We won't know for a while but I don't imagine there will be mass civilian graves, abducted children, or the intent to annex the country. This is probably more about oil and deposing Maduro.
"This is more about oil and deposing Maduro."
Scary how overt these 'operations' are these days. 50 years ago governments would try hide stuff like this. Someone said 'lack of shame' is very concerning with governments of today. Wonder if this is a reflection of where we as a humanity are heading.
Putin has always been very clear about conquering Ukraine and eliminating anything Ukrainian, including its statehood. Tons of public writing, won't shut up about his fake history of the region, etc. Putin is as clear about his intentions as Hitler was about his intentions.
Could you point to some sources please? Every time I see Putin talk on Ukraine, he clearly expresses the very opposite, so I'd like to see where he's said otherwise.
I can't honestly claim to have paid attention to the whole interview and followed all of his rambling, but he seemed to express in the Tucker interview that he views Ukraine as traditional/rightful Russian territory. Tucker was trying to lead Putin into the claim that the invasion was prompted by NATO doing NATO things (which is the talking point favored by right-aligned American commenters, who want to somehow blame Obama/Biden foreign policy for the war), but Putin just wanted to talk about shit that happened centuries ago.
But it is being proposed. What do you think Elon is doing when he tweets support for remigration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remigration), which is literally ethnic cleansing? Or when the DHS posts memes in public proposing to deport 100 million people (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dhs-100-million-deportations-...)? These are acts of ethnic cleansing being normalized before it actually happens. Let’s not ignore it. Instead, let’s vote out every single GOP politician that supports this or stays silent about it.
How well would you say it has been working out so far, to steelman Republican policies and attempt to find common ground and compromise? Personally I was doing so up until ~June of 2020 and all I really got for it was a lot of grief with still no recognition that I understand and care about many of the things they claim to care about. And society wide? Well, here we are.
Ethnic Cleansing is a policy of rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove persons of given groups from the area. You seem to be using a commonly cited inaccurate definition of genocide instead of the broader term “ethnic cleansing”, but note that even genocide does not require killing as the means, as it is defined (in the 1948 Genocide Convention) as any combination of one or more of seven different acts (one of which is killing members of the group) when undertaken with the specific intent to destroy the given racial, ethnic, national, or religious group.
TIL that neighborhood crime causing white flight is actually ethnic cleansing.
No, that's probably not ethnic cleansing, since the white people who fled to the suburbs were in a position of privilege and wanted to give up their homes. The American government practices ethnic cleansing, as you assert, so and for some reason they just made it illegal to do it in their own cities for the benifit of the most privileged ethnic demographic. Perplexing.
> Ethnic Cleansing is a policy of rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove persons of given groups from the area
So removing non-white Hispanics from America would count? What if the goal isn't to render the area ethnically homogenous?
> So removing non-white Hispanics from America would count?
Obviously that’s the argument put forth. Why phrase it as a question?
> What if the goal isn't to render the area ethnically homogenous?
A fair point, since a favorite argument of the regime and now protected legal doctrine is “the bad thing happened but it’s ok because we didn’t mean it like that”.
Except that doesn’t apply in this case since the goal is explicitly stated.
Yes, there were elections where at most only 18M people voted, compared to the 24M people that voted when the pro-Russian candidate won, in 2010. Because there were almost no ballot station in those regions leaning more towards Russia. Yet the government didn't think that was a problem at all; in fact, it was good for them (imagine if Trump could just make that people in some blue states couldn't vote). All this in a climate with banned parties and where all the media was controlled by the "Maidan" parties.
So it doesn't look the situation in Ukraine was very democratic either.
If he would barely speak Ukrainian, communicate mostly in Polish instead of Ukrainian, sacrifice his country’s interests in favor of Poland for 15 billion instead of following EU integration path, then yes – he was a Polish puppet all along.
Well, Zelensky actually barely speaks Ukrainian. He communicates mostly in Russian. As for his country's interests, we'd better wait to see how Ukraine is after all this finishes, and who are the biggest beneficiaries, in comparison to how it was when his term began.
> Why am I seeing footage of Chinooks if it's only a bombing? Those are troop-carriers
Based on what we're being told now, this was an extraction. (Slash detention. Slash kidnapping. In any case, requiring troop transport and extraction.)
It's so much easier to keep score these days. Up until the 90s, you were tube-fed the news from your TV (pun intended). You would have to go out of your way to read anything contrary to the sanctioned narrative or to see the effects of your country's policies and actions.
These days everything is live-streamed. So, anyone with an inquiring mind can lookup different sources and make their own conclusions.
But I fear this won't be for long. It is slowly becoming clear that the AI rally is less about productivity and more about mass surveillance and controlling online dissent globally [1].
Well considering Taiwan's independence and Putin's absolute obsession over NATO, it seems like the score ought to reflect the whole story. I'm not saying it's great, but it's gotta be better than historical comparables.
I am against China attacking Taiwan, I am against Russia attacking Ukraine, but I am also against Ukraine wanting to join NATO. The war started because of NATO and the US, and it almost fucked us over here in Germany when the US helped the Ukrainians blow up Nord Stream.
I am against any offensive action which leads to the misery and impoverishment of people, for some stupid power games of power hungry idiots.
I am sorry, you are blaming the United States for Russia invading Ukraine? Because Ukraine wanted to join a defensive alliance to protect themselves from a country that invaded them in 2014 and tried to keep their puppet in power before Maidan punted him?
"Bro please just look at the expansion map. I swear bro the war started because of NATO and the US. It’s not an invasion bro it’s a forced reaction to unipolar hegemony. Just one more provocation and the bear had to bite back. Please bro just admit it's a proxy war. I promise bro if the West just stayed out of the sphere of influence everything would be fine."
This tribalism that you display is exactly the reason that we end up in situations that we have. Do not pledge tribal allegiance to anyone. Pledge allegiance to critical thinking.
> How does this differ from Russia invading Ukraine?
As a Ukrainian I would assume US forces don't intend to conduct a campaign of mass murder, rape and looting, and US government overall doesn't plan genocide and erasure of national identity of Venezuela together with annexation of its territories?
OP's question was about how the current Russian invasion of Ukraine is different, not about some grand total score of infractions by major powers in 20th century. Overall I find this opinion of many western liberals that it is only fair for Russia to murder some Ukrainians, loot their homes and rape their women because US did some bad things before quite perplexing.
That wasn't my point. My specific argument is about US operational policy on the ground in similar engagements. Based on precident, we would expect them to engage in the behavior the commentor indicts.
I dream that neither of these imperial powers - Russia or the US - will be allowed to inflict imperial violence, but I wouldn't be mistaken and assume that this military action will be any different than, say, JSOC in Iraq.
Do you expect US soldiers to systematically loot homes on occupied territories? Or arbitrary murder anyone speaking language they don't like or found to be subscribed to Telegram channels they don't approve of on mass scale? Do the US plan to conduct genocide and annex Venezuela in your opinion?
The conduct of VSRF in Ukraine could perhaps be compared to the US conduct in Vietnam but definitely not in Iraq.
In Iraq, JSOC operational doctrine was literally to target assassination campaigns based on 'nodal analysis' from contacts lifted from cellphones; if telegram had existed, they certainly would have used it too.
Famously, they didn't have enough Arabic translators, so Delta Force was often taking targets entirely based on reported association. They couldn't target based on language because they couldn't even tell what language locals were speaking most of the time.
Russia's goal is to destroy Ukraine as nation and a country, because there's no "Ukrainians", there's no "Ukrainian language", and every country that speaks Russian should be controlled by Russian tsar. That's why they don't care and demolish ("liberate") Ukraine, town after town.
For one the whole country of Ukraine is fighting like hell for almost 4 years following the orders of their elected government to defend their country.
If Russia was on the right, the people of Ukraine would have just hanged Zelenskyy and his gov, instead of sending their children to the meat grinder.
Let’s see if Venezuelans will put their lives on the line to protect the regime.
Military (or part of) can (and historically does) initiate a coup. If civilians are also on board the gov is over in hours. Coups typically fail when people are not on the same page.
Turkey is a great example. Heck Putin also had Wagner knocking his door in Moscow.
> How does this differ from Russia invading Ukraine?
Cynically: maybe Venezuela will get a bit less sympathy because it's a somewhat shittier (see emigration numbers) and less democratic government than Ukraine's. And I suspect we have a more positive view of US troops than Russian troops, despite everything (Abu Ghraib is seen as an aberration and not as the normal way of working).
> How does this differ from Russia invading Ukraine?
Cynically it's different in that Trump hopefully will not going to kill 220,000+ and leave 500,000+ war invalids of US military personnel in process. Though you never know...
A surgical strike that was over before the news broke out vs. a 4-year campaign of plundering with literal criminals, press-ganged foreigners, and chechen blocking detachments, featuring mass rape, executed civilians, abduction and forced reeducation of thousands of children, gross mistreatment of PoW, etc.
Emphasizing that I’m not defending this war at all, but one key difference I’m extremely confident in is that the US will not attempt to annex its favorite regions of Venezuela.
FWIW Russia was initially quite happy with "independent" Ukraine provided that their guy Yanukovich was in charge. It was only when he was ousted that they switched to open invasion tactics.
So from that perspective, I don't think US is really much different, just better at keeping its own puppets in power.
Russia didn’t react to his ouster by demanding a restoration of proper governance, they reacted by sending clandestine troops to seize Crimea in preparation for annexation the next month. Annexing other countries’ sovereign territory is a red line for good reason.
I'm not defending Russia here. Yanukovich was ousted for good reasons (and arguably he carried out a coup first when he reverted the country's constitution). My point is that, if we don't invade other countries only because their leadership does what we want, then we aren't really qualitatively any better.
No. I suppose I’m less confident in that, but I still don’t think it’s very likely. The American oil companies with contracts in Guyana would certainly be unhappy about it and it’s not clear what political benefit anyone in the US could hope to gain.
Offensive aggression has certain leeway; it can be covert so that the aggressor can deny the very fact of aggression. West likes that position very much; it suits its lying nature. Defensive aggression has no such freedom: here the aggression has to be visible.
I was born and grew up in Russia, and all my life I heard people like you telling us that NATO is going to invade any time now. Maybe it's time for you to wake up and realize that this was never a threat to begin with, just a justification for bullying others.
NATO is invading. They just don't do it overtly. You don't think those Chechen "freedom fighters" were, like, independent? It was USA all along. It was not a mistake, some leftover from Cold War or something, some project they forget to close now when Soviet Union broke. It was the policy all the time. There is no way to somehow negotiate it to stop short of surrendering. We have to fight. We do not want to, but there is no other option.
Recently there was a terrorist attack on a concert hall in Moscow and about 150 people were killed. The actual attackers were rather simple-minded Tajik people. No way they could plan such an attack themselves. You do realize that there was someone else? "A quiet American"? (Or maybe a British; doesn't matter.) Some timidly looking guy visited that concert hall before that attack, walked around and made notes. He noted, for example, whether the finishing materials were flammable. He did that reconnaissance in several places and finally picked that concert hall. That fellow belongs to a group that does this kind of things. They have something like a list of cases, teaching materials and lectures. You don't see such people in the news; but they surely do exist.
Thank you for the comment. It's a very good illustration of the kind of paranoia that is prevalent among Russians in general and their rulers in particular, and this is exactly why NATO is necessary and Europeans shouldn't assume that feeding Ukraine to the wolves will help in the long run.
Another difference that has not been mentioned in other comments is that: The US is not completely delusional about its military capabilities and could actually complete this invasion in three days. In fact, it may already be over, as Maduro have been captured.
Is this a common thing to have at university? I'm from one of top universities in Poland; our database courses never included anything more than basic SQL where cursors were the absolute end. Even at Masters.
Do not worry, I do not work with databases in professional life as my main aspect. But I was not given a comprehensive education, and not even once there was a focus on anything more in depth. I came out without even knowing how databases work inside.
Naturally, I know what I could do - read a good book or go through open source projects, like Sqlite. But that knowledge was not was my uni gave me...
I am jealous of American/Canadian unis in this aspect.
Nothing's true anymore, everything's permitted... And at one point they'll get you to a point where you are unable to tell what's true or false. So you stop caring. And they win; your apathy is what they need.
I believe this is likely a consequence of how RLHF is done. I’ve not verified it, but I suspect the frontier model labs are outsourcing it to companies employing primarily non-native English speakers.
I genuinely can't tell whether you are serious or trolling. Please tell me more about how Europe is socialist.
Or what does that even mean to you. Is socialism when state exists? You are not first American to say that, and every time it happens, I'm genuinely surprised. (I mean, rhetorical question. I suppose that's what socialism is to you. And you are a part of a problem too, because you are growing up internally people who genuinely believe that socialism is good because it means healthcare and higher education. Words no longer have meaning to you in America.)
> most European countries seem to be on a path towards socialism
No, unfortunately the path in most European countries seems to be heading towards fascism, not socialism. We Europeans do tend to follow America in many things.
We have to wake up to the world where USA no longer cares about ideals like liberal democracy or allies, but is a warmongering corporatist autocracy.
reply