You surely cannot be so simplistic.
Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!
Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threadsthreadreaderapp.com
Really? I didn't realise urban was populated by people who own/control the means of production and live off the exploitation of their wage slaves.
In fact its the opposite - maybe this is why this misunderstanding keep coming up - its exactly about recognising and understanding Putins agency, and why he might act
It's not either/or though, is it? If some bloke goes postal at his former workplace after long bullying and unfair dismissal, that's on him, but what put him in a place where he was willing to do it is not irrelevant or never to be mentioned, and surely that's still less the case in geopolitics.
New low
Care to expand? Seems like a total misstep to me, setting aside the moral aspect. Not sure what Russian interests will be served.
Usually twice in the morning after a strong coffee.
But it would create a buffer zone (an occupied / client state eastern half of Ukraine) between Russia proper and ‘the West’. The western rump, even if not allowed into NATO, would still (as you say, agricola) be heavily-armed and hostile.
you should read it
Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!
Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads
So when people were saying rumours of an invasion were hysteria, they mostly knew there was going to be an invasion but didn't want those around them to get too worked up about it?
I don't think Putin can allow an independent "rump Ukraine" without security guarantees from the West, which he is unlikely to get.But it would create a buffer zone (an occupied / client state eastern half of Ukraine) between Russia proper and ‘the West’. The western rump, even if not allowed into NATO, would still (as you say, agricola) be heavily-armed and hostile.
Don’t know if this still applies today, but I understood that much of USSR Cold War policy in Europe was to create a buffer zone (ie the Eastern Bloc / Warsaw Pact countries), because of the Soviet Union’s horrendous experience in WW2 and the Nazi invasion. Millions murdered, scorched earth policy, villages destroyed, heavy plant and other materiel seized, the western / European part of the USSR was devastated.
So if NATO / the USA had attacked the USSR conventionally, they would first have to get through East Germany, Poland, Hungary etc.
Doesn’t Belarus as a Russian client state currently function as such a buffer?
Of course it would be far better for Putin to have control of all Ukraine, but he might settle for the eastern half
Was listening to a R4 pundit yesterday, suggesting that one way for this war to end without complete occupation of Ukraine would be for Zelenskii to offer Putin something in return for a cessation of hostilities. But what might that be - the Donbas region, or a good deal more?
It’s deeply unpleasant to think of - an aggressor rewarded for their aggression - but it’s what happened in Bosnia in the 1990s, with large areas of Bosnia being handed over to the Republika Srpska ‘entity’ in exchange for peace
no, that would be stupid of course. hard to talk about without concrete examples of what someone said in front of us
If you're going to cry to sir you need to put an @ in front of his board-name. That will send a corridor monitor to his office and then he will come down and see what all the fuss is about. Waking him up because someone called you a cunt tends piss him off a bit though because it's a long walk from his lair to the
I wasn't being serious.
I think he should give the worst offenders 100 lines though.
The board will flicker a bit just before his arrival.
i cant believe we're still doing this.
