War in Ukraine. Did the West handle the post Cold War era badly?

I don't actually expect you to educate yourself on the matter, I know you won't. That's why several of you were blissfully unaware that the conflict in Ukraine has been going on for 8 years now. It hasn't ended. Putin didn't wake up one day a few months ago and decide he'd conquer Ukraine.... and you wouldn't be so naive as to believe western leadership, who are profiting on the war in Ukraine, actually want a peaceful resolution to the situation. Remember, their mansions will be comfortably heated this winter, yours won't be.

By educate you mean, did some surface level research. Watching blogs on youtube doesnt count as studying.

The fact that you seem to think Mussolini is the architect of fascism or even commonly seen as the architect shows the level of your ignorance on this topic. Fascism is way older than Mussolini. Mussolini was notable for being successful but Fascism can be traced back to the 19th century. Again, you would not have made this embarassing mistake, if you actually studied history and not gloss through YouTube blogs.

Fascism has no real concrete definition, but generally agreed upon definitions include

• Strong rhetoric against a percieved enemy. Be they liberal, communist, aimed at a certain minority groups and in some cases, even conservative.
• Heavily reliance on mashismo aestetics, masculinity, youth and "the people" are heavily promoted. Strong romanticized aesthetic of the country's "glorious" past is always overemphasized.
• Goal being the creation of a nationalist dictatorship, potentially aspiring to become an empire.
• Strong anti-liberal action and sentiment. Democracy is constantly attacked, civil rights eroded.

Wait, did I just describe Putin? More reasons for Ukraine to fight back!

Edit: And for the record, these describe Victor Orban as well, minus the imperial desires. But maybe that would have changed if Hungary actually had the power to do so.

How come you can not describe it then?

That would also describe Joe Biden as well. That would also describe Justin Trudeau fairly aptly. Are you sure that's the definition you want to go by?

And Mussolini is credited as the architect of fascism. Even the moniker of "fascist" didn't come around until the post WWI era based on the Italian word "fascisti" which was used as a name for members of the political party founded by Benito Mussolini. Literally Mussolini's own political party made the decision to call themselves "fascist." This would mean fascism is a political ideology based on the ideology of Benito Mussolini and his political party. The English derivative of the word was specifically in reference to Mussolini's political party.

Mussolini's father was a socialist. Mussolini himself believed in government control over the economy (socialism.) This is why the fascist party in Germany called themselves the nationalist socialist party. Fascism IS on the same branch as socialism. Both promote a level of government control over economics and production. The difference between fascism and socialism is in fascism, people could own businesses. However, they couldn't do anything they wanted with them, government controlled and heavily regulated what they could do. In socialism however, private ownership is replaced with direct government control over production.

So to recap...

Fascism = private ownership of businesses but government controls how they operate.

Socialism = government owns and controls a large part of production of key products and services.

Communism = government owns and controls all production of goods and services.

Fascism is NOT an economic model, it is a political model.

And no, the only people crediting Mussolini as the architect of fascism are the ignorant YouTubers you follow. The movement started in the 19th century, and started its development across various countries, including France, Germany, Austria and Italy. These ideas began as a backlash towards increasing secular liberalism and other forms of enlightenment thought sweeping the European continent.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism/Intellectual-origins

For someone who claims to have studied world history, you are either lying, or you have a very poor retention rate. This may explain why you effectively said that Booleans are Not Variables.

What a surprise, you use the liberal redefinition of the word that fits your agenda. Like how "racism" has been redefined to only apply to whites or the many other redefinition of common words to suit your agenda.

You're discussing the intellectual origins in that link as well, not the formulation of what is actually described as fascism. Just like the "intellectual origins" for the ideology described by Karl Marx, which you've probably actually read, goes back prior to him as well. That doesn't mean Marxism isn't the ideology founded and formulated by Marx.

Face it, you failed to even know what Fascism is, who started it, why it began, what their ideologies were, how their government works. You simply carelessly, and ignorantly use it as an insult towards anyone you deem to be on the opposite side of the political spectrum from yourself. But the reality is, a good portion of the shit I see you, and people like you promote is far closer to fascism than those you whine about. In many cases, you promote even worse.

So here's an idea for you going forward. Stop using isms and ists as insults whenever you disagree with someone. Actually argue the content of their argument, and use a little common sense in your responses. Calling Orban a fascism, yet being unable to show he's actually done anything fascist outside of "the republicans invited him so he must be" is just silly.

But, I guess whatever it takes you to try to direct focus away from the fact western leadership is profiting on the war in Ukraine, and would like it to continue.

You clearly do not.

Payne's definition is the Liberal definition?

My definition also fits the Merriam Webster definition really well. Just expanded upon what is said there.

And Orban is undermining democracy, promoting some bizarre version of masculinity, eroding human rights, is a fervent nationalist, thrives on a us vs them attitude and more.

As a european, I can assure you, I do not judge him for going to CPAC, I judge him for ruining his own country and causing political instability in the EU. I do however, judge Republicans for inviting him in and then giving him a standing ovation.

Same as trump which they cheer on so don't expect them to bad mouth a handpicked Republican speaker who does the same. They are not a group that values democracy at all.

Mhm, I actually wanted to bring up Trump when he tried putting Biden in my definition. But I forgot too. I was too busy being disgusted by Victor Orban.

Horrible Human Being.

Changing definitions so you people don't feel like idiots when you call someone by a description that doesn't fit, doesn't actually change the definition of those words. Meriam-Webster is well known to change definitions whenever it suits a far left agenda to do so. Just look at how many definitions they've changed over the past few years. So no, citing Meriam-Webster doesn't impress me. Cite historical facts, world history, and not some book edited to fit the narrative.

Lastly, "eroding human rights?" Who was supporting forced injections against people's will and if they don't take them, have them fired, and imprisoned inside their own homes? Who is constantly attacking free speech and free press by declaring everything you disagree with to be disinformation or racism? If you want to see who is eroding human rights on a daily basis, look in the mirror. But even as hypocritical, self serving, power hungry, divisive, and condescending as the left is on this matter, it does not fit the description of fascism. None of this does. I gave you the description, the correct one. Use it, or don't. but Don't tell me someone is fascist because they disagree with your woke ideology. If you're going to accuse someone of it, or racism, or sexism, then have a damn good reason.

And that's the real joke with your ideology. You think everything you want, you have a right to, and if someone doesn't give it to you, usually at the cost of somebody else, then you stamp your feet, whine, and throw a tantrum that your rights are violated. That's why nobody outside your bubble gives a shit when you start calling others fascists. It's ALWAYS a bunch of self-serving melodrama.

Just start calling them neofascists since they don't identify themselves as fascists. Might be a case of identity politics.

There is no use. He thinks dictionaries are fake news. He doesn't even agree with the factual definition of vaccine or grooming anymore.

How does one even begin a "debate" with someone who thinks simple words are fake? So removed from reality.

US extreme conservatives at the moment. Mostly. Hell you're defending it in another thread, bizarre.

That's not fascism, we've had mandates for centuries. Don't be an anti-vaxxing freakshow.

Like what? I bet it is disinformation when it's coming from you.

Eoten why have you not provided counter citation? You've made several posts giving your opinion or outright ignored these links but never attempted to debunk them. They directly show you are wrong. Unequivocally.

You understand this is a L right?

You forgot this

No, the definition EVERYONE ELSE (aside from you) uses is by far the most contemporary and fits what most mainstream scholars use. If we went by your definition, pretty much all of the west would be fascist (we have regulations, so government ultimately has a say in how they operate.

Ah yes, good ol' whataboutism from you. Your PRATTS are getting repetitive by now no matter how many times we refute them. So I will not bother refuting them yet again.

I am sorry you heard some fringe definition and relentlessly stick to that. The rest of the world however, defines fascism in the way I described it.

Here is Merriam Webster's definition,

often capitalized: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

This is explicitly what we are seeing here with Victor Orban.

And here is another highly reputable source, which basically defines fascism similarily to how I do,

https://www.britannica.com/topic/fascism

I see eoten is at it again. Thinks fascism is defined as 'private ownership' lol.

You don't read so well.. but then, what else is new?

I too have used Britannica in conjunction with Merriam-Webster on Eoten, in different topics. He told me it was fake news and/or an op-ed.

It's useless. He lost the debate when he does this, it's over.

You think entire dictionaries, encyclopedias, and multiple fields of science are "fake". This is beyond Infowars and Q-Anon level, and completely removed from reality.

"You don't read so well" is NOT a charge you should EVER make against any human being.

Yup, and it is hilarious how he keeps arguing against Dictionaries and Encyclopedias.

Encyclopedia Brittanica is arguably the most popular encyclopedia in Europe. While I believe that Merriam Webster is the most popular dictionary in the US.

Regardless of which side of the ocean he lives on, he is just flat out wrong. As always.

He's almost at JimB levels of self awareness....which means there is virtually none.

Books are obviously part of the globalist agenda.

@kathaariancode: Here in europe, book burnings and bannings is a MASSIVE red flag.

It is here too for those of us that are sane.

Jim has yet to link to source that says the opposite of what he claims.

So, as may or may not be aware, this show acts as a Kremlin mouthpiece to make the public complaint to whatever insane shit they have done or plan to do under the guise of discussion.

Here, they are basically saying, due to the Ukraine counter-offensive and resource deprivation (they are denying), it's a free pass to do horrific shit on a grander scale, since everyone thinks they are assholes anyway, why not?

Jesus, this war is horrible.

Even once Putin is gone I don't know how the Russian state can be rehabilitated.

So latest I read in the newspaper here is that Russia has started or about to begin a counter offensive launch in Ukraine, as well unconfirmed reports/images about older Chinese weaponry being used. These weapons are most likely sold to Russia by North Korea, and are no longer made by China. Unsure if they are made at all.

Also Wagner recruiting prisons (leaked footage link below)

@uninspiredcup: Regarding the air defenses, how is this not a huge win for Europe in the long term?

@horgen: there's a lot of speculation about the Chinese mortars, but there seems to be a large agreement they weren't supplied directly to Russia from China, either they were traded to Russia from somewhere else, and there's one angle the ones shown in Russian possession were actually seized from the Ukranians who would have gotten them from western allies that had old stockpiles, supported by idea Ukraine uses the 60mm mortar platforms and Russia doesn't, plus these pictures of Russian mortars are months old and would predate when Russia may have started getting military supplies from others.

@uninspiredcup: with regard to Russia raiding its missile batteries across NATO border bases, it's a good sign their ability to wage war is being diminished. On top of reacting like everyone else to the abhorrent behavior by Russia to target civilians during their offensive, a part of me wondered whether this also was rapidly depleting their supplies and being counter-productive because they were not using them strategically against military targets. By contrast we saw the effects months back of Ukraine drones stalking Russian convoys with lots of troops and tanks and armored vehicles, and the Ukrainian drones with maybe a couple missiles on them didn't target its offensive capabilities, they target their logistic assets, trucks carrying fuel or munitions, leaving the groups intact but unable to function without supplies. Even recently as Ukraine has been pushing the lines back, there was an article about how Russia used 4 missiles totaling $100 million just to disrupt Ukraine's power grid for a couple hour. There just doesn't appear to be much strategic coordination or consideration within the ranks.

There's been reports Russia wanted to increase its wartime production but it also appears it won't be capable of making much of an impact. Pre-sanctioned Russia relied on foreign resources for its advanced components used in its military technology that they don't access to that stuff now either due to sanctions, some of those components were even made in Ukraine itself. Furthermore their existing military production capabilities have been crumbling these last couple of decades because arms sales abroad have been declining. Industry veterans are aging out of the workforce and they haven't done a good job recruiting fresh blood because the domestic economics of military production haven't allowed for attractive salaries to recruit top talent. These companies haven't been compensated well for the stuff they do make for Russian military and rely on foreign export to make ends meet.

This one video I watched explains how wartime production that prioritize production for Russia could throw industry in shambles as it means the manufacturers have to hold off delivering foreign orders for military weaponry indefinitely, which that revenue stream is necessary for keeping these private companies functional, which will cease future orders and thus they potentially won't last long dedicated for Russian military production if the foreign orders cease. There's also a similar consideration for repurposing industries with non-military applications for wartime production if it interferes with their abilities to remain solvent.

While maybe something to celebrate, it also scares me it might lead to nuclear escalation, not because I think Russia wants to resort to a heavy handed approach, more I worry it could happen as a result of Russia losing the ability to engage in any form of conventional warfare.

Are you saying western media isn't covering the situation entirely honestly?

@lamprey263: Part of it probably is the types of missiles being used.

This video explains it pretty well.

Don't think Russia is actually use to this scale of war. As evident even within the first 72 hours.

With something like the HIMARS, can be incredibly precise and proficient with ammo used. Javelins (compared to other equipment) along with the drones Ukraine demonstrated to good effect are comparatively cheap.

Super basic point as well, but taking a territory, is completely different from holding it.

The idea that Russia is going to somehow, magically turn Ukraine Russian is clown world. Been having to resort to brutal crap animals wouldn't do to try to force it, and it's not working.

Daresay, even if in the unlikely scenario they used a small scale nuke in an attempt to de-escalate, through escalation even that wouldn't work.

All Putin has done here is A) Hardened Ukraine identity more so than ever B) United NATO more so than ever C) Made the world more aware of Ukraine more so than ever D) Weakened Russia more so than ever

I honestly think Putin had in his head he was some Alexander The Great type motherfucker living in some reality that has had a rude awakening.

@eoten: "Are you saying western media isn't covering the situation entirely honestly?"

I haven't seen western news media assert China is supplying Russia with mortars yet. This is mostly dialog between the social media sleuths trying to preserve a degree of objectivity amid speculation. But I can totally see how that's how you would see it coming from that "fake news" rootin' for Putin brigade of Kayak deniers.

@uninspiredcup: Yeah, the HIMARS are a game changer, the US needs to get more of those to them. They basically offer great precision and range and highly mobile so they evade Russian retaliatory fire. Back to the Twitter post about Russia resorting to raiding their missile defense batteries to send to Ukraine, I read new developments that Ukraine has been using the HIMARS to take out the key air defense missile batteries, supply depots, and command posts in the current Russian controlled territory, softening them up as they stage for further offensive pushes (just waiting to establish new supply routes and establish new defensive positions in the liberated areas). Maybe wishful thinking but I am hoping seeing reports of Ukraine taking out key air defense systems and Russia cleaning out their bases bordering NATO regions to replace them, that being potentially a sign Russia is losing ability to contest for air superiority and that itself could be a decisive development if true.

Who is "rootin for Putin?" I've simply been calling out the nonsense and confirmation bias going on so far. Such as the disinformation that this confrontation is new and Putin just "snapped." The lie that Ukraine is actually fighting them off when it seems like the fighting is largely being done by non Ukrainians using non Ukrainian weapons, or the lack of evidence support Russia is actually buying weapons from NK, and the confirmation bias that if they were that it means they are some how struggling.

What happens if Russia wins?.. well not much. What happens if they lose? Not a whole hell of a lot either. It's bullshit being fed to the dumbed down masses in western countries to support the international effort to defend it, almost a carbon copy of the bullshit and disinformation that went on against Saddam Hussein and several other countries in the region in order to drum up public support to dump trillions of dollars into that war, that at the end of it all also didn't achieve anything.

It's just another war for profit.

They'll try to stamp out "Ukrainianism" by creating concentration camps, torture, mass murder, and potentially attempts to impregnate women with Russian off-spring. Which was a tactic used in Bosnia. Thier's history and culture will be blotted out, re-written and restructured to serve the Kremlin.

Thus far they've already done this to an extent. But now it will be an entire country.

I believe they call this "evil".

Do you think the leadership in Ukraine really care? They've profited off this war. Zelensky, Ukrainian oligarchs are rolling in cash from western aid, as well as weapons they've received and sold. European leadership invested in and receiving kickbacks from the corporations manufacturing and selling those weapons are profiting. The corporations making those weapons are profiting. Everybody in a position of power is profiting, lining their own pockets on all sides. The only people not profiting are civilians. Not just civilians in Ukraine, but civilians in the US and Europe who are going to see energy costs climb exponentially, and deal with the inflation.

The only thing the war in Ukraine has achieved, or will achieve, is the rich/corporations will get richer, YOU and people in Ukraine will get poorer.

Tin foil detected.

@eoten:

I like your anti-capitalist defense for anything it doesn't fit your narrative, like climate change or genocide, in which if there's anyone making a profit from it then it invalidates every single aspect of it. I would consider you being a moronic idealistic teen, some antifa tard, if your agenda wasn't so transparent. I guess the US having profited immensely from WW2 means it was wrong right?

Let's face it, the reason you far right lunatics are acting like Putin's butt boys is because you can't deal with Biden actually being handling with the situation so well (I'm surprised too, I must say). For you cultists that's all that matters, America First it's not really about America, it's about your tribe winning against the "others". Your movement is not only a cancer to America but to all humanity.

If anything the real mistake was Obama being a banana and letting Russia take Crimea without a strong reaction.

We shouldn't be OK with genocide, we shouldn't be OK with direct threats being made against us, we shouldn't close our eyes to the growing military threat the Sino-Russian axis poses. And **** that upsetting Russia will make things more expensive. Though luck. Bunch of spoiled cunts. Russia fucked up, thought this was going to be a walk in the park and it's vital that they are exposed to their own insignificance. Putting them in their place will prevent future wars and serve American interests far more than trying to give Putin what he wants to win the midterms.

Oh yeah, because war for profit is such an outlandish conspiracy theory. JFC you're as bad as the people cheerleading the invasion of Iraq.

You do realize that there is a huge difference between the War in Iraq and the war in Ukraine?

The War in Iraq a war of aggression that had no Casus Belli. Defending Ukraine however, is a defensive war, defending against an aggressor with no Casus Belli. For us europeans, the interest in defending Ukraine goes beyond merely defending Ukraine as well, because Russia isn't just gonna stop at Ukraine.

Also whether or not the arms industry makes money from this is irrelevant. It doesnt change the fact that Russia is engaging in an unjustified war of imperialistic desires. If people make money from keeping the west safe, so be it.

Edit: You are playing into Russia's hand, whether you like it or not.

Ukraine was attacked. They aren't profiting off the war. They're being destroyed by it. And yes, you buy into conspiracy theories. You're gullible.

Weren’t Republicans the war mongers when it came to Iraq?

Yes

Just look up the voting records. Hillary Clinton, Adam SChiff, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Diane Feinsten all voted in favor of invading Iraq. They were the biggest names in the DNC and still are today. Except for Reid of course.

They were given intell by Republicans that was false as we know now. But you do your whataboutism. The war belonged to GWB, a Republican.