea for Zelenskyy is another matter entirely.  But no, I don't think he nor anyone else should give two shits how Putin/Moscow would use it as propaganda.  If Zelenskyy thought it would be worthwhile, then sounds fine to me.  Same goes if he doesn't.

[IheartIheartTesla]

On the note of Hollywood (and the military) and Ukraine: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/13/us-veteran-ships-film-set-military-equipment-ukraine

Quote

Barton is not sending weapons or ammo – by law, he can’t – but this is crucial gear civilians often forget, he said. Many are everyday Ukrainians suddenly facing relentless shelling.

He’s donating about 80% of his inventory, including about 620 uniforms of various camouflage colors, 118 boots of different vintage and 300 pairs of gloves.

“Sometimes we forget the details – the slings, the canteens, the belts, the shoelaces. All that’s important,” Barton said.

Quote

Still, Barton hopes larger film studios will follow his lead and donate their fleet of gear.

“Some of these prop companies have acres and acres of equipment, especially just uniforms and boots, something that we wouldn’t even bat an eye at in the film industry,” he said. “Oh, it’s just costumes.”

They say costumes, he said. “I say uniforms.”

 

[DMC]

Pretty strong words from Zelenksyy in his address to the Knesset:

Quote

"Why are you busy with calculations [regarding Russia]? Mediating without taking sides? You can mediate — but not between good and evil," Zelensky said.

The Ukrainian president compared the Russian invasion to the Holocaust and said Russia unleashed all-out war aimed at destroying the Ukrainian people like Nazi Germany wanted to destroy the Jewish people.

Zelensky criticized the Israeli government's policy regarding the entry of Ukrainian refugees, and complained that Israel refuses to supply Ukraine with the Iron Dome anti-missile system and other defensive weapons and equipment.

The Ukrainian president also criticized the Israeli government for failing to impose sanctions on Russia like other countries in the west.

 

[Werthead]

Some reports that the entire Russian 6th Tank Regiment has been destroyed or forced to flee from the NW of Kyiv.

[Gorn]

Quote

 

CNN reporter asked President Zelenskyy about Russia’s demands in the negotiations, in particular, that they recognise Crimea as part of Russia, recognise the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions as independent republics, and guarantee that Ukraine will never join NATO.

Zelenskyy replied, "There are compromises which we as an independent state will never be prepared to make."

According to Zelenskyy: "There will not be a single compromise relating to our territorial integrity and our sovereignty, as is the will of the people of Ukraine

 

Like I said, there is no way Ukraine will sign away either Crimea or Donbas without a complete battlefield defeat. And the mention of "sovereignty" means they will not give up NATO permanently either.

[Werthead]

  

6 minutes ago, Gorn said:

Like I said, there is no way Ukraine will sign away either Crimea or Donbas without a complete battlefield defeat. And the mention of "sovereignty" means they will not give up NATO permanently either.

I think he's been clever in how he's approached these questions. For example, Ukraine will not surrender territory but perhaps devolved regions or genuine referendums in those areas could be used to get around the rhetoric, whilst he's already acknowledged that Ukraine will not join NATO, even if he's framing it that NATO will not accept Ukraine and that's a reality he has to accept rather than Ukraine saying they don't want to be in NATO any more.

The situation is extremely difficult, since it's hard to know to what degree Russia is really willing to accept a negotiated settlement, to what degree they are really willing to escalate things and so on. An "easy" agreement now might simply be storing up far more trouble for later on, but not coming to an agreement in the near future might also result in much more death, destruction and loss of life in the shorter term.

[Fez]

It would seem things are progressing from "protesting" to "insurgency" in occupied locations (unless this was simply Ukrainian special forces that snuck in, the front line seems to be close to Kherson now)