|
Mightypeon posted:Considerable parts of the Ukrainians see the policies of the post Maidan goverment as infringing on their rights, and for good reason. Concerning the "rights" of Ukraine to join Nato, they explicitly voided that right in their own state sovereignity declaration and in their declaration of independence. Yo the Maidan government was in place for like 2 days when Russia invaded Crimea. They didn't even get a chance to settle down before Russia started loving with them. Hope this helps.
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 11:05 |
|
|
Dusty Baker 2 posted:Yo the Maidan government was in place for like 2 days when Russia invaded Crimea. They didn't even get a chance to settle down before Russia started loving with them. Hope this helps. I believe he's trying to cite the Russian/separatist cassus belli - long since disproven - that the new government immediately attempted to ban/purge Russian as a language in Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:Mightypeon's recent string of "Russia as sore loser" explanation of events makes a lot more sense than any NATO chat. In Maidan the West didn't just "win", it won unfairly. Russia had the legwork put in, Russia had the money on the table, Russia had the guy in office, Russia by all rights HAD won in the pre-Berkut crackdown talks with EU pulling out. Then March comes around and when Put in is supposed to be having his moment with Sochi, the West and it's dirty tricks, swoops in last second as Maidan overthrows Yanuk. It's bulls hit because the West just shows up thirty seconds before the buzzer and scores the winning poo poo while Russia had to pull a lot of strings and get things done "the right way". Its not so much his explanation as it is the fact he obviously approves of the whole thing like some kind of sociopath. Hey MP, buddy, how do you feel about Hitler murdering all those people in WW2? Germany was mistreated by the west and had the moral high ground to murder/gas/conquer all those people, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Cuntpunch posted:I believe he's trying to cite the Russian/separatist cassus belli - long since disproven - that the new government immediately attempted to ban/purge Russian as a language in Ukraine. Poor plucky little Russia.  my dad posted:I sincerely apologize for diverting your attention from Ukraine for a bit, but there's some cross-region stuff I want to talk about. Probably constitutes a derail, feel free to skim over: I appreciate these updates, keep 'em coming.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Present posted:Its not so much his explanation as it is the fact he obviously approves of the whole thing like some kind of sociopath. Could we please not do this? It doesn't lend anything constructive to the discussion, and it's also a really lovely thing to say about somebody.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Majorian posted:NATO-chat and what you're describing here are all part of the same trend, at least as perceived by the Russians. It's the West drawing more and more of the traditional Russian sphere of influence into its own, from their perspective. That the West (up to this point mostly the EU) greatly underestimated the endemic nature of inferiority complex in Russia would be about right. It appears that the Russian mindset is that this is bullshit, and the West always win no matter what, so why bother playing by the rules if all it gets you is embarrassment. We rarely seem to talk about it here but the Eurasian Union was a big linchpin policy for Putin, a legacy policy, and it doesn't really work without Ukraine. The West meanwhile is caught completely off guard because they don't know why Putin doesn't just throttle gas in Ukraine and have the IMF pay for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Mightypeon posted:Just in general: What would the West have gotten out of this alliance with Russia? That she would not act as a "spoiler" in the Middle East? Currently Russian exports to China are 6.8% [37b USD], and imports 16.6% [59.4b USD]. Hypothetically, if the West had behaved towards Russia as China does, how would the China-Russia relationship look different today? Could it really be that much more favorable a situation for the US? It's not as though Russia is eager to share bread and salt with China over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
my dad posted:OK, dude, I had (e: and still have) optimization related subjects in my studies, and I have no idea what you're talking about. Half your post are optimization-related terms, and half is gibberish I can't figure out the meaning of. Could you please rephrase it somehow? I was once working on something somewhat similiar in terms of the computational vision and opimisation things. The initial problem you described did, for me, seem like the following: -There is an area -We wish to observe that area with enough probes to get good real time information from it -The observation radius of a given probe depends heavily on both spatial (where is it, what is around it) and temporal factors -We want to use as few probes giving as much information as possible -Probe coverage of the area in general must be above a certain threshold -In the event the probes going missing, or new probes becoming necessary (variable conditions as you stated) to fulfill the demands stated above, new probes have to be placed automatically. There will typically be an "optimal" way to spread the probes. This is the global optimum. In practice, finding that optimum may be computationally expensive and/or take too much time. Given a rich and changing parameter space, finding global optima may even be nigh impossible. I guess that going after local "optima" is more prudent, as in any distributions of probes fulfilling conditions you set is "good enough". These conditions can likely be set in a way that allows you predefine what area an individual robot will observe given its current probe load. This would in turn make cooperation between the individual robots easier. P.S. That thing just got my interest, I did something similiar earlier, and somehow this threat generally makes me want to do productive things instead. I hope you dont mind too much. If your guys implement this successfully, patent the gently caress out of it if possible because this would have very considerable applications in many other fields, but I dont doubt that you know this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
MightyPeon, I have a direct question for you: Would you agree that in the game of diplomacy and politics, Russians play chess where Americans play poker? I think that distinct is fundamental to understanding how this Ukranian crisis arose. For all his faults, Russian love of chess was something Bush II understood well from his father, and why he was so credible when he could honestly say he had 'looked into the heart of Putin and seen his true self.' Russian diplomacy has to be chess; Russian politics is winner-takes-all, and if you lose the game, you lose your king's head. American politics is poker, where if you're dealt a bad hand, you wait it out until life gives you a straight flush. And Obama, for all his faults, is one of the best poker players in America. Personally, I've seen him outbluff Blagojevitch in their weekly games at the executive mansion. Now that takes true skill.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:That the West (up to this point mostly the EU) greatly underestimated the endemic nature of inferiority complex in Russia would be about right. No, what the West underestimated was how vital the Kremlin considered Ukraine's alignment to be for Russia's interests. That misconception arose in the Bush Administration, but the fact that Obama hasn't corrected it is one of the biggest disappointments I have in his presidency. quote:It appears that the Russian mindset is that this is bullshit, and the West always win no matter what, so why bother playing by the rules if all it gets you is embarrassment. We rarely seem to talk about it here but the Eurasian Union was a big linchpin policy for Putin, a legacy policy, and it doesn't really work without Ukraine. Yeah, but I doubt it's going to have much of an effect on his general public approval. Dilkington posted:What would the West have gotten out of this alliance with Russia? That she would not act as a "spoiler" in the Middle East? Given the signals they're sending over Syria right now, that would probably be a good thing to have.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
Dilkington posted:What would the West have gotten out of this alliance with Russia? That she would not act as a "spoiler" in the Middle East? Russian availability as a potential balancer (but not neccesarily spoiler/container, both Russia and India would only contain China if they feel directly aggrieved by it) against China, which would enable/embolden India and Vietnam to also balance China. There is also the fact that US trade with Russia is ridicolously tiny (even pre Sanctions). It boils down to whom the west sees as a greater threat. Military nuke shenangians aside, China poses a much stronger "threat" to the "west running things" than Russia does. Translating economic strength into cultural and military strength is far easier than doing it the other way round. Containing China "without" Russia is already iffy, containing them "against" Russia is I think sheer folly that will end in embarassment and disaster.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
Majorian posted:No, what the West underestimated was how vital the Kremlin considered Ukraine's alignment to be for Russia's interests. That misconception arose in the Bush Administration, but the fact that Obama hasn't corrected it is one of the biggest disappointments I have in his presidency. Uh, what is there to correct? Obama thought Russia wasn't a mindless bad guy and that they could be trusted to behave like adults, unlike Bush very nearly including them in his stupid Axis of Evil thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Uh, what is there to correct? Obama thought Russia wasn't a mindless bad guy and that they could be trusted to behave like adults, unlike Bush very nearly including them in his stupid Axis of Evil thing. Obama personally thought Medvedev was playing poker to Putin's chess, not realizing he was a piece in play.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Uh, what is there to correct? Obama thought Russia wasn't a mindless bad guy and that they could be trusted to behave like adults, unlike Bush very nearly including them in his stupid Axis of Evil thing. Yeah, but Obama, up until now, hasn't abandoned Bush's incredibly stupid policy of fast-tracking Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. I honestly think this crisis would not have happened if Obama had made that part of the Reset.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:MightyPeon, I have a direct question for you: I just want to say I'm a big fan. Majorian posted:Given the signals they're sending over Syria right now, that would probably be a good thing to have. It would be nice. But Russia doesn't give her love away for free.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
Mightypeon posted:I was once working on something somewhat similiar in terms of the computational vision and opimisation things. OK, now I understand you, and I understand that you have good intentions. The stuff you mentioned makes sense, it's just that while I have no idea what the problems the project has to deal with are, the optimization related suggestions you give are pretty basic stuff they've certainly taken into account. I wish I could lead a constructive conversation on the subject, but beyond this point, I'd be pulling poo poo out of my rear end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yeah, but Obama, up until now, hasn't abandoned Bush's incredibly stupid policy of fast-tracking Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. I honestly think this crisis would not have happened if Obama had made that part of the Reset. Neither Ukraine nor Georgia have or had been fast tracked into NATO. This crisis would solely not have happened if Putin's pet dictator wasn't deposed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:MightyPeon, I have a direct question for you: Neither Russia nor the US are uniform in that matter. Some Russians play Poker, some play chess, For Americans it is the same. The kind of "chess" Russian decision makers play in IR terms is different from chess too. Chess is a game of certainities, if you take a piece, you always get that piece. Russian IR is quite aware that you are working with propabilities instead. In Russian IR chess, taking a pawn with a queen has a high chance of working, but bad luck may happen and the queen dies instead. You have differences between different factors on wether they want to maximize the odds of "really good outcomes" or minimize the "odds of really bad ones". FYI, Medvedev was of the former school, Putin is of the latter one. This isnt the only "poker like thing" that is actually quite present in Russian politics. You said that Russian politics is "winner takes it all", in some ways this isnt quite true. There are "oligarch classes" which are completely bloodless, so limited stake games certainly exist. Putin btw. went out of his way to encourage these kind of clashes at the expense of the more murderous variants. Some kind of "general agreement" of what constitutes "hej I just want some profits" and what consitutes "Hej, I am going to murder your friends and take your buisness" exists. Stuff can break down horribly when different sides have different conceptions on wether someone broke this threshold or not. Heck, things can already break down without that, but that gets into too many iterations. The thing is, this threshhold does also exist in their external policies. Stuff by other actors that is under that threshhold receives no hostile reaction, but once this threshhold is broken, all bets are off. Most powers have that threshhold, I think a major reason for the crisis is that Putins "they are going to murder me I must act now" threshhold was not where western leaders thought it was. Russian leadership reacts strongly to things western leaders would kind of ignore, and vice versa. A big reason why Russia and China is that their respective threshholds are the same. Thus they can interact and compete with each other without pissing the other off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Could we please not do this? It doesn't lend anything constructive to the discussion, and it's also a really lovely thing to say about somebody. Let me break it down for you. All of my relatives except for my parents live in Ukraine. Some or all of them might die once Putin gives the order. And this piece of poo poo is sitting in his computer chair at home watching all this and thinking "good for you Russia. You go girl." So can I maybe say some really lovely things about a person that sincerely supports my grandma becoming a civilian casualty, pretty please? FU MP In other news, Ukrainian soldiers somehow keep dying to Russian guns even after the ceasefire came into effect! What will those crazy Russians think of next. Present fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Majorian posted:NATO-chat and what you're describing here are all part of the same trend, at least as perceived by the Russians. It's the West drawing more and more of the traditional Russian sphere of influence into its own, from their perspective. And of course it remains a perpetual mystery to the Russians as to why anyone would want to get the gently caress out of their sphere of influence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Dilkington posted:It would be nice. But Russia doesn't give her love away for free. No, but it begs the question, what do you think will have the higher cost to US interests: having Russia as a thorn in its side in the Middle East, or doing what we can to ensure that Ukraine remains at least politically and strategically neutral? Nintendo Kid posted:Neither Ukraine nor Georgia have or had been fast tracked into NATO. The US supported Georgia and Ukraine for a Membership Action Plan. The only reason why they didn't get it was because France and Germany opposed it at the Bucharest Summit. Membership Action Plans are the fast track. quote:This crisis would solely not have happened if Putin's pet dictator wasn't deposed. True, but since most of us here are Westerners. So it makes sense to talk about what mistakes our own governments made in this mess. Kurnugia posted:And of course it remains a perpetual mystery to the Russians as to why anyone would want to get the gently caress out of their sphere of influence. I think they understand why. The problem is, most Americans (and Westerners in general) don't see Ukraine entering NATO and the EU as an expansion of our own sphere of influence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
Present posted:Let me break it down for you. All of my relatives except for my parents live in Ukraine. Some or all of them might die once Putin gives the order. And this piece of poo poo is sitting in his computer chair at home watching all this and thinking "good for you Russia. You go girl." So can I maybe say some really lovely things about a person that sincerely supports my grandma becoming a civilian casualty, pretty please? So chalk it up to him being ignorant, not to him being malicious. I'm tired of so many people on this forum assuming that every poster who disagrees with them does so out of ill intentions. I am sorry, by the way, to hear that so much of your family is in a dangerous situation. It's incredibly unfair that their lives and livelihoods are threatened so directly by Putin's underhandedness and aggression.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The US supported Georgia and Ukraine for a Membership Action Plan. The only reason why they didn't get it was because France and Germany opposed it at the Bucharest Summit. Membership Action Plans are the fast track. True, but the MAP was never approved and neither country gained that status. That they applied for it means nothing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
Majorian posted:So chalk it up to him being ignorant, not to him being malicious. I'm tired of so many people on this forum assuming that every poster who disagrees with them does so out of ill intentions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
I am honestly surprised the Russian crew on that mistral haven't just sailed off while on "sea trials"
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:True, but the MAP was never approved and neither country gained that status. That they applied for it means nothing. No, but it does mean something in that the US consistently and loudly supported them for it. I shouldn't be amazed that the Bush Administration didn't realize what signal they were sending by this, but God help me, I am. A Buttery Pastry posted:There's a point where ignorance becomes willful becomes malicious. Yes, but I don't believe MP has reached that point yet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:No, we should neither cheer on Russia nor is it justified in its actions. You really like building up absurd strawmen don't you? I agree with your general point, however I think it is valid to criticize Russia as choosing poor means to pursue its self-interest, not just from an ethical point of view, but from a consequentialist one. I don't see Russia's actions in Ukraine as benefitting them in the short or long term. More generally, mightypeon's posting patterns aren't consistent with argument in good faith. Dusty Baker 2 posted:Poor plucky little Russia. That custom title is really proving to be a good investment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
Majorian posted:
The membership action plan nomination was in no way a fast track. It's literally the normal track. Ukraine and Georgia had already reached the inensified dialogue stages and thus the MAP was the next step. The only mistake the western governments made was trusting Russian leadership to not be invasion happy morons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Hey mightypeon, what do you think is going to happen if NATO decides to give armed support to Ukraine? This of course assuming that the ceasefire doesn't hold, which it seems to be doing despite everything.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Majorian posted:No, but it does mean something in that the US consistently and loudly supported them for it. I shouldn't be amazed that the Bush Administration didn't realize what signal they were sending by this, but God help me, I am. quote:During a recent trip to Ukraine, U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden reaffirmed Ukraine's right to join NATO. I think they all knew exactly what signal they were sending. "gently caress you and your 'spheres of influence'" has been a consistent US policy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Majorian posted:No, but it begs the question, what do you think will have the higher cost to US interests: having Russia as a thorn in its side in the Middle East, or doing what we can to ensure that Ukraine remains at least politically and strategically neutral? If we're going to allow cynicism to rule the day, and make excuses for Russia's behavior in all this then I'd have to say the US doesn't lose much in that light. Driving a wedge between the EU and Russia would undermine Germany, putting US further along. Markets that Russia had could be taken by the US instead. A new cold war would drum up business for the military industrial complex. What's Russia going to do in the middle east? They're already selling weapons. They can't exactly put a bunch of Russian troops in Syria and call them local forces, and even if they did they would just be bombed like anything else. Sure, they could cause more air casulaties with their SAM's, but the US has more planes than god, and tactics to deal with the threat. If the world works like how some posters thinks it works, then there's no reason why the US shouldn't drive the rest of the west into a new cold war. Sure, a lot of people will die in the proxy battles, but they won't be anyone that matters in the 'game'.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yes, but I don't believe MP has reached that point yet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Kurnugia posted:Hey mightypeon, what do you think is going to happen if NATO decides to give armed support to Ukraine? This of course assuming that the ceasefire doesn't hold, which it seems to be doing despite everything. Define armed support.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:The membership action plan nomination was in no way a fast track. Actually, it is: quote:Bakradze said the sense of appeasement had been palpable at the NATO summit meeting in Bucharest this month, where alliance leaders refused to offer Georgia or Ukraine a Membership Action Plan, which puts a country on the fast track toward joining the alliance. Deteriorata posted:I think they all knew exactly what signal they were sending. "gently caress you and your 'spheres of influence'" has been a consistent US policy. The problem is, the US maintains its own spheres of influence. Killer-of-Lawyers posted:If we're going to allow cynicism to rule the day, and make excuses for Russia's behavior in all this Let me stop you there: I don't. I've been pretty clear that I consider the Kremlin to be the bad guys in this fiasco. My point is, the US and NATO made big mistakes that contributed to the crisis as well. quote:then I'd have to say the US doesn't lose much in that light. Driving a wedge between the EU and Russia would undermine Germany, putting US further along. I don't think the wedge between the EU and Russia will last long, though. Cheap fuel, unfortunately, sways votes in places like Germany and France. A Buttery Pastry posted:That's hardly surprising. I'm sure. Trying to understand your adversary is always a sign of weakness and duplicity, after all. Majorian fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Sep 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Yeah, but Obama, up until now, hasn't abandoned Bush's incredibly stupid policy of fast-tracking Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. I honestly think this crisis would not have happened if Obama had made that part of the Reset. I thought Ukraine joining NATO was derailed indefinitely after Yanuk shelved it three or four years ago, I forget. I don't know if some general was given a forgotten desk to keep lobbying for a reversal of this state of things as everyone else pivoted to China, but I don't think it was high on Obama's list of things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:I thought Ukraine joining NATO was derailed indefinitely after Yanuk shelved it three or four years ago, I forget. It was put on the back-burner once it became clear that France and Germany wouldn't stand for it, but the US has never really signaled that it's given up the dream.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
e: nevermind
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Actually, it is: Yeah, I understand where you're coming from, but a lot of the mistakes you talk about seem to be more in line with NATO and the US underestimating Russia and not playing the same game. If Russia is really like how MP, or the Russians say it is, then it doesn't seem like the sort of country that wouldn't go as far as it could. Since Russia cares so much about spheres and will do anything to get them, then it can't really expect everyone else to not act the same way. So I get what you are saying, but I don't believe that if we had kept our distance that things wouldn't have been the same, just further West in Eastern Europe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 11:05 |
|
|
Mightypeon posted:Define armed support. Military hardware I guess. Boots on the ground is probably not going to happen. Is it even possible for NATO to provide Ukraine with more help than it already does? Those NATO Mi-24's maybe? I don't even know, I'm not a military buff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2014 00:50
|
|