Ukraine

[CM156]

I have a coworker with Russian friends, so I'm getting this information third-hand.
But he tells me that the mood in major urban centers in Russia is pessimistic. That the news has gone from "We're going to win" to "I hope they don't kick us out of the Donbas and Crimea, at least. We've got to hold on there."

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Man, Africa is going to be surprised.

Not as surprised as the Afrikaaners will be.

 

[Gergar12]

Just when I thought things were getting slow again.

There was some debate whether or not Ukraine would destroy the bridge and judging form how long it took they may have been some hesitant to do so.

The two reasons not to hit the bridge were one economic use after the war and two allowing a way for Russians to escape if or when they invade.

But despite those two factors Ukraine seem to have gone with it anyway

Edit: also on Putin birthday

I have been hearing that it's been repaired somewhat.

 

[Dalisclock]

I have a coworker with Russian friends, so I'm getting this information third-hand.
But he tells me that the mood in major urban centers in Russia is pessimistic. That the news has gone from "We're going to win" to "I hope they don't kick us out of the Donbas and Crimea, at least. We've got to hold on there."

I think "hope we don't get kicked out before Spring" might be the best they can hope for at this point. And at the rate Ukraine has advanced recently that might be unrealistic to consider at this point.

Vodka and a sausage can only keep you warm for so long in the winter and it must be said:

Winter is Coming.

 

[Bedinsis]

So now Russian state TV is claiming the bridge explosion was a declaration of war. And its like, who are you going to go to war with? Shitty engineering projects and Russia's own infamous lack of quality control and safety features? New footage shows the explosion came from underneath the bridge, where the gas pipes run.
Not saying US special forces couldn't have rigged it to blow, but the Russians are just as good at blowing their own stuff up accidently as we are doing it on purpose.

Others have already made the joke, but: does that mean that Russia is officially labeling the war a war now? I don't know if there's any significance to it but it is at least a bit interesting.

I think "hope we don't get kicked out before Spring" might be the best they can hope for at this point. And at the rate Ukraine has advanced recently that might be unrealistic to consider at this point.

Vodka and a sausage can only keep you warm for so long in the winter and it must be said:

Winter is Coming.

I don't follow. Russia normally delivers gas to Europe, which keeps their homes warm during the winter. Due to the war, they no longer deliver the gas. That means there ought to be plenty of gas to keep Russian homes warm once winter comes.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

That means there ought to be plenty of gas to keep Russian homes warm once winter comes.

They can also huddle around their burning armoured vehicles.

 

[Satinavian]

So now Russian state TV is claiming the bridge explosion was a declaration of war. And its like, who are you going to go to war with? Shitty engineering projects and Russia's own infamous lack of quality control and safety features? New footage shows the explosion came from underneath the bridge, where the gas pipes run.
Not saying US special forces couldn't have rigged it to blow, but the Russians are just as good at blowing their own stuff up accidently as we are doing it on purpose.

The "War against Terror" was stupid the first time around, but sure, why not copy it to justify war-footing without ever declaring/acknowledging a war against a country.

 

[Thaluikhain]

While rail lines are certainly hard to permanently destroy, bridges in general tend to be pretty fragile. While it's possible the damage there is superficial, they're definately going to want to give it a proper check before sending 10,000 ton freight trains over it.

Oh sure, absolutely.

Though, given past events, wouldn't be too surprised if they didn't and being on the first train over the bridge wasn't a fun experience.

 

[Silvanus]

Let's just not let that inconvenient fact they were both created by Svoboda and have the same leaders confuse us. "Foundation for the Future" is to what S14 "rebranded", as the youth "activist" wing of Svoboda. They can call themselves Mary, Queen of Scots, for all it matters, they're still fucking neo-Nazis.

"They clearly can't be Nazis, they're only roughly analogous to the Hitler Youth! Theyre the, uh, Stepan Bandera youth!"

I'm... not saying they're not Nazis. Never have. What are you even blathering on about?

No, you may rest entirely assured nothing has "flown over" my head. You're just openly caping for Nazis at this point because the BBC told you to, and don't want to admit it.

Absolute fucking drivel. Nowhere-- absolutely nowhere-- have I denied that they're Nazis, or defended anything they've done.

You insinuated that the Sich Battalion, a neo-Nazi group, must be connected to the Sich movement as a whole. I pointed out that the wider, older 'Sich' movement actually is fucking unrelated, and that it's ironic you've sarcastically invoked an example that stands in opposition to your own point.

Where's the "caping" here, exactly? How is it "caping for Nazis" to point out that a bunch of early twentieth century Socialist groups are unrelated to them, you clown?

See earlier point about how Nazis would never, ever culturally appropriate to legitimize themselves, and weasel their way into popular support by performance and optics.

Of course they would. Do you believe that this somehow retroactively makes the Sich movements of the early 1900s connected to neo-Nazism? Even the ones that existed before the damn Nazi party existed?

 

[Eacaraxe]

Absolute fucking drivel. Nowhere-- absolutely nowhere-- have I denied that they're Nazis, or defended anything they've done.

Then what's your actual point, here?

...and that it's ironic you've sarcastically invoked an example that stands in opposition to your own point.

Or, you're just putting words in my mouth because you're pissed I'm continuing to point out there are, in fact, Nazis in Ukraine. Despite having just admitted you knew exactly what I was talking about, and the context of what I was talking about. That Nazis culturally appropriate to legitimize themselves was my entire point. The only reason the battalion's origins is "unclear", as I stated, is because that is precisely what they have done -- and Western media has chosen to perpetuate that (bad) kayfabe.

The American analog to this would be if Southern conservative evangelicals started a non-prof called John Brown's Kountry Kitchen Krusaders, that branded itself as a charity fighting food insecurity in the South...and American media just spontaneously went "boy there sure is a lot of food insecurity in the South! We're certainly lucky to have the Kountry Kitchen Krusaders filling hungry bellies in deeply impoverished parts of the US!".

Either you agree with me, or you're just trying to muddy the waters for the sake of argument, to push the thread away from the reality there are Nazis in Ukraine.

 

[Terminal Blue]

The American analog to this would be if Southern conservative evangelicals started a non-prof called John Brown's Kountry Kitchen Krusaders, that branded itself as a charity fighting food insecurity in the South...and American media just spontaneously went "boy there sure is a lot of food insecurity in the South! We're certainly lucky to have the Kountry Kitchen Krusaders filling hungry bellies in deeply impoverished parts of the US!".

Honestly, it's more like an American neo-Nazi group calling itself "the Alamo club" and then a few years later someone comes in and decide that the any reference to the Alamo past or present must be an admission of Nazi ideology.

I have no idea which of you is right and I'm not really invested enough to find out, but "sich" is not an unimportant or uncommon word in reference to Ukrainian history or nationalism.

Either you agree with me, or you're just trying to muddy the waters for the sake of argument, to push the thread away from the reality there are Nazis in Ukraine.

Oh no, there are Nazis in Ukraine!

Oh my god, I'm so shocked. I can't believe Nazis exist outside of western Europe and the USA.

Next you'll be telling me there are Nazis in Russia and Dmitry Utkin isn't just a huge Kiss fan.

 

[Silvanus]

Then what's your actual point, here?

That the Sich Battalion is unrelated to the wider Sich movements.

You implied they had to be connected, and I pointed out that's not true. That was the extent of the point, until you went off the deep end throwing fascist slurs.

Or, you're just putting words in my mouth because you're pissed I'm continuing to point out there are, in fact, Nazis in Ukraine.
[...]
Either you agree with me, or you're just trying to muddy the waters for the sake of argument, to push the thread away from the reality there are Nazis in Ukraine.

Why would I be "pissed" about something that I've also said from the start, and is fucking obvious to everyone? I've said nothing that could be construed that way by any reasonable reader.

You made a mistake which associated a bunch of early-1900s Socialists with the Nazis. I corrected it, and then you bizarrely insisted that the only reason anyone would correct that mistake is if they're a fascist themselves.

 

[Avnger]

Next you'll be telling me there are Nazis in Russia and Dmitry Utkin isn't just a huge Kiss fan.

Woah now. Sounds like you haven't read your Theory (tm). Mighty Russia opposes the fascist US empire and its vassal states. It is therefore, by definition, good and, again by definition, cannot have any Nazis within it. You're not a shitlib, are you?

/s of course

 

[Eacaraxe]

Honestly, it's more like an American neo-Nazi group calling itself "the Alamo club" and then a few years later someone comes in and decide that the any reference to the Alamo past or present must be an admission of Nazi ideology.

Sure, if they renamed themselves "the Alamo youth" and spontaneously started a second group, "the Alamo militia", and a few years later a whole lot of people try saying "the Alamo militia" is a completely different organization with no pedigree linking themselves back to "the Alamo club", and expect to be taken seriously.

You implied they had to be connected, and I pointed out that's not true. That was the extent of the point, until you went off the deep end throwing fascist slurs.

Actually, what I said was,

Kind of like how it's "unclear" how the Sich battalion is connected to the Sich movement.

That is to say, it's "unclear" in the sense neo-Nazis are culturally appropriating shit to legitimize themselves and hide their actual origin. It's a damn dog whistle, and I know for plain fact you not only know what that is, but how right-wing extremists use dog whistles to engage in and normalize extremist ideology whilst preserving a facade of legitimacy. Your "gotcha!" moment was the literal point I was making in the first place.

You made a mistake which associated a bunch of early-1900s Socialists with the Nazis. I corrected it, and then you bizarrely insisted that the only reason anyone would correct that mistake is if they're a fascist themselves.

Yes, that would be how dog whistle politics work. If we were having a conversation instead about social welfare programs and what Reagan really meant by "welfare queens", you'd be playing the role of tstorm in here saying "he didn't say black people, welfare queens can be white too!".

 

[Silvanus]

That is to say, it's "unclear" in the sense neo-Nazis are culturally appropriating shit to legitimize themselves and hide their actual origin. It's a damn dog whistle, and I know for plain fact you not only know what that is, but how right-wing extremists use dog whistles to engage in and normalize extremist ideology whilst preserving a facade of legitimacy. Your "gotcha!" moment was the literal point I was making in the first place.

That doesn't even make sense in context.

Terminal's original argument was that it's unclear how "connected" the Azov Battalion is to the civilian Azov movements. "Connected" here obviously doesn't mean "culturally appropriating" the civilian Azov movement, because that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. "Connected" here means that there's an unknown amount of crossover between the two groups.

Yes, that would be how dog whistle politics work. If we were having a conversation instead about social welfare programs and what Reagan really meant by "welfare queens", you'd be playing the role of tstorm in here saying "he didn't say black people, welfare queens can be white too!".

Except for the fact that absolutely nothing I said defended the perspective of any of these people, unlike your example. That's all brainworm shit you've projected onto it afterwards for a cheap slur.

 

[Eacaraxe]

Terminal's original argument was that it's unclear how "connected" the Azov Battalion is to the civilian Azov movements.

And it's still true, because any lack of clarity is the direct result of concerted efforts to obfuscate both groups' neo-Nazism in order to legitimize them. In other words, it's absolutely clear what the pedigree is for both of these groups, save for the fact it's become politically inconvenient to look reality in the eye and speak truth about it.

Azov Battlion's founder and first commanding officer is Andriy Biletsky, whose documented history of extreme right and neo-Nazi activism dates back to 2002, when he was member of Tryzub (which became Right Sector) and SNPU (which changed its name from the Social-National Party of Ukraine to Svoboda, when they figured out having "National Socialist" in their name perhaps wasn't the best optics).

The exact same people form an organization with the exact same politics, the exact same methodology, the exact same rhetoric, the exact same symbology, and the exact same name, yet we're to believe it's somehow "unclear" how connected they are? Give me a break. This really is getting into Monty Python "Mister Hilter and the National Bocialist party" absurdity.

"Connected" here obviously doesn't mean "culturally appropriating" the civilian Azov movement, because that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. "Connected" here means that there's an unknown amount of crossover between the two groups.

No, the exact amount of crossover is quite clear. We've just chosen to pretend it isn't, because it's inconvenient truth.

Except for the fact that absolutely nothing I said defended the perspective of any of these people, unlike your example.

You mean other than playing to that deliberate obfuscation to legitimize neo-Nazis?

 

[Silvanus]

No, the exact amount of crossover is quite clear. We've just chosen to pretend it isn't, because it's inconvenient truth.

So you actually weren't just talking about one just "culturally appropriating" the other. Glad we've got that sorted out. Does make it seem like you just forgot that was the defence you were mounting, though.

....Which then brings us back to the fact that you chose to imply that the Sich Battalion and the wider Sich movements were similarly connected. Which is patently false.

Did you forget that that was the only thing I weighed in on here? The mistake you made in smearing a bunch of socialist community groups that existed before the Nazi Party ever did as Nazis?

You mean other than playing to that deliberate obfuscation to legitimize neo-Nazis?

Pointing out that a bunch of early 1900s movements are unrelated to the Nazis is "obfuscation" how?

You threw a smear. It was factually incorrect. I'm sorry about that, but it doesn't somehow make anybody who points it out a Nazi, you utter goon.

 

[Eacaraxe]

So you actually weren't just talking about one just "culturally appropriating" the other. Glad we've got that sorted out. Does make it seem like you just forgot that was the defence you were mounting, though.

I wasn't just talking about cultural appropriation. I was talking about how neo-Nazis obfuscate themselves for legitimacy. Cultural appropriation is one tool in their toolkit.

Just like Azov, Sich's "origins" and "connections" are "unclear" because they're (poorly) hidden. It's geopolitical kayfabe, except in this circumstance we're not talking about Vince McMahon wearing a stupid hooded robe, we're talking about genocidal extremists embodying the most despicable and dangerous ideology in human history, who happen to be running around eastern Europe packing serious fucking heat and bull baiting a nuclear war on US/NATO dole.

Are we clear?

....Which then brings us back to the fact that you chose to imply that the Sich Battalion and the wider Sich movements were similarly connected. Which is patently false.

I implied nothing. You read shit into my statement and put words in my mouth because you're buttmad I'm calling Nazis, Nazis -- and called you out for having caped for them for 145 pages of thread, now. You can try to play semantics all you like, it's not going to distract me or derail me from calling Nazis, Nazis.

 

[Dalisclock]

I don't follow. Russia normally delivers gas to Europe, which keeps their homes warm during the winter. Due to the war, they no longer deliver the gas. That means there ought to be plenty of gas to keep Russian homes warm once winter comes.

It's not the Russian homes I was referring to. It's the Russian troops at the end of logistics train that can't seem to keep them going at the best of times, least of all when Ukraine keeps yoinking their supply crossroads and blowing up their ammo dumps and bridges. In the middle of an occupied country that fucking hates their guts because of the Warcriming.

Those guys are gonna be really cold this winter. And Hungry. With Rusty Ak's.

 

[Terminal Blue]

And it's still true, because any lack of clarity is the direct result of concerted efforts to obfuscate both groups' neo-Nazism in order to legitimize them.

Azov was a neo-Nazi militia for a few months. It has been a national guard regiment for coming up to a decade.

Part of being a national guard regiment is that you can't choose officers on the basis of political loyalty. You can't select recruits on the basis of their political beliefs. You can't recruit people without citizenship (in peacetime at least). Even without the deliberate purging of the membership following incorporation, you would expect to see some degree of depoliticization.

Is that depoliticization complete? The answer is unquestionably no. But claiming that this group has somehow managed to perfectly retain its political identity for years while also being an incorporated national guard regiment and despite deliberate membership purges isn't a whole lot more plausible.

In other words, it's absolutely clear what the pedigree is for both of these groups, save for the fact it's become politically inconvenient to look reality in the eye and speak truth about it.

It hasn't become remotely inconvenient.

The exact same people form an organization with the exact same politics, the exact same methodology, the exact same rhetoric, the exact same symbology, and the exact same name, yet we're to believe it's somehow "unclear" how connected they are?

In the case of Azov, yes.

Because many of those "exact same people" either left or were forced out and replaced by people who weren't the exact same people. Because the organization was significantly enlarged into a standard military formation through open recruiting from the civilian population. Because many of those people have now died and been replaced, again, by more people who are drawn from the civilian population. Because the rhetoric, while still undeniably present, has been largely excised from the collective identity of the group itself. Because the symbolism (while still extremely sus) has undergone significant alteration seemingly in an attempt to distance itself from the symbolism used by those "exact same people".

We are living in 2022 not 2014, and thus there remains an open question of what degree those "exact same people" still have influence over the organization they created in 2014. The historical connection is not ambiguous, but the present one is.

No, the exact amount of crossover is quite clear. We've just chosen to pretend it isn't, because it's inconvenient truth.

Again, none of this is remotely inconvenient.

I live under the assumption that all volunteer military forces, police departments and positions that allow for the use of force and the abuse of power are full of neo-Nazis. That assumption has never failed me.