Iuz the Evil

So the next phase of the war looks to me to be the Russians pulling back from Kyiv and likely also redeployment of  forces that previously has been committed to strike against Odessa (they’re not in a position to do that at the moment, obviously) to reinforce their forces in the Donbas region. How that plays out will probably shape the Russian perspective on a long term war, if the Ukrainians have continued success in a more offensive operation against higher Russian force density it’ll prove to be militarily unsustainable (as opposed to just economically and politically unsustainable).

It’ll be a different conflict than the previously four region poorly coordinated assault, but I would not bet against Ukraine at this point. They’ve been the superior of the two forces at every stage. And their morale is much better, plus they’ve secured supply chains at this point by repelling the eastern invasion. Logistical support and good morale, better knowledge of local terrain and a very serious emotional investment. That is a very tough combination to beat. 

3 minutes ago, Old Man said:

Saw a comment elsewhere that if Putin wanted a false flag attack, he wouldn’t have blown up an oil depot, he’d have blown up an orphanage. 

Totally, and what does that get him? A declaration of war so Belarus jumps in? Basically a crappier version of the Russian army?

“Illegal”? Like shelling civilian targets? Huh. Interesting argument.

 I’m thinking fuel facility in city where Russia launched a good portion of their invasion from, and a city in which they’re launching rocket attacks from, might be considered a fair logistical target. I could be biased though. 
 

It’s not, however, like they targeted a Red Cross facility. I don’t think that argument will garner much sympathy.

There’s various footage of the helicopters shooting at the facility. I cannot speak to whether they’re Ukrainians of course, but it seems likely.

https://militaryland.net/ukraine/invasion-day-36-summary/

Here we go. Can’t wait.

Given the events of the last month, it’s apparent that Putin grossly miscalculated. Humanitarian and economic interests aside, he did not read his Sun Tzu.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.

Russia has and will continue to pay a terrible price for this invasion, and has appeared to alienate themselves from the rest of the world. It has strengthened NATO as an alliance, and pushed several non-NATO nations to closer ties. Not to mention the economic apocalypse it’s unleashed.

 The juice was not worth the squeeze.

24 minutes ago, Pariah said:

So once Putin has the rest of Georgia and the Ukraine under his thumb, what's next? Belarus? Kazakhstan? The Baltic states? 

Baltic States are signatory members of the EU and NATO. Both they and Poland are not really an option on the table, as that will full on trigger WW3

Maybe. As you say, we shall see. He still is a top 3 ranked QB when you look at any QB ranking on a website: bleacher report, ESPN, etc. 

The COVID vaccination thing is going to cost him, I just don’t know how much. 
 

Rogers is a jerk, but so are many others through the years in that position. I think he’ll be playing for sometime as their starter in 2022, and the franchise will at least pretend to be happy about it.

He’s an idiot, a Prima Donna, and a media nightmare for any franchise who selects him. 
 

He’s also a remarkable quarterback talent. Top talent in that position is worth a lot to a franchise. I could see any team that can sign him being eager to do so, from a pure “we want to win this year” perspective.

Absolutely, this evening I’ll find my post earlier the last time this came up. Engage in local politics, lean in on democracy, and expect accountability from your government especially at the local level. State and Federal politicians come up from local levels, people as a whole don’t pay attention to your Board of Supervisors, City Council and so forth. Hold them accountable and take action when they don’t do the right thing. It works, it has always worked, and without that we get the government we deserve.

No eggs, assuming sausage gravy

No wings

I’m thinking there’s differences in the quality of the arguments, but “that’s the basis of America’s founding” as an excuse for mayhem has been a rather tired trope for many years. An appeal to historic revolution as a valid application of force for modern political change appears identical, irrespective of the argument behind it.

It’s interesting to hear the exact same arguments being produced by those aforementioned right wing militias regarding the American Revolution and political change come up around climate change and social justice issues. 
 

I’ll pass, personally. But it’s all hypothetical in this thread anyway - I’m currently figuring out how to respond to emergency medical needs during a pandemic for our community and just glad we aren’t managing yet another disaster. Someone’s got to do it, and it’s generally the government. 

I do the local trauma response to various violent behaviors response too. Haven’t personally seen politically motivated aggression do anything positive, at least not in the last decades, but who knows? 

46 minutes ago, TrickstaPriest said:

 

Unfortunately in extreme cases, such as literal slavery, you don't really have any law supporting you.  Those authorities often don't respect anything but money, power, and the ability to inflict violence.  Those unfortunates have nothing, will always have nothing, and will never be recognized as having more than nothing, let alone the law.

 

Of course, slave revolts also almost always fail.  Those few that succeed often are proceeded by very trying, difficult times for the whole country.  The same goes for many other kinds of revolt.

I do not believe that example applies in modern United States society, as this is not such an extreme case. I’m unaware of any literal slavery in America today. Attempts to harm life and property should be met with force, if necessary, by legitimate authority.

Violence in an elected Republic is a problem, not a solution. If violence is good for one side, then it’s good for the other and it’s just a matter of what flavor you prefer. That’s unappealing to me at a foundational level. Of course I have a preference between any two groups with strongly held beliefs, and may find one more reasonable (or less insane) than the other. That does not give them the right to harm persons or property in pursuit of their agenda.

 Others disagree with that philosophy, whether attending a protest turned violent or storming the Capitol. They do organize for that purpose, and I fully agree that right wing organizations do so more effectively and violently. That does not mean, in my estimation, that their opponents are exempt from the same criticisms when they engage in that behavior.

I suppose it depends on where anarchic violence lands on the political spectrum. Maybe need another axis besides left/right.

Violence is unacceptable, whether targeting just the public servants in law enforcement, or more broadly against government in general. When you harm someone or destroy their property in rejection of the rule of law, you have lost any moral integrity in your argument.

Must depend on where you live, this is “a thing” in a lot of areas. Body armor, batons and other crap like that tends to show up.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/year-protests-portland-residents-waning-patience-antifa/story%3Fid%3D77511470

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests_in_Portland,_Oregon
 

They all look pretty bad to me. And that’s acknowledging as I did before the right wing militias are more organized and dangerous. Certainly more worthy of Federal law enforcement attention (which they actually do receive). I’m not going to be supportive of anyone using these tactics to advance an agenda or take advantage of “righteous anger”. The agenda differs, but the behavior isn’t significantly distinct.

As it pertains to the civil war concerns, I think we’ve got militias on the left and the right. One set is just more significant

2 hours ago, DShomshak said:

This weekend, the New Yorker Radio Hour interviewed political scientist Barbara F. Walters about the prospects for civil war in the US, based on her recent book How Civil Wars Start: And How to Stop Them.

 

https://www.newyorker.com/podcast/the-new-yorker-radio-hour/a-new-civil-war-in-america

 

Walters was part of a CIA group that studies civil wars in other countries and the factors that precede them. She was unnerved to find those factors emerging in the US.

 

One important note: Robust democracies don't have civil wars. Robust autocracies don't have civil wars. It's the countries in between thaqt tend to have civil wars. So the de-democratizing of the US is especially worrying.

 

One possibly hopeful note: A major sign of imminent civil war is the appearance of militias, on more than one side. The US has its right-wing militias, but so far we don't see corresponding left-wing militias. (Well, there's Antifa, but it seems very much smaller.) People on the left seem generally not to have lost faith in the regular military and legitimate government. If the far right rebels, we've got insurrection, but the machinery of government has shown how quickly it can bring the hammer down (as, say, after the Oklahoma City bombing). If left-wing militias emerge, or the military and security forces themselves fracture, we've got a much worse civil war.

 

Dean Shomshak

Antifa and some of the more militant BLM protests look an awful lot like left wing militias. Antifa in particular.

I’m thinking that left wing militias have emerged, albeit not as organized and heavily armed. The right wing militias have affiliation with public safety (or law enforcement if you prefer), which poses a real and credible threat beyond the anarchic behaviors of their counterparts. But that doesn’t exonerate the behaviors exhibited by them, a lesser evil is still evil.

 Again, my perspective as I’ve said before is the use of violence to advance political aims is not acceptable. When a riot erupts from a protest, it’s a mark against any movement that fails to condemn it.

6 hours ago, Ragitsu said:

 

Better than technological, maybe? Think "Grey Goo".

Nanotechnologies are still technologies, I think?

This presumes the avoidance of biological and nuclear weapons?

Yeah, I don’t think I’ll stop calling my Georgia fan buddy “1980” this year… we will see, I guess

Wait, people are still playing football?

That was a really fun game for me. Really enjoyed seeing Bob Stoops win a bowl game, coaching Oklahoma one last time, with his son Drake scoring a touchdown… over Oregon. 
 

Damn, I love that stuff. Season was looking grim for a while there, total roller coaster. OU is going to the SEC, oh wait winning ugly but undefeated… ack, lost to Baylor and OSU, what do you mean Riley is going to U$C?!… oh, never mind. We good.

 Next year is going to be a lot of fun.

I’m really very excited about one artifact of this crazy season. Bob Stoops is coaching the Oklahoma Sooners one more time. I’m crazy nostalgic, not even that wound up about the outcome. Lots of change in both schools, Covid, and a rough coaching transition - plus opting out players. It could do either way. 
 

Current line is -6.5 OU, but with all that? Who knows? 
 

I’m going to cheer for my Sooners. It’s got a positive vibe right now, things are optimistic for next year. Close the recruiting season strong, keep minimizing transfers. Bring on 2022.

 Edit: I had to ask some texas acquaintances of mine… what do you do for an Alamo Bowl? Is there a special drink or hat? We’ve never been and they go about every year. Hey, what Bowl are they going to?

26 minutes ago, Starlord said:

Baker Mayfield may be the best QB this version of the Browns franchise has ever had, but honestly, would you really want to pay this guy top QB money?

Are you kidding? Because this isn’t a serious statement if you are a Browns fan. What is the better option they can attract or draft? Ever in recorded human history?

 It’s the Browns, man. Everyone rooting for them should just be happy he’s there. He’s definitely a top 20 franchise quarterback (even with the struggles this season he’s like 22) and that’s unheard of in modem memory for Cleveland.

The competition at QB for Cleveland is not Aaron Rogers or Tom Brady or Patrick Mahomes. It’s Ryan Leaf.