Russia - Ukraine “peace negotiations”

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 3K
  • Views: 80K
  • Politics 
Silence Dogood said:
Russia was invading Ukraine in 2014
Click to expand...
Not really. It was an incursion, not invasion. Russia didn't send in troops. Russia merely activated and supplied various pro-Russian militias or separatists, as well as sending a cadre of non-uniformed military. But there was no real fighting, and nothing for the Americans or Europeans to do, really.

Also, that incursion occurred basically the moment after the pro-Russian president was deposed and a new government created. That was Feb. 2014. Ukraine was in no position to fight, and they didn't -- because there were no formal enemies and because they didn't have the cohesion to do so.

It was not remotely the same situation, at all.
 
Geisterfahrer said:
I’m torn between content moderation and super ignore, but in the end super ignore better serves the first amendment spirit. The voice lives but one can choose not to hear it and the ever fainter ripples.
Click to expand...
Yes, but it does nothing to help lurkers, nor do anything to induce would-be posters to start posting. And letting misinformation flow unchecked is arguably contributing to the problem.

The bigger problem is that I'm not sure the board can function without the trolls. Engagement with them is a big part of the traffic. It's a big spur of posting energy. Without them, I'm just not sure anyone will participate. Even I have limits on how much I can pontificate.

Think back to the ZZL. This dynamic has been with us for a long time. I think there's a psychological dependence. Liberal posters like to use the trolls as proxies for MAGA, and it gives people an opportunity, so to speak, to yell at the idiocy. I don't know why the trolls are here, but it obviously fills a psychological need for them too. Maybe they need conflict in their life, or have conflict in their life, and they use this board to keep the conflict contained to something that doesn't really matter as opposed to unloading on family or friends.

I have my doubts that a co-dependent relationship that has lasted decades is going to easily be reversed without a more comprehensive plan.
 
Rock said:
What does everyone else think? Personally, I think Michael Flynn is a disgraceful human being. Pretty much the same with Elon Musk. But, I’m aware others may have a different view.

Do we want an opposing side to have a voice or is this just blatant “trolling”?
Click to expand...
Important Note: I am not taking a stance on when the mods here should ban someone from the board.

The issue isn't should the "opposing side [...] have a voice", but rather what kinds of posts are acceptable on a board.

Functionally, there is no difference between an intentional troll and someone either too stupid or too brainwashed to consistently put forth a coherent, logical argument based in real world facts (read: non-right-wing media propaganda). Whether the accused "troll" is posting absolute BS intentionally or unintentionally is of no real concern from a pragmatic perspective, as either way the BS is being posted. The operative information isn't what "side" someone is on, it is the manner of posting they utilize in making their points.

In short, a troll who actually believes non-facts and absolute idiocy to be true and shares them with the board is ultimately no different than a troll who knows they are posting non-facts and absolute idiocy.
 
Rock said:
What does everyone else think? Personally, I think Michael Flynn is a disgraceful human being. Pretty much the same with Elon Musk. But, I’m aware others may have a different view.

Do we want an opposing side to have a voice or is this just blatant “trolling”?
Click to expand...
I personally don’t think any lines have been crossed that warrant a banning. This board is a bit of a “contained” community where most of the posters are highly intelligent and critical thinkers, so I don’t think posting lies and disinformation here is dangerous. It maybe annoying, but I also think we need to keep an eye on the disinformation that is getting passed along so that we can have a better understanding of that which is being used to attempt to bring us down (and which has apparently been successful at doing just that). You can’t combat the lies and idiocy unless you know what they are.
 
superrific said:
Yes, but it does nothing to help lurkers, nor do anything to induce would-be posters to start posting. And letting misinformation flow unchecked is arguably contributing to the problem.

The bigger problem is that I'm not sure the board can function without the trolls. Engagement with them is a big part of the traffic. It's a big spur of posting energy. Without them, I'm just not sure anyone will participate. Even I have limits on how much I can pontificate.

Think back to the ZZL. This dynamic has been with us for a long time. I think there's a psychological dependence. Liberal posters like to use the trolls as proxies for MAGA, and it gives people an opportunity, so to speak, to yell at the idiocy. I don't know why the trolls are here, but it obviously fills a psychological need for them too. Maybe they need conflict in their life, or have conflict in their life, and they use this board to keep the conflict contained to something that doesn't really matter as opposed to unloading on family or friends.

I have my doubts that a co-dependent relationship that has lasted decades is going to easily be reversed without a more comprehensive plan.
Click to expand...
I think all this is just an argument for super ignore. Those that need the adversary get to keep them.
 
Let's say Europe rallies and we aren't needed for muscle going forward. Do we close down bases? Are we forced to close down bases? What happens to our ability to project power? Do we wake up one day and realize our military looks like Russia's current mess?
 
It is reasonable to offer criticism of the Obama administration for their reaction to the Russian annexation of Crimea and the border regions of Ukraine. However, as several have pointed out, there was not an invasion and little that the EU or US could do. It is not reasonable to completely misrepresent that outside forces had any real opportunity to stop Putin/Russia in 2014.

We can all be critical of the actions or nonactions taken by administrations that we didn't vote for. The Biden administration, at a minimum, set roadblocks to slow the Russia efforts. Quibbling with the specific choices is hindsight. Trump 1.0 may have been willing to help create roadblocks as well, but only if they got something in return and when that did not materialize, they stepped on their own dicks. Trump 2.0 so far seems to be focused on removing all roadblocks to Russian aggression in Ukraine. Now the basis for the current strategy could be
1. That this strategy supports Trump's vision for the future of the world power structure (3 spheres of influence US RUS CH)
2. Reverse anything Biden did out of spite
3. Spite Zelensky for not giving him real or imagined kompromat before the 2020 election.

Trump has always been an isolationist. He is going to advance an isolationist foreign policy and economic policy (IMO).
 
Rock said:
What does everyone else think? Personally, I think Michael Flynn is a disgraceful human being. Pretty much the same with Elon Musk. But, I’m aware others may have a different view.

Do we want an opposing side to have a voice or is this just blatant “trolling”?
Click to expand...
Give the opposing side a voice. Super ignore exists for a reason. This is your board, but I would draw the line at blatant racism, Naziism, etc, not at simply being an annoying MAGA sycophant. Don't repeat the mistakes (IMO) that the original ZZL Politics made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top