War, what is it good for?

[Octavious]

Yes, no-one is suggesting backing up Ukraine directly with US troops. I am only talking about other interventions to dissuade Russia from invading...including sending arms to Ukraine.

Yes, but there's rather a lot of scope in that. None military intervention can range from a load of hot air to quite significant sanctions, and people may object to differing elements for differing reasons. I'm afraid that we still haven't established who your extreme right are, by the way. A couple of right wing journalists, who don't seem all that extreme from what I've seen, and a senator without enthusiasm for foreign involvement does not an extreme right make.

[alexintour]

I think I can tell that here we can apply the meaning used in the rest of the world.
If someone is elected by the majority of the population, he is not a dictator.

If some third countries do not agree with that choice, is their problems. They can call it how they want, but the fact of the election does not change. And it is way more easier to fake an election in the US than in Russia. I can decide to name a pumpkin in a different way, but it'll only work inside my family and with the few people who agrees with that. The rest of the world would not even notice that.
You cannot be slightly pregnant, so lets not get into how much a dictator someone can be. Or if we do this, let's do this for Macron, and for Biden too.

To accurately consider everything would require too much time and writing I guess.

Corruption - it's intrinsic in the capitalistic system and in Russia there isn't more corruption than in many other countries (I'd even say there is a little bit less now). We can just remember the famous billions of Putins dollars in the west that no one has ever find (like the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq).

Repression - I can compare both sides news and I see way more repression in other countries. Just take what happens in Canada right now, and what the protesters get. In Russia they are learning only now the western way to treat this kind of protesters (everyone can check what treatment got Mr. Pavlensky in Russia and in France for the same performance and decide where the reaction is stronger), so we will slowly reach western levels in the future.

Threatening to invade Ukraine. I have lots of screens from 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 news with the same titles over and over again. Year after year. And this is not how you plan an invasion. This is more typical when playing Diplomacy you want to convince someone to get to your side: "hey, look, his is going to attack you soon".

I don't even start the Navalny question from jailing to "poisoning". Just want to notice that it seems russians have developed the less effective nervine agent in the hystory, that is even outclassed by a simple recent vaccine (it seems russians could have way more chances to kill Navalny by just letting him have a couple of Pfizer covid vaccine shots).

What I see in the last years is that the information tends to be more emotional and less based on facts. No more solid people like Kennan, but just TV shows to make you feel strong emotions and gain audience.
The problem is when you start to take serious decisions based on those emotions. When Blinken says that Russia is not fulfilling the Minsk agreement, the domestic audience understands him very good, but people who can read the actual agreements can check that it's not for Russia to fulfill them.

[Octavious]

You cannot be slightly pregnant

A small aside, but would you not say that a woman who was 8 months pregnant was more pregnant than a woman who has missed a period and suspects she might be pregnant? To be "very pregnant" is a commonly heard expression in English, so why not slightly pregnant?

And I would say that politics is a world that is almost purely built on grey areas. I will happily call China a dictatorship, yet they hold elections of a sort. Russia straddles the gap between democracy and dictatorship. I wouldn't call Putin a dictator myself, but I understand those who do.

[Octavious]

the sanctions policy that has been introduced against Russia has done more harm to Hungary than to Russia

Viktor Orban

Any EU sanctions on Russia should not hit energy

Mario Draghi

Some European Unity in action...

[alexintour]

A small aside, but would you not say that a woman who was 8 months pregnant was more pregnant than a woman who has missed a period and suspects she might be pregnant? To be "very pregnant" is a commonly heard expression in English, so why not slightly pregnant?

uhm.. perhaps I could have used the world partially instead of slightly.

The point was that you can be pregnant or not pregnant. You can not be half pregnant, or something in the grey area.
Of course someone can claim an almost pregnancy, or a very fully total mega pregnancy, but the meaning is always the presence (or not) of a zygote inside a uterus. No matter what kind of description you provide.

Some European Unity in action...

stupid things must always hurt. so people can understand how much stupid they are. or not.

Russian sanctions have cost Italy €4 billion, and 80,000 direct jobs lost.

Il sole 24 ore (feb 2017)

Keep going.

[flash2015]

He isn't a dictator in the full sense of the word, and indeed enjoys rather higher approval ratings from the public than those enjoyed by Macron, Boris, and Biden. If Russia had a free and fair election tomorrow there's little doubt that Putin would win it. But he's certainly veered rather heavily towards authoritarianism and has little respect for the true democracy experienced in the West.

I don't have time currently to comment on everything you have said.

However I have to comment on this part. Your definition of a "dictator" is VERY weird. A dictator is a person that is able to run government without any real power restrictions or as Britannica says "possesses absolute power without effective constitutional limitations". I would argue Putin fits this definition. Wouldn't you agree?

Determining whether someone is a dictator or not has absolutely nothing to do with how popular they are. Often dictators can be very popular, either because they are actually providing good government OR by being able to control the media to be able to paint themselves in the best possible light (Putin is more of the latter). This is what is often misunderstood about why dictatorial governments are often able to last for so long. Many people really don't understand this.

If you get down to it, on its own there is nothing inherent which suggests a dictator MUST even be evil. We even have a term for a "good" dictatorship:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship

Even democracies sometimes need to give governments "dictatorial" powers at times (e.g. emergency powers act, war act etc.) to be able to overcome specific threats or emergencies.

The important principle of course that absolute power, even if enabled for the best of intentions, will eventually turn corrupt. This is why it is so important that when enabled, it is important that it be of the most limited duration and scope possible.

[Octavious]

Your definition of a "dictator" is VERY weird

It's pretty standard, actually, but as I have not attempted to define "dictator" anywhere in this thread you are forgiven for not knowing this.

[flash2015]

Your definition of a "dictator" is VERY weird

It's pretty standard, actually, but as I have not attempted to define "dictator" anywhere in this thread you are forgiven for not knowing this.

It seemed to me that you were saying because he was popular, he wasn't a dictator in the "full sense of the word". Perhaps you can clarify? It helps to know that we are talking about the same thing.

[Octavious]

I am well aware that is what you concluded. You were very clear in showing that this is what you thought. I thought I was equally clear in indicating you were wrong. If not I apologise, and will attempt to show greater clarity as requested.

You were wrong.

I hope you find that satisfactory. I am unsure how much clearer I can make it.

[flash2015]

Your responses are really weird to what is a simple ask. Is this a riddle game?

If you have got an argument to make, why not elaborate?

[Octavious]

I have no interest in making an argument. What do you want to discuss? You thought that I believed being popular meant you didn't count as a dictator. You were wrong about that. You now know this. I'm a little baffled about what it is you want to argue about.

[Jamiet99uk]

Threatening to invade Ukraine. I have lots of screens from 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 news with the same titles over and over again. Year after year. And this is not how you plan an invasion. This is more typical when playing Diplomacy you want to convince someone to get to your side: "hey, look, his is going to attack you soon".

Well you were completely wrong, Alex.

Today Russia has invaded Ukraine.

A horrific violation of international norms which will bring death and suffering on a massive scale.

[alexintour]

I'm surprised, but I don't think (for now) I was completely wrong.

Considering the official information, so far it's a military operation to ensure national security. There is no evidence Russia will remain after the objectives of the intervention will be achieved.

I'm of course sad for the normal people involved, but it's not the first time a country (or a block of countries) have done such thing, and it will certainly not be the last one.

[Octavious]

I'm surprised, but I don't think (for now) I was completely wrong.

Considering the official information, so far it's a military operation to ensure national security. There is no evidence Russia will remain after the objectives of the intervention will be achieved.

I'm of course sad for the normal people involved, but it's not the first time a country (or a block of countries) have done such thing, and it will certainly not be the last one.

I'm not sure exactly how you could be less wrong, truth be told. In fairness with this latest post you're making for yourself an exciting opportunity to be more wrong, but purely in terms of established wrongness you're very much at the top of the tree.

Purely for the sake of argument, then, how exactly does Russia enhance its national security against a nation who has not only never attacked it, but even went to the trouble of unilaterally dismantling its nuclear deterrent by giving it to Russia? What possible security objective might the Russians have considering that Ukraine doesn't have anything to threaten Russia with? Is Putin in a desperate race against time to confiscate all of those German military hats before it's too late? Is the Ukrainian President really a Nazi hell bent on world domination who has brilliantly disguised himself as a Jewish television celebrity?

[flash2015]

Putin really is "taking the piss":

https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine ... putin-war/

EDIT: OK, I see this was already mentioned in the previous post.

[Josef IV]

I fully agree with Octavious here, Russian claims about the invasion are insane like always. Remeber Crymea - several days into that invasion, Russia was neglecting its army was involved, although things were so obvious to everyone... Now they are lying again - that is just a show for their own population and those who wish to believe and will ignore any facts about the real military situation.

And with respect to our game - opening Moscow to Ukraine might become a bit controversial...

[flash2015]

I have no interest in making an argument. What do you want to discuss? You thought that I believed being popular meant you didn't count as a dictator. You were wrong about that. You now know this. I'm a little baffled about what it is you want to argue about.

OK, given your evasiveness on this, that you won't clarify what your definition of a dictator is and why Putin isn't a dictator "in the full sense of the word" I can only assume that my original understanding was correct i.e. that you really didn't understand what a dictator is.

[Octavious]

Flash, mate, give it a rest. I have no enthusiasm for arguing with you about the definition of dictator, especially as you are unwilling to accept anything I say on the subject. If it makes you feel better by all means imagine that I believe that in order to be a dictator you have to wear either a beret or a bicorne hat, and enjoy the warm glow of smugness that comes from not sharing that belief. I do not care. I have zero interest in either your views or what you happen to believe about me. If you want to believe that you have won go ahead, give yourself a biscuit. Now, off you fuck.

[Jamiet99uk]

I'm surprised, but I don't think (for now) I was completely wrong.

You said Russia wasn't going to invade Ukraine.

Russia has invaded Ukraine.

[worcej]

I find it weird/interesting how the opponents to intervention have changed.

It used to be that the left used to be the ones that were most against intervention here...partially due to the left having the most pacifists/isolationists (though there were always some notable isolationists on the right too like Pat Buchanan - I have one of his books) and partially due to some having sympathizing with Russian "socialism".

Now partially due to internal political issues in the US (Mueller probe, Hunter Biden and Ukraine etc.) the extreme right are the ones now against intervention in Ukraine. Also since Trump saw himself as a strongman and who lauded strongmen, the extreme right are against intervention because they sympathize with Russia not for "socialism" but with the "strong man"/authoritarianism which Putin and Russia embodies.

I honestly don't find it weird because we've seen it so many times in US history. It's pretty standard for the party in power to have the other party go "all-in" to be vocally against the position that party takes in order to get an advantage for the next election if everything goes horribly wrong.