I feel like everybody/most people were saying there was no way to win against Russia. "One does not simply win a war against Russia". They're a massive nuclear power. It was at least clear when the hyped counteroffensive went nowhere that it was just a slow burn, and that hoping that a massive state would collapse its own economy so quickly was delusional folly.

The only way to defeat Russia is through hybrid warfare and propaganda. Hence a myriad of “independent journalists” directly funded by US Govt to spread “correct” version of the narrative. See eg recent revelations around OCCRP. I spent a decade of my life explaining articles at OCCRP - which inevitably slowed down business processes and wasted resources and made people suspicious.

https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/occrp-budget-funding-us-government-usaid



How come there is no Radio Free France or Radio Free England? Oh because its not needed you see. Domestic media is captured enough they are deathly afraid at honest critical analysis at the threat of their journalist careers being cancelled or them being incarcerated. This is slowly changing now with social media, but even that is not enough. A wider societal acceptance that things are not what they seem should somehow be achieved. Critical thinking course should be mandatory in every public high school so people can judge things on their merits instead of consuming MSM fast food that rots their brains and poisons their minds.

pretty much this.

well.

The fuck is going on in Germany. You invading, my germanbros?

https://uacrisis.org/en/71966-joint-appeal-of-civil-society-representatives

This is from 2019 ~

Joint statement by civil society representatives on the first political steps of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky UCMC press center 23.05.2019, 12:10 Over the past five years, we, the undersigned, members of civil society organizations, have been actively defending Ukraine’s sovereignty and national interests in global information space and counteracting the Russian information war. Each of our organizations works in a specific field to strengthen civil society and help build high-quality state institutions open to ongoing communication and dialog with our citizens, responsible for reforming our country and rendering it more stable and secure in the face of strong threats and challenges. Our principles and positions remain unchanged. Our mission is to protect the values ​​that Ukrainians fought for during the Revolution of Dignity – freedom and dignity, the independence of Ukraine and protection of Ukrainian statehood, a democratic system of government, patriotism, courage, responsibility and honesty as the fundamental qualities of all Ukrainian citizens. We remain politically neutral, but are deeply concerned about the first executive decisions taken by the newly-elected President. Unfortunately, they demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the threats and challenges facing our country. We strongly disagree with the President’s intention to appoint members of former President Viktor Yanukovych’s regime to key government positions, a move that contradicts the principles of lustration, as well as persons without relevant competencies and individuals sharing business interests with President Volodymyr Zelenskyi. Given the pain and troubles that our country has suffered in the past few years, such short-sighted measures are bound to have adverse effects on society… and the consequences could be devastating.

As civil society activists, we present a list of “red lines not to be crossed”. Should the President cross these red lines, such actions will inevitably lead to political instability in our country and the deterioration of international relations:

Security Issues:

holding a referendum on the negotiations format to be used with the Russian Federation and on the principles for a peaceful settlement conducting separate negotiations – without the participation of Ukraine’s Western partners – with the Russian Federation, members of the occupation authorities and their armed groups and gangs in the temporarily occupied territories of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts, Crimea and Sevastopol fulfilling the ultimatum requirements demanded by the aggressor state or achieving compromise with the Kremlin at the cost of making concessions to the detriment of national interests, national sovereignty, territorial integrity and order, and independent domestic and foreign policies of Ukraine inhibiting the implementation of security and defense policies outlined in the Strategic Defense Bulletin of Ukraine

Foreign Policy Issues:

delaying, sabotaging, or rejecting the strategic course for EU and NATO membership; reducing political dialogue and destroying bilateral institutional mechanisms for cooperation with European and Euro-Atlantic partners initiating any actions that might contribute to the reduction or lifting of sanctions against the aggressor state by Ukraine’s international partners attempting to review any actions aimed at supporting international solidarity for Ukraine, restoring our territorial integrity, guaranteeing security and protecting the rights of all persons that have suffered from Russian aggression

Economic Issues:

extending preferential treatment to oligarchs: in particular, facilitating the return of nationalized Pryvatbank to its former owners or ensuring “compensations” to the same owners, as well as accommodating monopoly positions of financial and industrial groups in the energy sector implementing policies against existing agreements with the IMF and other foreign partners that help promote Ukraine’s macroeconomic stability initiating major redistribution of wealth in the interests of specific groups exerting pressure on regulators (Anti-Monopoly Committee of Ukraine, National Commission for State Regulation in Energy and Utilities, National Television and Radio Broadcasting Council) and using them in the interests of political parties or groups, as opposed to supporting reforms in order to strengthen and increase their independence)

National Identity:

Language, Education, Culture attempting to review the language law attempting to review the law on education attempting to review the law on de-communization and condemnation of totalitarian crimes of the past implementing any actions aimed at undermining or discrediting the Orthodox Church of Ukraine or supporting the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine

Media and Information Policy:

using the media (in particular, TV channel 1 + 1 and oligarch-controlled TV channels) to promote the new government restoring Russian social networks and Russian TV channels in Ukraine

Government Functioning:

eliminating electronic declarations for public servants and the Prozorro public procurement system launching politically motivated persecution of members of the previous government rehabilitating/encouraging the return to politics of members of former President Viktor Yanukovych’s regime and individuals that supported the “dictatorial laws” of January 16, 2014 enabling the Servant of the People Party to form a coalition with politicians that were founding members of the Party of Regions and the Opposition Bloc in the new parliament and/or any other parties that promote reconciliation with Russia by way of surrender or concessions of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity ignoring dialogue with civil society inhibiting key reforms: administrative, territorial, medical, educational, banking. delaying or sabotaging anti-corruption and judicial reforms Through constructive dialogue and prompt criticism of the government, we have always sought to strengthen Ukraine’s voice in the world and worked hard to gain the support of our international partners.

If the President crosses these red lines, it will indicate that he does not seek real democratic change and does not wish to establish a more honest and responsible government, even though he promised to do so during the election period.

The pathetic German foreign minister, Anna-Lena Baerbock, stirred up quite a bit of shit with recent remarks about Germany potentially contributing troops to a post-war peace-keeping mission in Ukraine. The media and the opposition of course had a field day and and framed it as if she was suggesting sending German troops to the ongoing, hot war. The map in your screenshot shows one proposal for the troop strengths of the various European countries in this peace-keeping mission, plus where the demilitarized buffer zone is supposed to be.

Personally, I'm kinda indifferent to the proposal on its face value, but it was of course politically tone-deaf to propose anything which even remotely sounds like sending our military to the active warzone (which overwhelming majorities of our country reject). And I also don't like her proposal in the sense that I could very well imagine it being a trial balloon to test how the public reacts to any proposal in this direction.

For context: Baerbock's Greens have strayed VEEEERRRRRYYY far from their origins in the peace movement of the 70s and 80s. Nowadays, the Greens are the 2nd most hawkish party in our political spectrum, behind only the mainstream cuckservative Christian Democrats (CDU).

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Dec 4 2024 05:40pm