Skip Navigation
Zelensky: 'Our partners fear that Russia will lose this war'
  • People deserve to have their views confronted violently, sometimes. If you disagree that’s your prerogative as a moderator, and I’ll tone it down.

    But can you please do your job and clean up the insulting comments? There should be plenty from the same user for you to choose from. They’re clearly just starting shit, without a single inkling of good faith argumentation. It should be glaringly obvious.

  • Zelensky: 'Our partners fear that Russia will lose this war'
  • Again, maybe read the context of the user who clearly spammed the report button while also continuing to instigate incivility.

    He’s literally calling people children if they do not accept his false binary worldview.

  • Helicopter carrying Iran's President Raisi crashes, search under way
  • It’s the same story. I believe the first official Iranian statement had language like “involved in a hard landing” without anything else.

    They have since turned to asking for prayers for their safe recovery, and apparently asked the EU for satellite imaging to help with search and rescue. [this is from a New York Times timeline that I recently read.]

  • Ah, the true path to socialism!
  • Totally. It’s absolutely terrifying (and occasionally, very reassuring) how much a single person can impact the entire planet.

    To your point about voting and democratizing foreign policy: I tend to agree with you, but I also have some reservations. I think you can observe how easily things become overtly politicized and based, based on short-term political gains. Bureaucracy and individual expertise/institutional knowledge and inertia can safeguard against some shockwaves that occur based on shorter term democratic changes. I do think that there’s plenty of space for a technocratic approach to administration, where decisions are based on longer term thinking than a lot of representative democracies reward in the political sphere.

    Just to be clear: I’m defending expertise within a democratic government’s institutions, not for opaque policies or a system without oversight. I’m just saying that just as I like to have scientists leading a county’s national science organizations, I like having foreign policy experts leading a county’s foreign policy organizations.

  • Ah, the true path to socialism!
  • Indeed. That’s why I asked the question.

    Say what you will about how fucking stupid American foreign policy is and has been, but it’s at least somewhat tempered its approach to socialist governments around the world.

  • community is punk
  • We had completely different experiences. I honestly can’t believe we were in the same spaces.

    And I know about the City. That’s why I said it that way. Because the City specifically is where I met an awful lot of folks out organizing. Like I said: I lived there for a while.

  • community is punk
  • I could not walk around the City of London without coming across all kinds of political and civil service organizations handing out flyers or wanting me to get involved in some kind of petition or action.

    You may also go to Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park, where there are usually various causes and political orientations present.

    If there is a record store near to you, that is another place where people often begin to organize. Check out the flyers and posters they have, often on bulletin boards or in stacks in counters of whatever.

    I wasn’t there long enough to find any good book stores, but I would be shocked if there weren’t at least a few anarchist/collectivist/leftist book stores scattered about.

    Others have mentioned libraries, which I’ll second. If there are any community centers or local government offices, these will also sometimes have postings dedicated to various causes.

  • Russia lacks 'numbers for strategic breakthrough' in Ukraine: NATO
  • I respectfully disagree.

    I take part in conversations not for their benefit, necessarily, but observers’ benefit. And one of the most effective ways of fighting propaganda is to shine a light on it.

    If you just delete every dissenting worldview without engaging, then it runs the risk of making the other positions more legitimate to others watching but not engaging, or gives fodder to the ideas that “we” in the more open parts of the world are just as bad as authoritarians at silencing dissent, which isn’t usually true.

    I’d agree if the other poster was only spamming ad hom attacks all over, but there’s enough logic laced in there that I find it’s worth discussing and trying to understand, if only to better understand where Russian disinformation is.

  • Russia lacks 'numbers for strategic breakthrough' in Ukraine: NATO
  • Intelligence about state capabilities come, first and foremost, from the state itself.

    What are you confused about here? That foreign intelligence services believed Russian assessments of its own capabilities?

    Yes, the Russian grossly overestimated their capabilities. Yes, many foreign analysts agreed that the Russian military was powerful.

    This is ended up being less the case. But that doesn’t mean the Russian military isn’t dangerous or is completely incompetent and incapable of change.

    What’s your point?

  • Russia lacks 'numbers for strategic breakthrough' in Ukraine: NATO
  • Russia is a threat to NATO member states, not NATO. NATO is aware of how easily it can stomp the Russian military, and so do all the NATO members.

    What’s worrisome is how close some NATO members are to Russia, a country that has made its willingness to invade other countries based on made up justifications very well known, and actively sows disunity propaganda and actively influences politics on other countries, explicitly as acts of hybrid war (as in, based on state war fighting doctrine).

    It’s also very clearly able to undertake large scale war, which its neighbors don’t necessarily have.

    I don’t know exactly what you’re arguing here… that Russia actually isn’t a threat to NATO? Or are you seeking some kind of “gotcha” moment when people acknowledge that Russia is both dangerous, but not as fierce as analysts initially expected? Maybe you can clarify what you mean by “NATO lies,” for starters?

  • Russia lacks 'numbers for strategic breakthrough' in Ukraine: NATO
  • … to what?

    Are you suggesting we’re still waiting for the real Russian military to show up?

    Or are you suggesting Russian deployment of tactical nuclear weapons?

    Or is there another way that Russia could further escalate I can’t think of?

  • InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
    Posts 0
    Comments 77