The attached video explains that a contributing element to Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine was his perception that, due to the advancement of LGBT rights, the west has grown feebleminded. Since this is purely a matter of speculation that cannot be properly analysed on a material basis, I wanted to ask what is yours opinion on this. Is he making the same mistake that countless leaders have done over the years, including the prime example that was Hitler himself? For sure, there are material reasons why invading Ukraine is something he would want to do, but when it came to the decision alone, it is this fact that supposedly played a major role, i.e. predicting the enemy’s response based on the state of their sexual culture. It also seems to be the reason why so many western rightists seem to be siding with him, since they perceive him as more macho than the imperial core. Are there any texts that attempt to analyze this phenomenon from a materialist viewpoint, and also, how similar is this to actual fascism?
deleted by creator
So, you are of the opinion that Putin does in fact not factor western gendersex attitudes in matters of war, despite being seemingly full about it as of recent? (Such has his recent remarks about J. K. Rowling, which most people found very strange, coming from him.)
deleted by creator
Well obviously they are. Is it therefore itself a rightist idea to suggest that this played a role in his decision making, i. e. something that only rightists alone would believe? Because obviously there are historical examples of various leaders nonetheless succumbing to such line of thinking.
deleted by creator
You have to remember that Ukraine makes Russia look like the LGBTPride Parade in contrast.
If you think this war of civilization of Russia vs the Fourth Reich is about LGBT issues, you are out of your goddamned mind.
I have explained in the original post that I do not think that this is the case, that there are material reasons for this war, as with anything else. I have merely wondered whether “LGBT issues” were a contributing factor.
Read Sun Tzu. Then reassess your line of questioning and you’ll understand why so many people are mocking this line of questioning.
There is absolutely no way that the military leadership council of any nation is factoring aspects of gender and sexuality into their assessments of enemy capabilities and outcome scenario planning.
So just to be clear, Putin does not think that the west is “weak”, he did not see an opportunity with Ukraine because of that, and when he displays such attitudes publicly, he is merely pandering to domestic bigots. Is that right? And also, speaking of Sun Tzu, is that something that played a role? It is an ancient book, most famous for telling how to defeat your opponent without fighting, i.e. through propaganda. Did Putin read Sun Tzu and did it influence his decision making? Or, what exactly are you saying?
Your style of questioning reveals a level of certainty in your preconceived notions that has no place in the learning process. I hope I’m not wasting my time by responding to your arrogant line of questioning.
No one has ever won a war because their opponents domestic culture wasn’t masculine or macho enough. Machismo of your opponent’s civilian administration does not factor in to calculation of whether or not you’re going to win a war. The idea that Putin has held on to power this long but is fully capable of miscalculating his opponent’s violent force because they allow people who are transsexual into the military is a level of delusion that requires you to ignore literally a thousand years of material analysis of military strategy and planning.
If Putin saw the West as weak, then it was because of his access to and his trust in military intelligence about Western capabilities, numbers, current positioning, geopolitical force balances, and consequences of actions. The idea that Putin saw the West as “morally weak” or “not masculine enough” or whatever you seem to be implying is delusion.
when he displays such attitudes publicly, he is merely pandering to domestic bigots
Possibly. There’s lots of reason for people involved in conflicts to make statements. None of them are simply because they believe them to be true. Public announcements are first and foremost planned because of their impact, not because of their accuracy. Inaccurate statements, for sure, have impact, especially when the people receiving the message can perceive the messages as inaccurate, but that impact is calculated into the communications planning.
For example, the British did not spread misinformation about carrots being healthy for your eyes because it was accurate, nor because they believed it, nor because they assumed scientists wouldn’t notice. The said carrots made your eyes better because it was a way to fill in an intelligence gap in the enemy who might not have known that they had developed radar and the off chance that the enemy would need to allocate time and effort to run their own experiments, wasting their time. At no point did the British military believe that carrots made your eyes better nor was their ever a material advantage gained by carrots, but they still said it.
speaking of Sun Tzu, is that something that played a role?
The Art of War remains relevant in every competitive scenario today, from military to business to sports.
It is an ancient book
Irrelevant
most famous for telling how to defeat your opponent without fighting, i.e. through propaganda
Famous for? Who cares what it’s “famous” for? Have you read it? It’s a material analysis of warfare about the conditions that lead to defeat or victory. If you haven’t read it, you won’t fully understand its importance to this conversation and you won’t believe me when I tell you that it’s important. Suffice to say, Art of War as a material analysis of warfare lays out what causes victory and defeat and it never ever mentions the (real or perceived) masculinity, sexual propriety, or moral character of the culture fielding the opposing force.
Did Putin read Sun Tzu
Absolutely no doubt in my mind that he’s read it. As did every single one of his generals.
and did it influence his decision making?
Absolutely no doubt in my mind that the material analysis of warfare is a significant influence on the decisions of every commander and general in the world.
And if you don’t understand that, it’s easy to think that someone like Putin would assess the outcome of a war based on his personal feelings about the moral character of specific cultural aspect of their opponent’s domestic policy. But that’s an incorrect assessment of how war works.
Very well, thank you for explaining it. That said, we do see that the progress of Russian troops is beginning to stagnate. It seems that Putin or his generals miscalculated. Why do you think it is, that the war didn’t go for them as expected?
See, the reason for all these questions is, that aside from this place, my other major source for info about the war is the many liberal, usually apolitical subreddits, that I’m subscribed to on Reddit. That’s how they get me, they act apolitical, but then the mods pin some atrocity that I simply must take a look at. And, well… there were many stories covered by them that the communists around here and on Reddit haven’t really talked about that much, such as for example the material impact of the war on the ground, coverage of the civilian victims, i.e. things that illicit the greatest emotional response in liberals. (They also debunked some stories that I’ve seen around here, such as the claim that the dead bodies in Bucha were moving. Apparently they weren’t after all.)
And the times that this topic came up in my family’s circles, the discussion always circled back to this topic, and I didn’t really have anything to say, so I simply agreed to pretty much every single talking point they were having, because obviously, the loss of innocent life is terrible no matter what, and I also didn’t want to resort to whataboutisms regarding America’s wars, as that doesn’t seem very appropriate. (If anything, it looks dismissive or ignorant.)
Lastly, I originally mentioned Hitler, as he was exactly one of those types that believed in superstitious war strategies. He provided the general plans, and his generals fleshed them out to the best of their abilities. At least that’s how I’ve heard it be told. For example, his decision to invade the USSR apparently came to him after a solitary deliberation in the Alps. I.e., he picked the time of the invasion based on a nonsense reason. I initially thought that maybe Putin could have also been motivated by some superstition to greenlight such an operation, all else being left to his skilled generals as far as logistics go (so pretty much every single important decision, aside from the initial idea for the invasion itself).
I suppose that in the end, it doesn’t really matter what Putin thinks, right? The reason could have been anything and it wouldn’t change the fact that Putin decided to invade Ukraine in late February of 2022, superstitious or not. So I guess I really am arguing about nonsense. But he obviously is a conservative bigot, no denying that, so it’s understandable where the video that I shared was coming from.
we do see that the progress of Russian troops is beginning to stagnate
This is a characterization, not a fact. What is the fact upon which you are characterizing the current situation as “progress beginning to stagnate”. How accurate do you think that characterization is based on the facts you have? How accurate do you think the facts you have are? How complete of a picture do you believe you have?
It seems that Putin or his generals miscalculated. Why do you think it is, that the war didn’t go for them as expected?
Without repeating myself too much, you’ve got a lot of characterizations here. Worse, you’re asking leading questions. We have yet to establish that the war isn’t going as expected from the perspective of Putin and his generals. I don’t know what the war plan was. I don’t know what the primary and secondary objectives were. I don’t know which objectives have failed and which have been accomplished. I don’t know the standard of victory for the plan.
Do you?
It’s easy to list the reasons for strategic miscalculations. Most of them are in The Art of War or can be derived from it. The root cause of nearly all strategic miscalculations is lack of accurate and complete intelligence. If you know the entire board state, you can determine from the board state whether there’s a clear victor or not. If there’s no clear victor from the current board state, then the board requires a change. Determining all possible changes is impossible, but changes fall into 2 categories: changes using known capabilities and changes using unknown capabilities. This gets us into the famous 2x2 “Known Knowns” x “Unknown Unknowns”. For all possible known capabilities, there are unknown properties of those capabilities (like quantity, readiness, and suitability). Generating intelligence on these is something everyone is trying to do and everyone knows everyone is trying to do. Then, there are unknown capabilities (mostly top secret technologies). Identifying the potential space of unknown capabilities is difficult, generating intelligence for unknown capabilities is even harder.
So, if the Russian war department miscalculated, why did they miscalculate? Lack of accurate and complete intelligence, including their own readiness and including hidden alliances amongst their opponents.
And let me be very clear, the war is not being waged in isolation. Sanctions are an obvious move that exists outside of war, but are still part of the conflict, and therefore still subject to the material analysis of Sun Tzu as well as the consequences of that analysis, including intelligence, counter-intelligence, and propaganda. So the various machinations we’ve seen around the sanctions, the currency disputes, the trade agreements, etc, all of these are part of the conflict’s calculation and leaders throughout the entire apparatus of state are involved in assessments, intelligence gathering, scenario planning, propagandizing, and disinformation distribution.
in the end, it doesn’t really matter what Putin thinks, right?
His opinions and values don’t matter. But when someone like Putin, or Biden, or Bush, or Blair, or Macron, or Merkel, or Schulz, or Johnson, or any other leader of a significant military, it is a useful exercise to use those decisions to help one’s self imagine the material conditions that they believe hold true as a way of gathering evidence about the world. If one knows about strategic planning and execution, and one knows about propaganda, and one knows about intelligence gathering, one can take a decision by one of these leaders and use it to try to reverse engineer what the real situation is. It’s hard to do, and not necessarily accurate, but it’s a great way of learning about the world. For example, there were tons of reports of how Russia’s military assets were aged, broken down, not suitable for traversing even the territory surrounding. Why did this news come out? Was it pure propaganda from the West? I don’t think so, I think it was accurate. But was it because Russia’s military is actually that bad? Or is Russia aware that it’s been successful at masking its forces both in quantity and in readiness from the intelligence apparatus of its opponents, and therefore it made the deliberate choice to send its worst assets into the theater knowing that they would be enough to achieve their objectives because NATO wouldn’t respond and Ukraine wouldn’t be able to prevent Russia from achieving its objectives even with the worst of Russia’s military being deployed? Was the timing of the war based on the fact that if Russia waited until the US had established a greater position that Russia would be forced to deploy more of its assets, thereby granting an intelligence advantage to the US that it desperately wants to keep? Did it work, i.e. did Russia achieve it’s primary objectives without undermining its intelligence advantage? Is the assessment even accurate, i.e. does Russia even have such an intelligence advantage to protect? Does Russia believe it has this advantage but actually doesn’t (this is a fun question and the answer remains to be seen)?
But he obviously is a conservative bigot, no denying that, so it’s understandable where the video that I shared was coming from.
You’re using conservative in the American way, to mean bigot, or at least socially conservative. It’s really important that you understand that the video you posted is actually showing the conservative bigots in the US and the UK, it’s not talking about Putin actually incorporating his bigotry into his strategy. The last 90 seconds of that video basically show how this war is between two fascists (US/EU vs Russia).
Lastly, I originally mentioned Hitler, as he was exactly one of those types that believed in superstitious war strategies
Hitler didn’t last very long for a reason.
I was going off of the supposed news that Putin was dismayed by how slowly the war is going, as well as the reports that the Russian army is lacking in equipment. Personally, I think that a lack of intelligence did play a role too. As for the sanctions, this seems to be implying that they indeed were effective at stalling Russia’s advance. Would you say that this is the case? I know it’s a big lib talking point, that sanctions work, so I am hesitant to draw conclusions.
And yes, it is rather interesting to speculate just how much could Russia be hiding. Then again, for me, such speculations always seemed bordering with hidden tech fantasies and conspiracy theories, so I prefer relying on confirmed info. It could be that the news that Putin is unhappy with the development of the war is itself propaganda, meant to convince us that the Russian war machine is running out of juice, but the opposite would imply that Ukraine is not important enough for Russia to be worth investing much into war resources, so it’s difficult to say. Put simply, is it a blunder, or a strategic loss? I don’t know, and I hope I can learn more about this somewhere.
And yes, I meant that Putin seems like a conservative bigot from the american point of view, so it’s understandable why some might say these things and draw these Hitler comparisons.
deleted by creator
What a fucking joke of an analysis.
This is a war against the Fourth Reich.
Boiling this down to LGBT issues is pathetic at best, at worst it is sinisister Western information warfare.
This is a joke right? Putin going to war because of woke.
It did seem rather far fetched to me too, but I wasn’t entirely sure, so I had to ask. So then, what is the main cause of Putin opening a war in this specific timeframe, early 2022? What specific opportunity did he see in it?
Because an all out Ukrainian assault on Donbass was imminent, they were massing a huge amount of troops and equipment on the contact line and had already started to massively escalate shelling in the days prior to Russia recognizing the DPR and LPR. They also have documents proving that such an operation had already been approved and scheduled to begin mere days later. Russia beat them to the punch.
If they had allowed the invasion of Donbass to happen it would have been a bloodbath and would have resulted in a mass ethnic cleansing like what happened 1995 in Croatia with NATO help where as a result of just such an operation 500,000 Serbs were pushed out of Krajna.
This is the imminent reason why it had to happen before the end of February. The broader reason for why such an intervention was necessary regardless of the Donbass situation is because if they waited any longer NATO would have become impossible to dislodge from Ukraine.
Arguably Russia should have acted in 2014, and they did to a degree, they annexed Crimea to keep the Sevastopol port from falling into NATO hands. But they were not yet prepared for the all out economic war that the west has now unleashed on them, so they could not undertake any larger scale intervention yet.
Russia spent the past had 8 years making themselves more or less sanctions-proof and getting close to China. And the US has also declined quite a bit since then.
Anywhere I can read more about this? The news are moving very fast now, so it’s difficult to search for stuff like that.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/ and https://thesaker.is/ post regular updates and news, in particular the latter’s “Sitrep” articles are quite good (the site as a whole is a bit sus but on this conflict their takes are spot on). There are various telegram channels that do extremely frequent live updates (i don’t follow them but i believe Intel Slava Z are often the first primary source on any given military news), and i’m not sure if ASBMilitary still posts about this conflict but in the initial weeks they used to be quite good before they were banned off Twitter. Also definitely follow Pepe Escobar (also kicked off Twitter now but you can find him on VK) and read all his articles on The Cradle too. On Youtube you have Brian Berletic: https://youtube.com/c/TheNewAtlas/ and Richard Medhurst: https://youtube.com/c/RichardMedhurst/ And finally there is The Duran, who though they are coming at this from a very different ideological direction than we are usually have reliably solid analysis and are up to date with the news: https://odysee.com/@AlexanderMercouris:a (i’m posting the Odysee link here though they are also on Youtube because i expect more and more Youtube will crack down on dissenting voices in the future).
No real opportunity. Just countering NATO expansion. Maybe wanting to save Donbas.
