I am sorry, you all aren’t “anti war protesters”, you are dangerous propagandists who are literally making a mockery of the anti war movement. I have never had the pleasure of responding to 🇷🇺 ridiculous internet disinformation in person before. Thank you for the opportunity ✌🏽 https://t.co/xzTLQCymgO— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) October 28, 2022
Yes, my favorite resource on the conflict so far (so much so that I typed the url from memory without looking it up) was published in April by a Swiss Colonel and former NATO advisor who actually worked with the Ukrainian army in 2014. He provides important background on the progress of the civil war in the Donbass, the composition of the Ukrainian armed forces, the OSCE observations I alluded to, and more.
***Unfortunately it also contains disinformation about the Holodomor, but that isn't germane to the current situation.
He was interviewed by Aaron Mate on Pushback, which incenses me whenever I see Aaron ignoring this fact as well.
Edit: I think it's important because the entire framing of this conflict in the western imaginarium has been that Putin is the aggressor. It hasn't been true at any step of the way. But to admit that the Ukrainians started the shooting in February would be to ask why all their forces were sitting on the contact line in the Donbass rather than in defensive positions along the Russian border. Why were they mounting an offensive? That would then ask us to explore the deeper roots of this conflict, like why the LDNR are trying to separate from the Kiev regime. Why are miners and factory workers organizing into militias and asking the big bad Russian army for assistance? Can it be that they didn't feel they were dignified by the "revolution of dignity" back in 2014? But if that revolution wasn't representative of all the Ukrainian people then who DID it represent?
I remember watching the intensifying attacks on the Donbas, in what seemed like an effort to provoke a Russian response. I thought that maybe there was an accusation of an attack on Russian territory.
Follow up observation: I don't think it actually matters who shot first. Let me know if I'm way off base here, but Putin is bad for using right wing culture war and violence to redirect class resentment away from the rich (like a western politician), not because he intervened in a humanitarian crisis happening on the Russian border and disrupted NATO's ability to limit the autonomy of the people Russia.
I think that's what I was getting at. Putin is bad because he's a capitalist and boes capitalist things. That's essentially my definition of a "bad guy". However, regardless of his motivation, the intervention in Ukraine is probably for the best.
This is interesting. Can you give a link or elaborate?
Yes, my favorite resource on the conflict so far (so much so that I typed the url from memory without looking it up) was published in April by a Swiss Colonel and former NATO advisor who actually worked with the Ukrainian army in 2014. He provides important background on the progress of the civil war in the Donbass, the composition of the Ukrainian armed forces, the OSCE observations I alluded to, and more.
***Unfortunately it also contains disinformation about the Holodomor, but that isn't germane to the current situation.
He was interviewed by Aaron Mate on Pushback, which incenses me whenever I see Aaron ignoring this fact as well.
https://www.thepostil.com/the-military-situation-in-the-ukraine
Edit: I think it's important because the entire framing of this conflict in the western imaginarium has been that Putin is the aggressor. It hasn't been true at any step of the way. But to admit that the Ukrainians started the shooting in February would be to ask why all their forces were sitting on the contact line in the Donbass rather than in defensive positions along the Russian border. Why were they mounting an offensive? That would then ask us to explore the deeper roots of this conflict, like why the LDNR are trying to separate from the Kiev regime. Why are miners and factory workers organizing into militias and asking the big bad Russian army for assistance? Can it be that they didn't feel they were dignified by the "revolution of dignity" back in 2014? But if that revolution wasn't representative of all the Ukrainian people then who DID it represent?
deleted by creator
I remember watching the intensifying attacks on the Donbas, in what seemed like an effort to provoke a Russian response. I thought that maybe there was an accusation of an attack on Russian territory.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Follow up observation: I don't think it actually matters who shot first. Let me know if I'm way off base here, but Putin is bad for using right wing culture war and violence to redirect class resentment away from the rich (like a western politician), not because he intervened in a humanitarian crisis happening on the Russian border and disrupted NATO's ability to limit the autonomy of the people Russia.
deleted by creator
I think that's what I was getting at. Putin is bad because he's a capitalist and boes capitalist things. That's essentially my definition of a "bad guy". However, regardless of his motivation, the intervention in Ukraine is probably for the best.
please consult this https://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/reports?page=2
Removed by mod
https://www.osce.org/special-monitoring-mission-to-ukraine/512872
here you can see the data ,t the raw data
https://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/reports?page=2
Hell yeah, the raw intelligence!
the pure raw organic mother seed