site banner
PaperclipPerfector  14d ago (text post)   1296 thread views

Transnational Thursday for October 17, 2024

Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

They might disintegrate if we did that - the battlefield situation is not looking very good even with continual spurts of aid.

There are already lots of angry Ukrainians who feel betrayed or deceived by the West, many of whom now have plentiful access to MANPADs, ATGMs, top-tier killer drones and experience using them. I wouldn't want to be the politician who is seen to pull the plug on these people.

This whole situation has become a complete disaster, I have a few shreds of sympathy for the Pentagon/State Department goons in charge of this operation. No matter what they decide on, there's going to be huge backblast. Steady-as-she-goes: Ukraine bleeds out on the battlefield. Cut and run: accusations of betrayal, the usual suspects shrieking 'with a bit of backbone we could've fought off the tyrannical rampage of this genocidal monster', Ukrainian collapse and decent probability of 'stabbed in the back' terror attacks. Pump up aid: military readiness declines further, escalation risks, Russia takes hostile actions elsewhere, still very unlikely Ukraine secures 2014 borders.

Of course, if the experts actually understood what they were doing we would never have rowed up shit creek at all.

Pump up aid: military readiness declines further, escalation risks, Russia takes hostile actions elsewhere, still very unlikely Ukraine secures 2014 borders.

I doubt more aid will really affect American military readiness, the bigger question is what the US gets back. Zelensky is not able to answer the big unspoken question: why should anyone help Ukraine win the war decisively?

There's option A: the US spends 100 billion dollars, Ukraine and Russia bleed out on the battlefield, at least one of them sells its prime assets to MNCs to fix the economy

And there's option B: the US spends 500 billion dollars, Ukraine kicks Russia out, at most one of them sells its prime assets to MNCs to fix the economy

Why spend more money on a potentially worse outcome?

B) also implies civil war in Russia

Not necessarily. A civil war requires competing elites, and Putin has been constantly pruning anything that could be considered a nascent counter-elite. Given how even Ukraine didn't really have a civil war I doubt Russia will. The PRC could support separatists in the Far East, but this would mean the bigger part of Russia would realign itself with the US, which not what they need.

Given how even Ukraine didn't really have a civil war I doubt Russia will.

Russia and Ukraine are having a civil war right now, it's just one that happens to straddle an existing border.

Don't forget in option B: Russian ethnics are dispossessed at least and massacred at worst in Crimea and DPR/LPR, with NATO weapons.

Russian ethnics are dispossessed at least and massacred at worst in

Russian ethnics are being dispossessed at least and massacred at worst in Ukraine right now, by Russians.

Yes but not, or at least only marginally, with US support and weapons.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats