Understanding Russia & Putin

[Fleetinglife]

2 hours ago, Fleetinglife said:

Btw, Breaking News: Former US Ambassador to Ukraine Victoria Nuland confirms in an official US Congressional Testimony Hearing of the existence of 11 US-funded and sponsored Biolabs and Biological research facilities existing in Ukraine, some of them seemingly engaged in the production of biological pathogens such as Anthrax and types of Plague for the purposes of biological warfare - violating article I of the UN Charter on the prohibition of biological warfare usage in war, either for offensive or defensive purposes - that were ordered to be destroyed [the biological pathogens] by the Ukrainian Ministry of Health on 24.2.2022 due to the fear of their capture and seizure by Russian military and occupying forces in their location:

Russians obtained and published an article of the copy of the Ukrainian Ministries of Health decree (translated via Google), at the date of the Russian Invasion, for the destruction of some of the biological contents supposedly being developed and existing in some of these Biolabs and bioresearch facilities in Ukraine.

 

Now, if the existence of the actual contents of stuff in this documentation revelation, that it claims to specify, proves to be actually true and legitimate coming from the Russian side and if the part of the funding coming of US defense spending portion for military aid and assistance towards the Ukrainian military, or as a part of US's financial aid package to Ukraine actually went in part for the development of these facilities and their funding for programs to be researched and developed in them for the purposes the production of biological pathogens that could be used for offensive or defensive biological warfare purposes also proves to be in fact true, and not only being a cynical and conniving Russian propaganda and disinformation campaign directed towards the current Ukrainian government and its supporters in the US, then one must an ask an obvious follow-up question, in regards to that, given the overall past historical and political context leading up to this full-on invasion and war now, of why was such emphasis on the US side put for the funding of such's biological facilities and on this part of their specific research development in country such as Ukraine, which since past 2014 was seen as unfriendly and a threat to Russia, due to it's NATO commitment,  and that's bordering it and which's eastermost and southern part was already in conflict with Russian-backed separatists for 8 years, costing around some already 14 000 casualties up until the latest invasion, if not for the, either eventual threat in it's deployment, when eventually developed for biological weapon loadage and usage, as seen as deterent for Russia trying to achieve it's political or military goals in the country or even worse for it's usage against the Russian backed separatists at some point as part of an pre-emptive offensive eventually launched by then current Ukranian governmnet and military side, for the aims of the full reconstituion of their non-administrated territories taken or backed by Russia into Ukraine, against them before the possibilty of Russian military backage of their attempt of the constition of their self-declared republics in their full territorial reach in Ukraine - one can see, easily, by looking from the easily spooked, paranoid and fearful Russian mind, of US funding of possbile biological research facilities containing in them biological pathogens that can be easily repurposed and deployed for the purposes of biological warfare usage to bring their backed separatists in to heed with Ukranian extreme nationalists that they were fighting  and/or even deployed in the eventual retaking of Crimea by US or NATO backed Ukranian military forces, could have prompted them, with their knowledge of these existence of all these biological research facilites in their borderlands with and disputes with Ukraine and thier Russian supporters there, could have provoked them to plan in advance a potential justification for launching a pre-emptive offensive to neutralize this potential threat for them and those who backed them in Ukraine and achieve the objectives for the populations they backed there much sooner than later due to their lack of information potentially, of how soon the factor of the existence of biological pathogens developed in this US-funded biolabs and facilties might it take for it to be developed  enough for it to be eventually possible for it to be deployable as biological weapon to be eventually operable and potentially used as actual military capabilty and option there if deemed possible to get away with and necessary in an upcoming future war with Russian backed separatists or the Russian miliatry directly and it's troops invading/intervening in the country.

If there is a legitimate pre-emptive threat of such weapons being developed enough to be deployed eventually as either justifed as deterrence for the possibilty Russian miliatry intervention in the disputed territories in the country or Russian occupied areas within it or caught off guard offensive against the Russian side, with the tacit backing and being part of the shady presence of US military/or just financial aid funding to the current post-Maidan Ukrainian government behind their possible eventual research, development, and deployment, which in the past hasn't hesitated to deploy internationally banned and/or illegal weaponry against the Iraqi military, such as phosphorous and depleted uranium ones for their versions of wider global geo-strategic goals and noble purposes, one can only speculate how the Russian side grew increasingly paranoid with some of the revelations of these developments in Ukraine surfacing on their side, given US's previous track record of how far it was willing to go for securing and saving key deemed geostrategic locations and targets for it's military-industrial complex and it's global presence and stability theory backing, and how far some of the Ukrainian nationalists elements existing in non-small numbers within the country radicalized against Russians and Russian presence in their country over the years, and the unclarity from the Russian's side, perspective and survival agenda of how far the US would be willing to go to back them in their overall strategic goals and objectives, of how far they were willing to go for them actually, to get their country out of the gutter and to resolve these disputes they had with Russia and perhaps rid themselves of their pressence and influence in ''their'' country permanently. So one can easily see then, from the Russian's side and perspective, of their fears, like resembling in part Bush's and neoconservative one's not some time long ago, why the invasion had to be planned and launched sooner rather than later in order for them not to risk of losing literally everything up until that point they have achieved and had in Ukraine, by those they demonized and those who tacitly helped them to potentially require and have such lethal, potentially future troop invasion, intervention, deployment or occupation terminating, weapons in their hands.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Fleetinglife

[Ananta]

14 hours ago, zurew said:

I think what he meant, is that they would have the attack of suprise, not the other way around, however you could say now that is wouldn't be much of a suprise if Russia would attack other countries, so arguments could be made on both sides.

The thing is, even if that's what was meant. How can you attack Russia with the element of surprise if you've already allowed them to take your land and government, as well as your military equipment. To me, it's now or never...

Edited March 9, 2022 by Ananta

[Loba]

Pentagon denied Ukraine the migs...

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-europe-poland-nato-5724ff192113703d829024dc4410664e

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by Loba

[DieFree]

@Leo Gura

Is it just about security interests? A compelling theory I’ve read from a professor who studies Russia is that Putin is afraid of Ukraine becoming more Western because that undermines the legitimacy and longevity of his rent-seeking, patrimonial system of control. Putin wants a ring of satellite states governed (or misgoverned) like Russia so the Russian people never ask themselves why they can’t be democratic like Ukraine.

[Fleetinglife]

2 hours ago, nuwu said:

not not condemning war, but it seems putin mentioned at some point "nato joining ukraine will make nuclear war likely" considering the conflicts already happening between ukraine-russia and the alliance domino that would follow. maybe he did consider this in his calculations, as a justification for being the leading role in a war while preserving some internal sense of morality / sanity

Looks like the existing threat of the possibility of eventual biological weapons deployment justification narrative by Ukrainian nationalists tacitly supported by the US at some point for the purposes of either deterrence for future Russian military troop involvement within the country (due to their inability to be swiftly or at all be admitted in NATO or EU as long as they have an issue of the existence of unresolved territorial disputes and sovereignty issues in their country, they cannot be fully applied for membership) or launching eventually a military offensive when they are powerful enough using them as key to recapturing of their claimed sovereign territory recognized by most countries in the world now - was what was most on the mind as future coming inevitable possibility of a danger existing, if things left to developed with no input, intervention or attempt to be changed, procrastinated and unresolved as they did, buying the US and Ukrainian side more time to their advantage, that hey had to from the Russian's POV eventually act in some way, to break this stalemate deliberately designed not to go in their favor, in order from their perception to break the possibilty of such a threat existing ever having the possibilty of coming into fruition - which was now, to them from their threat listing and ranking perspective as the war went on and possibilty of further radicalization of Ukrainian nationalists, overall culture and separatist regions grew with it, together with their strategic goals, objectives and demands, a much greater immediate possible future threat and possibilty for them to at some time eventually become operable to have the possibilty of it being possible to be deployed by Ukranian military in conjucture with the tacit approval or forced, calculated mediating involvement by the US, then by now mostly hypothetical, now when it's no longer possible to be easily admitted into NATO due to unresloved territorial issues scenario, alliance domino effect fearmongering nuclear scenario over Crimea, was from the Russian's POV possibly, the possible last ditch attempt by the Ukranian government and military tacilty backed in funding by the US for it, since them being able to be admmited into NATO now is unlikely due to aforementioned membership security requrements resolvements issues, to get by using it the possbility of further Russian threat out of their country and to somehow use it to secure and neutralize the disputed regions they have with the Russian military with active combat, and to on that basis decoupling the ability of a swift Russian military response or deployment to that eventually secure membership to NATO - these do sound like some heavily induced future nightmarish dreams and paranoid fears by the Russian side dreading this scenario but remember they can also seem as very real possibilites to them, due to them thinking, perhaps by more experiential merit than me, who they are dealing with of elements existing and holding onto power and having actual most and more influence in Ukraine and how far they think they are willing to go to achieve their stated strtegic objectives and goals against them from their expereince of them and with them.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Fleetinglife

[Fleetinglife]

13 minutes ago, DieFree said:

Is it just about security interests? A compelling theory I’ve read from a professor who studies Russia is that Putin is afraid of Ukraine becoming more Western because that undermines the legitimacy and longevity of his rent-seeking, patrimonial system of control. Putin wants a ring of satellite states governed (or misgoverned) like Russia so the Russian people never ask themselves why they can’t be democratic like Ukraine.

Also a possibility from a pol science liberal democratic perspective and theory on things, but as Leo said I think are some much deeper motives and much more concrete fears about the future, that he identifies himself with being identical as Russia and Russia's position and remaining relevance in the world overall geostrategically and economically in the future,  than that that do motivate him, while he is still in office, and most likely in the last few remaining years in the near future in his mandate tenure, since he is quite old (more than seventy now) and slowly on his way out from this world.

Edited March 9, 2022 by Fleetinglife

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, DieFree said:

@Leo Gura

Is it just about security interests? A compelling theory I’ve read from a professor who studies Russia is that Putin is afraid of Ukraine becoming more Western because that undermines the legitimacy and longevity of his rent-seeking, patrimonial system of control. Putin wants a ring of satellite states governed (or misgoverned) like Russia so the Russian people never ask themselves why they can’t be democratic like Ukraine.

Of course that is also a factor.

What you guys need to understand is that geo-political positioning is about dozens of factors and it's about achieving a holistic outcome of increasing a country's power and leverage on the world stage. These are not simplistic decisions with narrow aims. You're basically doing whatever possible to increase your country's strength. And of course Putin believes that his country will be stronger with him in power vs him losing power. And he will naturally believe that even if the Russia people are influenced by the Wes to want to be more Western, that will weaken Russia because the West does not care about Russian sovereignty or strength.

[Ryan_047]

16 hours ago, BlueOak said:

I hope I worry over nothing. I hope you are 100% correct and the Romanians in Moldova live a long, happy and peaceful life.

I have the same anxieties as you do. Romanians in Moldova have emigrated in Europe a lot due to the pro Russian leadership they had to endure for so many years. They work in Western countries (sometimes even Russia, but that's quite rare) and come back home and live off the money they made working abroad. The cycle continues each and every year. 

For reference the Moldovan currency is somewhere around 0.054 US dollars (no, those 2 zeros are not a mistake). You literally can't work domestically and afford to live.

I hope Russia leaves Ukraine asap and not touch anymore countries.  Though it's a good "opportunity" to do the same to Moldova as they did to Ukraine. Those 2 countries are in a very, very similar situation. 

[axiom]

9 hours ago, Fleetinglife said:

Now, if the existence of the actual contents of stuff in this documentation revelation, that it claims to specify, proves to be actually true and legitimate coming from the Russian side and if the part of the funding coming of US defense spending portion for military aid and assistance towards the Ukrainian military, or as a part of US's financial aid package to Ukraine actually went in part for the development of these facilities and their funding for programs to be researched and developed in them for the purposes the production of biological pathogens that could be used for offensive or defensive biological warfare purposes also proves to be in fact true, and not only being a cynical and conniving Russian propaganda and disinformation campaign directed towards the current Ukrainian government and its supporters in the US, then one must an ask an obvious follow-up question, in regards to that, given the overall past historical and political context leading up to this full-on invasion and war now, of why was such emphasis on the US side put for the funding of such's biological facilities and on this part of their specific research development in country such as Ukraine, which since past 2014 was seen as unfriendly and a threat to Russia, due to it's NATO commitment,  and that's bordering it and which's eastermost and southern part was already in conflict with Russian-backed separatists for 8 years, costing around some already 14 000 casualties up until the latest invasion, if not for the, either eventual threat in it's deployment, when eventually developed for biological weapon loadage and usage, as seen as deterent for Russia trying to achieve it's political or military goals in the country or even worse for it's usage against the Russian backed separatists at some point as part of an pre-emptive offensive eventually launched by then current Ukranian governmnet and military side, for the aims of the full reconstituion of their non-administrated territories taken or backed by Russia into Ukraine, against them before the possibilty of Russian military backage of their attempt of the constition of their self-declared republics in their full territorial reach in Ukraine - one can see, easily, by looking from the easily spooked, paranoid and fearful Russian mind, of US funding of possbile biological research facilities containing in them biological pathogens that can be easily repurposed and deployed for the purposes of biological warfare usage to bring their backed separatists in to heed with Ukranian extreme nationalists that they were fighting  and/or even deployed in the eventual retaking of Crimea by US or NATO backed Ukranian military forces, could have prompted them, with their knowledge of these existence of all these biological research facilites in their borderlands with and disputes with Ukraine and thier Russian supporters there, could have provoked them to plan in advance a potential justification for launching a pre-emptive offensive to neutralize this potential threat for them and those who backed them in Ukraine and achieve the objectives for the populations they backed there much sooner than later due to their lack of information potentially, of how soon the factor of the existence of biological pathogens developed in this US-funded biolabs and facilties might it take for it to be developed  enough for it to be eventually possible for it to be deployable as biological weapon to be eventually operable and potentially used as actual military capabilty and option there if deemed possible to get away with and necessary in an upcoming future war with Russian backed separatists or the Russian miliatry directly and it's troops invading/intervening in the country. If there is a legitimate pre-emptive threat of such weapons being developed enough to be deployed eventually as either justifed as deterrence for the possibilty Russian miliatry intervention in the disputed territories in the country or Russian occupied areas within it or caught off guard offensive against the Russian side, with the tacit backing and being part of the shady presence of US military/or just financial aid funding to the current post-Maidan Ukrainian government behind their possible eventual research, development, and deployment, which in the past hasn't hesitated to deploy internationally banned and/or illegal weaponry against the Iraqi military, such as phosphorous and depleted uranium ones for their versions of wider global geo-strategic goals and noble purposes, one can only speculate how the Russian side grew increasingly paranoid with some of the revelations of these developments in Ukraine surfacing on their side, given US's previous track record of how far it was willing to go for securing and saving key deemed geostrategic locations and targets for it's military-industrial complex and it's global presence and stability theory backing, and how far some of the Ukrainian nationalists elements existing in non-small numbers within the country radicalized against Russians and Russian presence in their country over the years, and the unclarity from the Russian's side, perspective and survival agenda of how far the US would be willing to go to back them in their overall strategic goals and objectives, of how far they were willing to go for them actually, to get their country out of the gutter and to resolve these disputes they had with Russia and perhaps rid themselves of their pressence and influence in ''their'' country permanently. So one can easily see then, from the Russian's side and perspective, of their fears, like resembling in part Bush's and neoconservative one's not some time long ago, why the invasion had to be planned and launched sooner rather than later in order for them not to risk of losing literally everything up until that point they have achieved and had in Ukraine, by those they demonized and those who tacitly helped them to potentially require and have such lethal, potentially future troop invasion, intervention, deployment or occupation terminating, weapons in their hands. Looks like the existing threat of the possibility of eventual biological weapons deployment justification narrative by Ukrainian nationalists tacitly supported by the US at some point for the purposes of either deterrence for future Russian military troop involvement within the country (due to their inability to be swiftly or at all be admitted in NATO or EU as long as they have an issue of the existence of unresolved territorial disputes and sovereignty issues in their country, they cannot be fully applied for membership) or launching eventually a military offensive when they are powerful enough using them as key to recapturing of their claimed sovereign territory recognized by most countries in the world now - was what was most on the mind as future coming inevitable possibility of a danger existing, if things left to developed with no input, intervention or attempt to be changed, procrastinated and unresolved as they did, buying the US and Ukrainian side more time to their advantage, that hey had to from the Russian's POV eventually act in some way, to break this stalemate deliberately designed not to go in their favor, in order from their perception to break the possibilty of such a threat existing ever having the possibilty of coming into fruition - which was now, to them from their threat listing and ranking perspective as the war went on and possibilty of further radicalization of Ukrainian nationalists, overall culture and separatist regions grew with it, together with their strategic goals, objectives and demands, a much greater immediate possible future threat and possibilty for them to at some time eventually become operable to have the possibilty of it being possible to be deployed by Ukranian military in conjucture with the tacit approval or forced, calculated mediating involvement by the US, then by now mostly hypothetical, now when it's no longer possible to be easily admitted into NATO due to unresloved territorial issues scenario, alliance domino effect fearmongering nuclear scenario over Crimea, was from the Russian's POV possibly, the possible last ditch attempt by the Ukranian government and military tacilty backed in funding by the US for it, since them being able to be admmited into NATO now is unlikely due to aforementioned membership security requrements resolvements issues, to get by using it the possbility of further Russian threat out of their country and to somehow use it to secure and neutralize the disputed regions they have with the Russian military with active combat, and to on that basis decoupling the ability of a swift Russian military response or deployment to that eventually secure membership to NATO - these do sound like some heavily induced future nightmarish dreams and paranoid fears by the Russian side dreading this scenario but remember they can also seem as very real possibilites to them, due to them thinking, perhaps by more experiential merit than me, who they are dealing with of elements existing and holding onto power and having actual most and more influence in Ukraine and how far they think they are willing to go to achieve their stated strtegic objectives and goals against them from their expereince of them and with them.

Noone is going to read that wall of text! 
 

Edited March 9, 2022 by axiom

[K Ghoul]

8 minutes ago, axiom said:

Noone is going to read that wall of text! 
 

True. I spiraled out at the third line. The text really needs to be broken down into sentences and paragraphs 

[BlueOak]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What you guys need to understand is that geo-political positioning is about dozens of factors and it's about achieving a holistic outcome of increasing a country's power and leverage on the world stage. These are not simplistic decisions with narrow aims. You're basically doing whatever possible to increase your country's strength. And of course Putin believes that his country will be stronger with him in power vs him losing power. And he will naturally believe that even if the Russia people are influenced by the Wes to want to be more Western, that will weaken Russia because the West does not care about Russian sovereignty or strength.

Of course its all about world power or influence to many, not every leader thinks like that, for some its much more about quality of life. I think the smaller the state, the more this becomes its focus, and so they elect a leader that represents this. A federal europe just sounded much more appealing.

How often have you done something even after you knew you shouldn't. How many leaders have to get voted out or removed by force before they step down? Sometimes people are overly selfish. People who want to lead, find it difficult not to lead, they shaped their lives around it. Leaders cling to power long after they should have stepped down. I think that's often the case. Even when in themselves though know its time to leave.

>>>And he will naturally believe that even if the Russia people are influenced by the Wes to want to be more Western, that will weaken Russia because the West does not care about Russian sovereignty or strength.

This was insightful into his mindset. Thank you.

Edited March 9, 2022 by BlueOak

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, axiom said:

Noone is going to read that wall of text!

Warning to him has been issued.

[smd]

On 3/6/2022 at 9:29 AM, Leo Gura said:

I've been seeing a lot of talk in western media and on this forum about how insane, crazy, or evil Putin is. Well, such talk should immediately make you suspicious of your own worldview.

This video offers a much better perspective of Russia's and Putin's perspective than anything I have seen coming from Western media.

What I see consistently is that people in the West fail to consider Russia's security interests at all in this situation. They just dismiss that as a cover for Putin's personal lust for power or Putin's delusional view of history.

Don't take this as a justification for Putin's war, but as a way of understanding the situation better. If you cannot understand the survival agenda of your adversary then you will not be able to correctly predict his actions and negotiate with him. That's the point. This is not about morality, it's about being understanding. You can't have peace with someone you fail to understand.

This is also not about blaming the US or the West, or creating some kind of moral false equivalencies. It's about understanding how to prevent conflict.

But Leo!!!    I've watched the video and I have discussed it with someone from Ukraine.   They don't see this at all.  They see Putin doing this simply for the fact that it's because he can and he dreams of restoring the empire (even if it's not the Soviet Union).  It has nothing to do with NATO Expansion or Monroe Doctrine from their eyes.   This will be the same thing China could do to Taiwan: because it feels like it.  Everything else about why it is done is just bullshit talk.  Tens of thousands, perhaps millions will be killed in both situations, just to make a point?

Also, you ought to take a look at the 500 and 2000 bomb nuke map of America.  Las Vegas has I think 5 nuke targets over it.  Even two of them in the 500 bomb scenario...I haven't looked at it since last week but there was a lot there.

Lastly, if we were a Russian country, your site would probably be taken down and you would be spending probably 10-15 years in prison for drug possession and possibly other things you have talked about.  Just ask Garry Kasparov, their chess grandmaster who did time, or some of Pootie Poot's former friends.   Even now there is a US female basketball player in which they found hash residue in her belongings and she was arrested.  Just residue!  Prison time seems to be an everyday occurrence there.

If I had my say in how it should be handled, I'd say that Ukraine should just surrender at this point and then use Ghandian style non-violent protest. The West could go back to freezing Russia out of our world and they can keep the hotline open with Washington, so they can keep checking with the West that we're not about to perform a nuclear first strike...and let that go on in Cold War 2.0.

/smd

[DocWatts]

Via Hanzi Frienacht (aka Daniel Görtz and Emil Ejner Friis) :

https://medium.com/@hanzifreinacht/10-action-points-on-russia-ukraine-984cc1e4f39b

"Avoid a nuclear war — by helping Russia to save face!

In the end, it is true that:

Russia has a ten times stronger military than Ukraine (at least on paper).

The Russian government (and the apparatus it relies upon and shares interests with) will be very desperate to not back down.

Other countries are unlikely to directly intervene.

Putin is threatening us with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.

Thus, a complete military victory by Ukraine is, after all, unlikely. Even with crowdsourced support around the world, even with a morale boost of the Ukrainians unparalleled in contemporary history (they know the whole world is watching them, and that they’re rocking our socks off; can you think of a better genesis of national cohesion and patriotic identity?), even with Russian logistical fiascos, even with collapsing public support for the government in Russia, it is a David’s fight against Goliath. In fairy tales, David always wins. In reality, this is less often the case.

It is probably true, as Yuval Noah Harari argues (also in The Guardian) that Putin has already lost the war in the larger scheme of things — politically speaking. But there is little comfort in that realization alone. It still means military defeat for Ukraine, a prolonged conflict, possibly bloody guerilla warfare, and an increasingly desperate Russian government — increasingly likely to “lose it” and start a nuclear war. When a house of cards collapses, when lies are exposed, when the posers accidentally reveal their underlying fear and weakness, it’s just never a pretty sight.

Where does this leave us? Well, we might, again, learn from history. When the Soviet Union attacked Finland in 1939–40, in the so-called Winter War, the USSR suffered massive and humiliating losses because of the sheer logistical catastrophe of the operation. Finnish soldiers, camouflaged, shot the Russians as they tumbled slowly through the thick snow in the dense Finnish forests. In my family, we remember Eifel, a Finnish neighbor in the 1980s who fought in that war. More than four decades later, he literally cried at the thought of how many men he had mowed down. David versus Goliath was not pretty, even when David won.

What happened with the Winter War then? In fact, the Russians signed a peace treaty and were handed some new territories. On paper, in theory, in their own narrative, “they had won”. They had conquered new territory.

It’s the basic thing that sociologists of everyday interaction teach us: We all need to save face. My take on this is, thus, to try to help Putin and his administration save face by conceding some territories to Russia. It’s not like Donetsk and Luhansk or Crimea will be nice places for Russians and Ukrainians to live together after all of this is over either way. So, make a compromise: Hand Crimea and perhaps Donbas (Donetsk, Luhansk) to Russia. And open the canal down to Crimea, so that Russia can keep Crimea under tolerable conditions."

Edited March 9, 2022 by DocWatts

[Danioover9000]

@axiom @K Ghoul

3 hours ago, axiom said:

Noone is going to read that wall of text! 
 

 

3 hours ago, K Ghoul said:

True. I spiraled out at the third line. The text really needs to be broken down into sentences and paragraphs 

   You have to learn to apreciate and read long texts to deeply grasp what is being written here. 

[zurew]

@Danioover9000

1 minute ago, Danioover9000 said:

 You have to learn to apreciate and read long texts to deeply grasp what is being written here. 

thats true, however, i think nothing wrong with suggesting to use a more digestable form of writing. its much easier to make sense of, and also to reply to.

[Danioover9000]

@zurew

3 minutes ago, zurew said:

@Danioover9000

thats true, however, i think nothing wrong with suggesting to use a more digestable form of writing. its much easier to make sense of, and also to reply to.

   I partly agree with that, it just resembles complaints to Leo for giving hours lengthy videos. I think it's probably that most people don't have enough toleramce and patience to read a long text anymore, due to the increased prevalence of ADD from prolonged use of social media.

[Vinnie]

If I can add something. There's a woman I follow on Patreon who made a video about the situation and specifically tapping into Putin and Zelenskyy. She said Putin came off very empathetic and compassionate whereas Zelenskyy was very dark. 

Basically Putin is doing what he feels he needs to do but that this might also be his end and for Russia. He thinks NATO is corrupt and he wants to protect Russia from it's covert agenda.

Putin references Neo-Nazis because the initial undercurrent began in WW2 with Germany. What's been learned since then is that power can't be taken by force. Instead you seduce a target into accepting your rule. Russia will not comply so it's out. 

She said Zelenskyy felt like an A.I. Very dark.

This is just my bat-sh!t crazy addition, but I don't think it's totally bat-sh!t crazy either. So there you go.

[zurew]

@Danioover9000

I don't even think people have a problem with the length,but more with the lack of structure and with the really long sentences. Sometimes one sentence looks like that it will never end. Imagine, if i wanted to tell you a story which has 500 words in it, but i would only use 2 sentence.

Its obvious that he is an intelligent guy, who can share a lof of valuable insights, so if he can work on this, that will be awesome.

[K Ghoul]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

@axiom @K Ghoul

 

   You have to learn to apreciate and read long texts to deeply grasp what is being written here. 

By the time I’m done with reading all the assigned material and all the response papers that I have to complete on the weekly basis I really don’t have much mental power and time left for me to sit and decipher someone’s script - I’d rather spend that time on reading others’ perspective or writing my own response. Why treat it as some sacred spiritual text where one has to read into it deeply in order to grasp some hidden meaning to appreciate the message- simple use of grammar/dividing the text into smaller chunks/constituents on behalf of the author would suffice. Imo, it’s common courtesy to write in a way that’s intelligible and doesn’t require extensive mental exertion on the part of the reader in order to engage with what’s being said.

Edited March 9, 2022 by K Ghoul