BlueOak

No they just lie better. I have had to accept that lying is required to win anything against a liar. So liberals need to embrace that and just run constant lies about republicans all day. Just take what works, personal attacks, lies, populism and pressure. The soft era of liberals wrecked them. Denouncing populism wrecked them. Trying to be moral, good-natured, and cooperative, its all a waste of time. But ego aside, this is just the natural progression of authoritarianism rising. That which embraces or mirrors it does better. The aspects of Trump that go against it will cause him problems, the other option is to reflect it while remaining liberal. Both leave a bad taste in my mouth.

It would have been more insightful if you could have looked at Russia's perspective also and done the opposite here. What do they gain by peace and what do they lose by keeping fighting. That way we could have a whole perspective rather than half a perspective. Ukraine From the very same article. @Bobby_2021 “Unfortunately, we’ve always had fewer weapons than needed and are far from matching Russia’s advantages in aviation, bombs, and missiles Ukraine's training far exceeds Russia's. Their current conscription age is 25. Some of this we are now reading is America making an excuse to pull out, it'll lay all the groundwork for that in their media. Though young men have historically been the backbone of most armies, the question of who should serve in the fight is deeply divisive in Ukrainian society. Mobilization is unpopular, and Zelensky’s administration has said further lowering the mobilization age — it’s now 25, which is old compared with other countries — doesn’t make sense when there aren’t enough weapons to equip the soldiers already on the battlefield. So no this is not being considered seriously. This is also reflected on the Russian side with their demographics already being bad, and their casualties being about 3 to 1, people argue 2.5 to 1, but whatever the exact number it's still a lot of Russians dead that they could not afford to lose—especially given the exodus prewar and during the first few months. However, I can acknowledge that Russia can keep losing men for awhile, despite their economic hits, as the Russian population outside of the major western cities can live in poverty more easily. This doesn't tell me why Russia would ever settle for a long term peace, not with BRICS resupplying them. If you'd have said china were cutting equipment to both sides, that would have been more reassuring. Missiles do plenty Bobby they wreck Russian ammunition, manpower, armor and logistics. So let's not try and BS that long-range missiles are not effective in war. Trump pulling out is reflective of the American people pulling out more of NATO and Europe that's the reality, let's not sugar coat it. In the future decades America is going to split further with Europe and be on the opposite side of things or at least neutral (economically speaking, no doubt weapons will still be sold).

Putin and Ukraine need to know that it will get worse for them to continue. They also need to know it will get better for them in peace. Otherwise it will go nowhere. The peace is almost impossible to sell without a lot of hardware coming their way. If NATO, all military alliances and nukes are off the table for Ukraine, there is almost nothing that can be done to stop a new war starting 5 years from now with Russia in a stronger position in terms of land access and logistics, even if they are weaker economically and in terms of stockpiles. They'd need a heck of a carrot for that deal. Ending the war is also a bit of a hard sell to Russia if Trump looks too keen to pull out, as he wants to. Because without US support, Russia can gain a lot in Ukraine also.

@gamblerTry this:

https://syria.liveuamap.com/ This is the map I am looking at it, its different to yours, but I have no idea which is accurate.

Not quite. It's like making Gaza a state directly bordering a large regional power supporting it. I mean in europe there are city states; the size is irrelevant.

When things are hard admit it, and be the change candidate, then you have a large advantage. In this case Democrats should have leaned into populism and change, at least in their rhetoric. Completely giving up their populism has given all that energy to Trump, it's been that way for years, and nobody on the American (center right) in the Democrats, has learned much.

Yes its dumb. If you are asking me if its what i'd pick, no of course not. I'd tell everyone to stop playing zero-sum, geo-political games. This however, is the natural conclusion to several different world powers all wanting influence in Syria, and their populations/leadership being unable to work as one global collective. If you want the solution talk about a global collective often, and when someone starts saying how they hate one side or the other, or want to see them destroyed, start trying to tell them how insane that is. On the meta they are literally saying they want to destroy that part of themselves.

1, Multi-state solution 2, Regional Goverments 3, Infighting until 1 happens. Russia and BRICS will of course push their influence back in to destabilize the country, as they are doing in Romania and eastern Europe. So the logical conclusion is either long term instability, which is what we sort of had, or a multi state solution.

Authoritarism is rising everywhere, yes. But this is what most here wanted, and I warned about for almost two decades. Well this is what it looks like. Many say nothing when Russia meddles in every country in Europe, but when someone else does its a problem. Funny that. At least it stops people from acknowledging why NATO expansion happened, so they can feel better in their own aggressive expansion while hating the other side doing it. Here is Russia's week. Ruble drops off a cliff Syrian control collapses. - This hurts their air influence over Africa critically for BRICS. Georgia destabalises. More aid coming in to Ukraine Russias casualties soared. BTW No Russian influence on an election allows for it to be democratic because Russia is not democratic; the points from Aaron are idealistic on that issue. Its one of the reasons authoritarianism and democracy cannot mix.

How conveniently we all forget Russia has been meddling in Georgia for several decades now. Ditto Romania to a lesser extent. Rich Russian land barons kicking the locals out were just halted in abkhazia, with a political fallout for its leader. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/politics/government/abkhazia-halts-russian-property-deal-amid-public-uproar/ar-AA1vfnEq All Russia ever wants to do is russify everything, they are no different to America's nation-building, they just don't bother announcing it.

People are only able to see their perspective. Maybe I am just lucky that I can see both, or more willing to look through both. In Russia and their allies they are showing this as a great victory. In England for example, Russia is seen as a shell of its former self. In Ukraine its a fight against their oppressor and a malicious tyrant. In Countries near Russia they see this as a way to keep this as far away from themselves as possible. Certain BRICS countries see it as a way to dent American imperialism, and a few to establish their own brand of it, China for example. France sees it as a way to kick back at Russian Africa's influence. Certain countries see it as an opportune way to expand their own influence, for example in central Asia and also now Syria. If we wanted 'truth' it would have to include all of these. People don't want truth though, they want something that backs up their own opinion.

Failure is also part of you if you decide so. Whatever you experience and decide that means is what it is, speaking collectively also.

@Something Funny I have no power over anything happening in Ukraine, nor do you. I don't get to make a call. If I did we'd already have troops in Ukraine. You are projecting massively onto an opinion you don't like something that doesn't exist. If I die in Ukraine it'll make no difference whatsoever, the world will still be in the same place. Would I go if we got into a war and we were called up, yes. Do I now qualify for your hero card? Or is it conceivable that a world war to stop Russia is worse than a war fought in the east of a country? Giving up land to Putin is just going to encourage him to do more, as he has done again and again. Because nothing has changed about the world. Another foreigner who can't shoot a gun dying there will make no difference whatsoever. All war is psychopathic, most of the world is that way. I value consciousness more than anything. This the best of a bad choice.

@Something Funny You are incapable of realising all people want the same thing: safety. There is no twist of the words, it is two perspectives looking at the same problem with different solutions. You are incapable of this because all you can do is demean someone who disagrees with you; thus, we have conflict on the macro and micro. Its the old they are bad I am good nonesense you are just repeating it again. Here i'll reflect: You are a coward for wanting to give an aggressive tyrant more land, and trying to sacrifice all these lives for nothing. Your perspective must be proved 'right' to make your ego feel good, and those who disagree must be proven to be the 'bad guy' so someone else can come along and tell you how great you are.

I don't want Europe in a war no. That's some absurd definition of a coward you've got there. War is nothing to be proud of or want. If it can be contained until Russia cannot fight anymore then that is the best of a bad bunch of choices. I've endless proof as i've been debating and talking about this for years, but I won't waste another word on someone like yourself. All you've got is venom for someone with another perspective why the hell do you engage in conversation? Ridiculous.

Its precisely because I do not want a wider european war that I advocate for keeping the war as far away from Europe as possible. I actually almost did join in at the start, my earlier posts here were thinking on the idea, till I was told directly that untrained foreigners are not needed, because despite your fantasy of: Ukraine does not need untrained manpower, they lack the gear to outfit hordes of throwaway soldiers like Russia does. Instead they use better gear, better training and better tactics to bleed the Russians. The situation does not need to 'turn around' or magically do anything. Once again: Its to contain the war in the east of Ukraine, that has been the strategy for about 2 years now, and that is exactly what is happening. Russia keeps running headfirst into it. Russia is down to tanks from the 60's and earlier, it cannot replace anything advanced, and its stockpiles were its main threat to Ukraine and the west collectively in any conventional fight. That and its population, which it is burning through, a population that was already in decline. Its economy is not doing well at all, so that decline keeps speeding up. You do understand that the Russian economy compared to the EU collectively is only 1/10th of it. Not including the UK, America, or other NATO allies like Japan, South Korea, Turkey etc. Your reasoning that this is somehow a competitive point is nonsensical. Sure Russia retools its factories impressively, but if you are thinking that they would come out on top if the EU or NATO collectively actually started a war economy, that is pure fantasy. Ukraine shoots down almost all Russian missiles. The cheap mass drones from Iran are more effective. You argue against yourself at the end. You say Russia can outproduce everyone, yet somehow Ukraine and the EU will have the same amount of production in any downtime if the war gets put on hold. You can't have it both ways. An army is limited by how far their logistics stretch, it struggles to build this up in war time because people keep targeting them, in peace time it can build supply deports, rail connections, roads, ammunition stockpiles etc. This then allows it to push much further. This isn't even talking about how much harder it is to invade an entrenched position than one that has just been taken.

Its blindly obvious what will happen. Its not predicting the future it's me telling you this is what Russia is doing and has been doing 8 times in a row, and then everyone telling me why it's doing it and then me saying yes, none of that has changed, so they'll just do it again. True Putin's KGB fossils are not immortal, but there are a dozen of them or so left, I hear. After that, we'll get fewer people caring about a dead empire called the USSR. Non-stop war until Russia cannot effectively fight it controls what happens. It blunts Russia, their stockpiles are almost gone, BRICS has delayed this happening but they cannot prevent it entirely. See Syria, which Russia has had to pull out of. An element of certainty is exactly what every country bordering Putin's Empire wants. Without that certainty, countries suffer economically, politically and socially. Keeping the war and Russian control as far away from them as possible benefits every single eastern European country. The region has repeatedly fought wars with Russia and repeatedly had Russia or its previous incarnations meddle in their internal politics. Now to Ukraine. Keeping Russia in the east is on the Ukranian's side also. If Russia gets to rearm, regroup and go again, it'll be twice as bad. They'll have fresh troops, new funds, new equipment, and supply lines, that's a terrible idea. Wars can be very long bloody affairs some last decades. If Putin really wants to fight forever until he has no economy or country left, that's up to him. Ukraine will be heavily invested in by the EU but nobody is going to help out the remote communities dotted over the giant landscape of Russia that Putin has drained of men and their futures.

Me accepting the dictator in me, or the authoritarian, took a hell of a lot of work, and when we cannot do that internally, we create an external condition for it to be reconciled. In this case, authoritarianism vs democracy. The only way peace exists is for both sides to take on enough of the other for parity to be found, otherwise, all we get is: THEY ARE BAD. WE ARE GOOD. And the rejection of that part of ourselves. Which is conflict, which eventually bubbles up into a larger war. The victim mindset is well documented and yes fear and unsafety can cause it, I sat it in for about a decade of my own life.

West = World. East = World. etc. This is humanity. Until that's accepted as inside your own chest too, be ready for a lot more war.

See what I mean, peace is an impossibility when one's own position and actions cannot be objectively looked at for fault. its like people think they just wander through life and have no bearing on it whatsoever, that attitude in Russia leads to alcoholism and the victim mindset most people sit in. There is no masculinity at all in that, and all day I hear about this void of it in society; well there it is on show.

Which will last until Russia invades again. For their 9th war into former USSR territories. They and the posters here will say: It's the wests fault, and list a few reasons they feel this way to justify the next war. I will say I must be a mind reader to have predicted this 5 years ago huh. Like I don't have 8 previous examples to look at, Russia repeatedly telling me it, and every previous condition for this war not only being still there but exaggerated on both sides.

You can grow more easily in harder times. The contrast between you and reality is greater. By you I mean all definitions of that, from the thoughts you have, to your body/mind, your environment, community and country etc.

We could do a mega thread but that will be a long thread