-
It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.
The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web. -
Re: Ukraine
How about the 1.5 million Russian military uniforms that were in a warehouse kept ready for a situation like now - only there are no uniforms. Speculation is they only existed on paper and the money went to someone’s private yacht. Someone who has now got some ‘splainin’ to do.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
New troops aren't the same. Can't step in the same river twice.
Do not speak of "our institutions" unless you make them yours by acting on their behalf.
Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny (2017)Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
Watched an interview with a Russian tank driver now on the Ukrainian side. He was talking about the chaos of the Russian military. Broken down equipment, no training. He was a recent recruit, and wanted to go into the medic side of things, so of course they made him a driver, having never driven anything but a car before. Promised a month of training, got two weeks. 3 tanks at the training facility, 2 of which didn’t run. So he got 20 minutes a day actual driving experience, for one week. The other week on a simulator. Could basically drive ahead and back up. Sent to the front, the tank ahead of him drove over a mine and blew up, then his was hit by a rocket. Lasted 5 minutes at the front. He was pretty angry at the lies he had been told.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
An interview with Yuliya Timoshenko:
President Putin has drawn new borders for Russia. What do you think about them?
Well, it looks like another fit of hysteria, a serious one this time. Everyone - probably except him - can see that the Ukrainian army has just encircled his army in Łyman (the conversation took place on Friday, before the Russian army escaped from this city - ed.) And is liberating these territories.
I wonder how often he will have to redraw his boundaries if we redraw new ones every week. His hand will get tired. Although he should understand that every inch of Ukrainian land will be liberated.
Currently, since 2014, Russia has occupied Ukrainian territory, which is equal to the territory of roughly three Switzerlands. This is a lot - and very temporary.
I think that all this propaganda hysteria, which we are just watching, is already an agony and is the result of the fact that the Ukrainian army liberated the Kharkiv Oblast (it is about the liberation of Balaklea and Izium - ed.). And after this liberation, the approach to the conflict in Ukraine began to change in the world.
Have you noticed this on your current trip abroad?
Yes, it was after the Kharkiv victory that even the greatest skeptics, who did not believe that Ukraine could win this war, began to talk about the fact that we could win on the battlefield. This is a historic change. Putin's and the Kremlin's reaction to the fact that the world believed in the possibility of victory looks like this - hysterical.
As the head of the Ukrainian government, you met with Putin many times and negotiated. You know him - as much as a politician can know another politician. Do you think he could order the use of nuclear weapons?
As far as I know Vladimir Putin, he considered his willingness to act against the laws, customs and values as a power. He saw hi ability to break them as an advantage. Crossing any "red lines", breaching international obligations or agreements. He believes that in such conditions imposed by him the West is very weak and incapable of opposition, because it is used to living according to some rules, formats and, without a doubt, relying on values, whether democratic or moral.
That's why he plays the game like this. He breaks all the rules, convinced that no one else will do it.
Which means that now he can only be stopped by force.
But is he ready to use some sort of ultimate force, namely nuclear weapons? Or is some kind of opposition within his own elite stopping him from doing so?
No no. They are not even worth debating about. There is no Russian political elite, one should not even use this phrase. There is only a bunch of gray mice running around a man who has doubled over that he should rule the world. These people do not have views of their own and are unable to take any action on their own.
As for the use of nuclear weapons, I believe that such a question should not be asked at all.
Why?
Because we should not torment ourselves and guess: whether they'll use it or not. That would be accepting his narrative. Even asking that question reveals that we hesitate and do not know what solution to choose. Meanwhile, we should choose the most difficult solutions, it should be assumed that he can do it, and at the same time the Western world should have a very detailed, step by step plan of action to prevent him from doing it.
How long can the war go on?
I think the military should be asked because politicians are not able to know it. I personally trust the opinion of the authoritative general, former commander of US forces in Europe, Ben Hodges. Literally a few days ago, he said that he can predict that Ukraine would reach its administrative borders by the end of this year, and that Crimea would return to Ukraine by the end of next year.
Well that's what a man thinks that seems to understand what's going on, and that's why I believe him. I can see for myself that thanks to the fact that Ukraine was given arms and support, our army went on a counteroffensive. For this reason, the Kremlin is acting so hastily.
If Ukrainian troops can reach Crimea, how will the war end? A peace agreement?
Putin invited Ukraine to the talks table during his ceremony in the Kremlin, but immediately said that what he had annexed was his. Can you speak of serious peace talks after something like this? Putin himself understands that they will not be there. Ukraine has already said it, because even their preconditions were not only unacceptable, they were degrading.
I mean spring talks in Istanbul. There, we were offered to allow to join the occupied territories to Russia, to reduce our army practically to zero (i.e. unilateral disarmament), and not to join the NATO collective security system. And there was also the so-called a humanitarian block that politely explained to us that we should give up the Ukrainian language, history, culture and everything that makes us Ukrainians.
It is clear that such an agreement is absolutely unacceptable. This is not the way to peace. It's a kind of salami tactic: we take your territory, we disarm the army, and next time we beat you effortlessly.
The old "Minsk agreements" (the truce concluded in 2014 between Ukraine and Russia and the peace talks that followed - ed.) were not and are not an option either, because their goal was a kind of political conquest. They would have led to the creation of a "Donetsk-Luhansk enclave" in Ukraine, a territory that would be returned to Ukraine but would be fully controlled by Russia. In this way, they would have gotten power over Ukraine politically, but no one will let them and will not allow it.
Therefore, the so-called the peace process as an opportunity to get out of the current situation, in principle, never existed. What Putin understood, because why would he cause a war if he wanted to sign a peace treaty?
And what was he trying to achieve, was it simply to conquer Ukraine?
He set himself very ambitious, almost messianic goals. He wanted to overthrow the leadership of Western countries, change the world order. By creating a Russian empire of Russia and neighboring countries. He made his first step in Ukraine. Or in Georgia in 2008, really, but it failed.
At the end of Alexander Solzhenitsyn's life, Putin tried to make friends with the writer. In 1990, Solzhenitsyn wrote an essay "How to Rebuild Russia", where the core of the new empire would be Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Putin has already attacked Ukraine, will it be continued?
First of all, I believe that Solzhenitsyn never meant a military conquest, but he was an idealist. Zbigniew Brzeziński also wrote that without Ukraine, Russia will never be an empire. And since Ukraine does not want to be with Russia, this empire cannot be created.
Even Belarus, as it exists today, resists being swallowed by Russia.
Lukashenka?
Due to possible persecutions, I do not want to mention names. But I am convinced that the Belarusian people will not allow this to happen. Kazakhstan is an independent country and it is satisfied with it. It does not appear that he wanted to become part of the Russian empire.
Will Ukraine bear the costs of this war, or can the war lead to its bankruptcy?
Well, war and growing economy are an oxymoron. That is why it is so important that with the beginning of the war, Ukraine has become part of the free world. Today we are not defending ourselves alone in this war and as far as I can see, we will not be left alone. There is a huge coalition of 60 countries around us. We receive military aid, but most of all, huge financial and economic support.
From what I hear from Western politicians, as long as the war continues, aid will not be stopped. This free world has also promised that we will rebuild our country together after the war.
According to you as an economist, how many years will it pass before Ukraine is rebuilt?
Compare this to post-war Germany, which was rebuilt with the Marshall Plan. After ten years, they stood on their own feet and had a really fast-growing economy.
Since the free world is much stronger now than it was in 1945, I am convinced that Ukraine will be rebuilt faster than Germany and it will be one of the strongest countries on the European continent.
Let us also not forget about the inevitable Russian war contribution. Several countries have already announced that Russian assets blocked due to sanctions will be allocated to the reconstruction of Ukraine. And that's just the first step.
War fell on Ukraine as it tried to solve its own considerable problems. For example, corruption.
We'll sort it out after the victory.
You do not deny that the problem exists.
All post-Soviet countries require massive institutional reforms. This will also happen to Ukraine. The countries operate within the legal systems created shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, by the former communist nomenclature that ruled then.
In Ukraine, the first post-Soviet constitution was adopted in 1996 by communists. And they are used to having full power, and they have considered the country's wealth as theirs. On the one hand, the constitution was a huge step forward because it confirmed our independence. But at the institutional level it formed powers without control. This juridical weakness has led to such unpleasant consequences.
And after the victory, we will have to quickly adopt a new one, with a very clearly described, for example, separation of powers.
In Ukraine, presidential elections should be held in 2024. Will you run for them?
Oh, our politics died for the time of the war and nobody thinks or deals with such things.WszystekPoTrochu's signature available only for premium forum users.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
Side note: they must've changed something in Google Translate. It's nearly perfect in keeping correct English grammar and much better in forming non-nonsensical sentences. It still errs, maybe once per paragraph or so. The errors are now super sneaky, in fact I think the upgrade increased my post-translator corrections time. It's still faster than "manual" translating, of course. Many issues are only noticeable if you compare texts side to side and understand both, so when you don't need the service. E.g. "in our country" -> "in Poland", since it was translated from Polish, never mind the interviewee is Ukrainian. Impersonal forms of verbs (nonexistent in English) are translated with guessed subjects, which may dramatically change the final meaning. Be mindful when using Google Translate, the errors are not gone, they are just sneakier.WszystekPoTrochu's signature available only for premium forum users.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
#5319: Yes, I saw that interview too. Remarkable!
The guy is now helping out the Ukrainians, doesn't want to go back home ( but he does worry about his mother ), would take Ukrainian citizenship.
Peter Ziehan points out that traditionally the Soviets have a habit of re-grouping when beaten back, then returning with fresh cadres, supplies, and tactics and grinds their way back to an eventual win. However, not all the time ( viz, WWI ). The problem for them is that no matter how much Putin brays that this is an existential war against the West, this is simply his adventurism, and he runs the real danger of being caught lying through his teeth to the Russian masses. No wonder their morale is crap. Would they gladly die for Mother Russia? Absolutely. Will they gladly die for Putin? Evidently not so much.
PS: This IS an existential war for the West, as well it should be. If the West had slapped Hitler's pee-pee in 1936 or even 1938, much grief would have been avoided. Whacking Putin's right now is a moral imperative.Gerard>
Albuquerque, NM
Next election, vote against EVERY Republican, for EVERY office, at EVERY level. Be patriotic, save the country.Comment
-
On the trailing edge of technology.
https://www.amazon.com/Outlaw-John-L.../dp/B07LC6Y934
http://www.scribd.com/johnmwatkins/documents
http://booksellersvsbestsellers.blogspot.com/Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
How about this then ?? Caitlin is talking about you . . .
Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
One "overarching point" is the ease at which people swallow propaganda . . .Originally posted by twodot
Very much like Orwell's 1984, many folks can reverse their view of reality almost instantly.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
where do you find this stuff. utterly self defeating logic:
that's the intro, and it only gets worse. one bald assertion after another, scolding, lecturing, posturing, with no reference beyond the author's own feelings.Vladimir Putin has approved the annexation of four territories in eastern Ukraine, whose addition to the Russian Federation now await authorization from Russia's other branches of government.
The Zelensky government responded to the move by applying to join NATO, only to be immediately shut down by US and NATO officials. Can't have sacrificial pawns trying to rise above their station on the grand chessboard, after all.
to fill in the (ill)logic: the u.s. and nato provoked the russians by keeping ukraine at arms length, rejecting their nato application in 2008.
and the u.s. and nato prevent a peace settlement by once again rejecting ukraine's appeal for nato membership in 2022.
once again, your preferred source infantilizes ukraine and demonizes the u.s.. and makes no meaningful assessment or critique of russian behavior or motives.Comment
The WoodenBoat Forum is sponsored by WoodenBoat Publications, publisher of WoodenBoat magazine. The Forum is a free service, and much like the "free" content on Public Radio, we hope you will support WoodenBoat by subscribing to this fabulous magazine. To get WoodenBoat delivered to your door or computer, mobile device of choice, etc, click WB Subscriptions.
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. You'll find answers to the frequently asked questions as well as basic rules. No need to register unless you would like to participate, although some images will only show if you are registered/logged-in.
You will need to register before you can post: click the red register link or the register tab, above, right.
Selling/self promotion postings are verboten on the Forum. To advertise, take a look at WoodenBoat Advertising, or use your Google Adwords account if you want to advertise on the Forum.
Tweet
Comment