Eastern Europe: Poland rip in pis

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Eastern Europe: Poland rip in pis

«‹›10 »

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Rinkles posted:

No decisions yet regarding a larger NATO presence (American bases) inside the Baltic states and Poland, correct?

They're increasing NATO force presence in both.

# ¿ Sep 5, 2014 07:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 13:04

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

I'd argue that spheres of influence are an increasingly outdated concept in an era of :friedman: globalization, and that their primary use is now rhetorical.

# ¿ Sep 5, 2014 16:57

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Cripes. Huge Pubes, could we keep some sort of list of Thread Bad Actors in the OP that we could link to? Also, could you add straw man here to that list?

# ¿ Sep 6, 2014 05:10

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

jaete posted:

I've noticed that nobody is using the word invasion for Russia's, well, invasion of Ukraine. Why exactly is that?

The West is still trying to pretend it's not an invasion?

A lot of media outlets are now calling it an invasion.

# ¿ Sep 6, 2014 19:38

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian posted:

Nope, what I'm saying is that removing perceived security threats to Russia will make them less belligerent.

Oh man, it's a tone argument! I'm good at these!

The problem with applying response logic here is that Russian narratives and domestic politics are what is making Russia belligerent, what is making them perceive security threats. Russian "perception" isn't tied to external reality in a meaningful way.

# ¿ Sep 6, 2014 22:30

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Does a discussion of various governments secretly arming the Ukrainian government to fight a proxy war against Russia not count as Clancychat?

Generally, I think it's a valuable service to let anyone new to the thread know the names of the Russia apologists who tend to periodically reappear here. If everyone ignores them, new readers will make the mistake of thinking they have legitimate arguments or opinions.

# ¿ Sep 7, 2014 22:46

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

My Imaginary GF posted:

Making lists of known Russian apologists and publicizing their names....hmmm....sounds like a very Germanic or McCarthian thing to do.

You mean McCarthyite? Conceptually similar, I suppose, although it's more a social stigma effect than the material paranoia or actual harm of the McCarthy era. I'm not sure how long you've been in the thread, but mightypeon has a tendency to pop in for a set of conspiracy theories and RT talking points, and carry a couple new posters along with him until he gets shouted down when he says something particularly horrible. Then he stops posting for a couple days, only to reappear like a case of Russophile gonorrhea. He's the most persistent, but there are several similar posters who've trolled the thread along those lines, and letting people know who they are would save us a lot of time.

# ¿ Sep 7, 2014 22:59

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Rapey Joe Stalin posted:

Probably the same person who bought me this one. Although I am a bit gutted that I didn't warrant the effort of a picture.

Both of you were lucky.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 16:51

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Track and pattern poster IPs, especially duplicate sources. You've got a whole additional article there.

Also, invest in several backups and some really good hosting security- you're probably going to get attacked, if you haven't been already.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2014 18:16

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Both. The human mind is adaptable, and is very good at rationalizing an ideology that also serves the individual's self-interest. This is part of why paranoid schizophrenics can run sites selling different, conflicting conspiracy theories to other conspiracy theorists. Institutions can exploit this. If you pay someone to say something and give them a way to believe it, they will usually start believing it.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2014 22:33

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Based on a profile by Dave Weigel a couple months back, RT liked to pose as a credible agency to new journalism school graduates and sucker them in. Only once they got there and started work would they realize it was a propaganda outfit, at which point they were often unhireable (and as I mentioned before, getting paid to recite propaganda, and having an interest in your own self-esteem, is a great way to start drinking the kool-aid). Other journalists and journalism schools started warning people about the entity so it became harder for them to ~~dupe~~recruit from mainstream sources. About the same time, there was a management change, and RT started taking a more militantly oppositional approach. They basically don't bother trying to seem legitimate to others in the media now- they know there's still a crackpot anti-US subculture (see, e.g., Ted Rall from the Political Cartoons thread) on the left fringe that they can still speak to and recruit from.

# ¿ Sep 10, 2014 02:29

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Typo posted:

Ukraine will pretty much never be part of NATO now since Russia has just shown it can invade eastern Ukraine at will and nobody in NATO wants to commit themselves to a war with Russia. Donetsk and Luhansk might as well be Russian spheres of influences at the very least now and this will be an issue which allows Putin to destabilize politics in the rest of the country as well as making sure Ukraine will never ever be NATO material.

That's not how NATO works. If anything, demonstrating a willingness to invade non-NATO members makes NATO look more appealing.

# ¿ Sep 10, 2014 22:49

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian posted:

Who cares what looks appealing to non-NATO members, if NATO won't let them in?

What's your basis for saying this is the case? Does this apply to all countries?

# ¿ Sep 11, 2014 01:15

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

sum posted:

Does the reflex to defend the Ukrainian government no matter what turn off the parts of your brain that do critical thinking or what

Do you have an actual counterargument to the post you've selectively quoted?

# ¿ Sep 12, 2014 07:42

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

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

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian posted:

That's right guys, there's no policy of getting Georgia and Ukraine onto the Membership Action Plan since 2008...
It's actually kind of proven the opposite: that promising to expand NATO into Ukraine sooner rather than later makes them react aggressively.

You're self-refuting now, and you can't even tell. It's magnificent.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 03:39

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian posted:

The point is, the signal we're sending to Russia is that the US intends to encircle it. Whether or not that's what we're ACTUALLY trying to do (and I believe it isn't) is completely irrelevant; what matters is that our policy is sending threatening messages their way.

We're not sending Russia that signal. Russia's leadership is sending that signal- to their population, to justify their current political hegemony. Russia's government has, repeatedly, demonstrated its willingness to make the false claim of encirclement and interference regardless of all facts to the contrary, because that is how they continue to maintain legitimacy. As I said before, spheres of influence aren no longer a thing that policymakers believe in. They're a rhetorical tool.

Eastern Europe: It's not Homonazi if the Spheres don't Touch

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 04:43 on Sep 13, 2014

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 04:40

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

OK, let me rephrase. There is nothing that anyone, the US included, can do that the Russian government will not interpret and present as a threat.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 04:44

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

"encirclement", like "spheres of influence", is a rhetorical tool, not a reality. Russia is only encircled to the extent that it defines itself oppositionally. It defines itself oppositionally because it needs to do so to justify its domestic political order. The external world, and facts, don't matter, because these rhetorics continue to function in Russia's domestic order.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 05:13

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

The pulling the "West" did was literally being people who don't act like Russia. The entirety of Western "threats," their "encircling" "sphere of influence" was to cooperate with other countries and not be dicks.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 07:43

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Berke Negri posted:

All of this does make me kind of regret that there isn't a proper Mexican politics thread in D&D. I mean, I get it, that SA slants Northeast US and Western Europe, but there's a good deal what we're talking about in Eastern Europe that is familiar with the country directly south of America's border. I reject all the lazy "what if China moved into Mexico" hypotheticals, but the issues of oligarchs, sectarianism, violence, etc., are just as much issues down there and sorry if this is an out of blue comment but it's one of my genuine peeves with D&D. The next election won't be until 2018 though so I guess it is going to be awhile to really start a thread on it to get any attention.

Start a thread. I'll be there. I don't know much about Mexican politics (or Mexican anything, really) but I'm eager to learn.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 17:25

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Cliff Racer posted:

Don't worry, I don't know poo poo about Mexican politics either but I can sum up the hypothetical D&D thread for you anyways. The main right wing party is a bunch of corrupt, incompetent shitlords, their main ideologues are hooting morons and the awful country bumpkins who support them talk wrong and I am am glad I don't live near anyone who supports them (except, sadly, my parents .) I can't believe that they are pursuing *insert current hot button issue here*. This country is honestly the worst, awful, awful, awful. The main leftwing party is trying to do good but there are too many moderates in it. I'm voting for the Green Party (or Not-Quite Communist Party) instead. Here is a picture of some of their cute female politicians or supporters, probably with lovely tattoos.

Sadly I actually do know enough about Mexican politics to know that PRI doesn't actually fit neatly on a left to right spectrum but still its fun to mock the other D&D national threads.

edit: That proposed thread title sucks. Neither of the two things it references are good and at least with the homonazi stuff using that word is a sign that your post probably sucks. Surely we should put our best foot forward instead of our worst. Also Ukraine? Mykraine! Was a much better title.

I...I have no idea how to process this.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 18:31

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Wierre posted:

New webpage of the Hungarian President's Office: http://www.keh.hu/ spot the problem.

I don't see anything. Someone say what it is.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2014 19:19

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Has anyone seen Majorian and Mearsheimer in the same room at the same time?

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 03:11

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

What's the source for that photo purporting to be the contents of the "aid" truck?

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 03:42

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Bizarre, the tweet is actually saying that that truck is aid. The source is apparently Roman Kosarev, an employee of, surprise! RT.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 05:00

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian can't or won't distinguish Russian rhetoric surrounding its perception of NATO/EU/anyone who isn't Russia from the reality of their perception.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 17:04

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian posted:

You know, it's amazing - you make claims like these, but you don't back them up with expert opinions or anything like that, even when I do. Which is kind of like plugging your ears and going "lalalalala!" when somebody proves you wrong.

OK, let's try this then, since you're ignoring my actual arguments. A political theory based on a foundation of predicating action on self-interest is completely unfalsifiable, much like rational actor theories in economics. Any action can be justified as coming from self-interest, particularly if the analysis discounts alternate explanations and treats the country in question as a dehumanized monolithic entity.

I know you don't like responding to what people actually posting in the forum say, so here's some credentialed authority. The page for offensive realism on wikipedia has a lengthy, well-cited criticism section, one of the main parts of which is that the school of thought completely ignores the potential role of domestic politics in potentially explaining both perceptions, stated perceptions, and actions. You seem determined to do the same to any post which raises these structural issues.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 18:34

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian posted:

Here's where you're wrong: you mistakenly assume that realist analyses seek to justify anything. Political scientists aren't interested in justifying things. They're interested in explaining things.

It's not explanatory because it can't predict things. If self-interest can be used to explain any action, then it has no value as an explanatory tool. And you're still avoiding the central criticism of the theory, which is that it, and you, are ignoring the domestic political dimension-much as you've not addressed any posts by myself or others that raise it as an issue. To the extent that you address it, you do so by dismissing its relevance, or saying that it is sufficient that we should treat domestic political rhetoric as identical to government perceptions of international affairs.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 21:41

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Majorian posted:

That's a ridiculous statement. All political science schools of thought acknowledge that self interest plays a role in how states behave. Moreover, nobody is arguing that self-interest alone can explain how states behave. That's a ridiculously broad argument.

It is, which is why you've presented a number of variations of it all thread long. That said, the problem is not its breadth, but its unfalsifiability.

Majorian posted:

I've actually acknowledged that Putin has domestic incentives for invading Ukraine. It's kind of funny that you should accuse me of ignoring posts when you can't be bothered to read mine.

Your discussion of that, after having it pointed out to you for pages, has been to say "ok, it's a thing, but never mind that, it's insignificant, btw NATO is partially to blame for antagonizing Russia". There is nothing that will not antagonize Russia if anything anyone does can be constructed as a threat. By incorporating everything into Russian perceptions of threat, by blending domestic rhetoric with actual perceptions of self-interest, your claims about Western antagonism consume all other explanations. Like I and others have said in all those posts you don't actually respond to.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Sep 14, 2014

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 22:55

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

If it means he stops posting it here, so much the better.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 23:13

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

That's all right, I'm one of many. I look forward to not posting in, and therefore not getting my arguments misconstrued and ignored in, your separatist thread.

vvvvv Nope! We tried for pages. I'm not interested in continuing the cycle. Enjoy your thread!

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Sep 15, 2014

# ¿ Sep 14, 2014 23:51

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Mightypeon posted:

They could also try to actually depose the Oligarchs, instead of enshrining the rule of a fraction of them by giving them far more political and also economic power then they had pre Maidan.
According to Ruban, people from the East that later joined the Seperatists were on Maidan, on the side of the protestors.
For many of those, appointing frigging Kolomoisky as Duke/Despot of Donetsk was propably the breaking point.

Congratulations for further undermining any goodwill you have remaining. At some point I need to put together a masterpost of these comments from you.

# ¿ Sep 16, 2014 21:31

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Are we sure Russia is real, and not some elaborate TobleroneTriangular kind of thing on a global scale?

# ¿ Sep 17, 2014 21:49

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Sergiu64 posted:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/19/world/europe/ukraine-leader-urges-congress-to-arm-his-soldiers-against-russia.html?_r=0

It very much runs counter to the position I thought we'd seen Poroshenko taking.

# ¿ Sep 18, 2014 19:20

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

If the latter is the case it's a better sign in terms of his pragmatism than I'd hoped.

# ¿ Sep 18, 2014 19:34

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Cat Mattress posted:

Speaking of sanctions: How sanctions are hastening the world without the West

Just to mention it (I'm sure you knew, Cat Mattress, but I find it's helpful to make it explicit), this story is from a Russian government owned news agency, although it has a couple layers of obfuscation on it. The target audience appears to be english-speaking, previously sympathetic and business class.

For maximum irony, try this story from the same "newspaper".

# ¿ Sep 21, 2014 19:11

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

OddObserver posted:

They also magically assume that all the victims are Russian speakers.

We should think of them as Russian-speaking aspirants, for who wouldn't want to speak Russian!

# ¿ Sep 29, 2014 22:48

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Putin actually already being a lich would actually explain a lot of things in this whole mess. Who's up for a reworking of Tomb of Horrors set in the Kremlin?

# ¿ Oct 2, 2014 22:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 13:04

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

Volkerball posted:

Don't worry, guys. The whole divide between European democracy and Russian kleptocracy can be conquered. And you all know just the man to do it.

You got my hopes up for a quote from Bran Boyko.

# ¿ Oct 2, 2014 22:58

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Eastern Europe: Poland rip in pis

«‹›10 »