This just has the same affect as all the previous similar pro-Russian predictions and accountings I've read. Always the same terse, affected style, supposed to convey an image of brute realism (very unlike those pro-Ukrainians who are so soyjack and Reddit in their childish enthusiasm and with their memes! Adults speaking here!)... and that realism always ends up being that this time Russians are just on the cusp of total victory and destruction of the Ukrainian army.
The fact that pro-Russian sources have been making similar prognosis for the entirety of the war is not mentioned, or if it is, it's excused as merely a result of Western support and "mercenaries" (we're just going to use that word to describe all volunteer foreign or returnee troops in a conflict from here on, aren't we?) or by Russia holding itself back from sheer kindness or incompetence... and now all that is ending, and the inevitable victory is on the way, and in a few months we'll lather, rinse, repeat. Of course pro-Ukrainian sources do the same - the ever-starting Kherson offensive and so on.
Of course it's always possible that Russians will eventually win, even in the coming months, wars often hinge on factors not currently visible, but this analysis doesn't really offer anything that hasn't been seen before or would convince me it's more than usual pro-Russia boosterism. Why feature it at all?
I made a bunch of predictions at the old forum, at least.
At this point it looks like I actually overestimated Russia's drive - I thought they'd reach Kramatorsk, and ceasefire would probably also require more yielding from Ukraine, at this point. Of course there's still two months left.
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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
This just has the same affect as all the previous similar pro-Russian predictions and accountings I've read. Always the same terse, affected style, supposed to convey an image of brute realism (very unlike those pro-Ukrainians who are so soyjack and Reddit in their childish enthusiasm and with their memes! Adults speaking here!)... and that realism always ends up being that this time Russians are just on the cusp of total victory and destruction of the Ukrainian army.
The fact that pro-Russian sources have been making similar prognosis for the entirety of the war is not mentioned, or if it is, it's excused as merely a result of Western support and "mercenaries" (we're just going to use that word to describe all volunteer foreign or returnee troops in a conflict from here on, aren't we?) or by Russia holding itself back from sheer kindness or incompetence... and now all that is ending, and the inevitable victory is on the way, and in a few months we'll lather, rinse, repeat. Of course pro-Ukrainian sources do the same - the ever-starting Kherson offensive and so on.
Of course it's always possible that Russians will eventually win, even in the coming months, wars often hinge on factors not currently visible, but this analysis doesn't really offer anything that hasn't been seen before or would convince me it's more than usual pro-Russia boosterism. Why feature it at all?
This could be solved by offering bets. In particular, Insight Prediction has a bunch of liquid markets: https://insightprediction.com/c/5/russia-ukraine
I made a bunch of predictions at the old forum, at least.
At this point it looks like I actually overestimated Russia's drive - I thought they'd reach Kramatorsk, and ceasefire would probably also require more yielding from Ukraine, at this point. Of course there's still two months left.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link