Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[AUS-97HORN 11558]

11 minutes ago, drt said:

I think if we don’t lead the way things fall apart. 

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11587]

Mere anarchy in Poland when they see this. 
 

 

[SL Xpress 7492]

Just now, B00M said:

it’s fucking infuriating. If nothing else congress needs to fucking consider the ramifications of Russia capturing Patriot missile systems 

I have to admit that's pretty far down my list of priorities in terms of what a colossal fuckup it would be. To me it's like saying we shouldn't have supported Khomeini over the Shah because look at all the modern American military equipment Iran ended up getting access to. 

[atomheartbevo 89096]

26 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Mere anarchy in Poland when they see this. 

Just like he did a great job of pushing Finland and Sweden into NATO with his comments about not stopping with Ukraine, Putin has done a great job of helping Poland justify their aid to Ukraine as well as building up the Polish military with that one little “interview”.  Especially since on September 29, 1939, the Soviet Union divided Poland with Germany.  Putin left that detail out, but the Poles haven’t forgotten.

4 minutes ago, B00M said:

it’s fucking infuriating. If nothing else congress needs to fucking consider the ramifications of Russia capturing Patriot missile systems 

I assume that the Russians have had access to anything we sold to the Saudis. 

[B00M 6045]

29 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I have to admit that's pretty far down my list of priorities in terms of what a colossal fuckup it would be. To me it's like saying we shouldn't have supported Khomeini over the Shah because look at all the modern American military equipment Iran ended up getting access to. 

I agree, i was just grasping for anything that might motivate team America 

[Schulz2.0 28657]

 

 

 

[atomheartbevo 89096]

Speaking of drone supplies and repairs, that post above leads to a story from November about Putin’s daughter getting a stake in drone manufacturing.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/24814

 

[Parliament 14027]

26 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

...about Putin’s daughter...

 

So...about her...

[atomheartbevo 89096]

46 minutes ago, Parliament said:

So...about her...

Creepy how much she looks like him.

[F250 28551]

1 hour ago, Parliament said:

So...about her...

That's Sophia the robot with a wig.

 

[staboner 4943]

man. that video on the coke plant ~4 posts up. The trees. Fucking hell, sorry Mother. Bill Hicks was right - we are a virus with shoes. 

[wd40 1976]

21 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

and then the arabs came, and they bought mercedes-benzes...

[Schulz2.0 28657]

 

 

[Viper 11956]

A serious analysis of Putin's interview from a GWU ph.D professor. He has a good theory that Putin is an increasingly history obsessed boomer who doesn't understand why the rest of the world doesn't see everything the way he does. 

 

A few thoughts on the Tucker-Putin interview:

Having watched the interview last night, I've been very interested in seeing the reaction here on this site. A lot of people have focused on 'Putin as an autistic history nerd' (good memes here), while others have stuck to variations on 'look how his history is a lie and bizarre and strange' or 'he whiffed the PR opportunity and didn't give MAGA anything.' 

Ok. The former is funny, the middle is standard signaling and positioning, and the latter is US politics brain. Fine! But there's really tremendous data in here if we want to look seriously. Some points below. 

First, the most important thing is indeed the half-hour history lesson. Not only did Putin start with this, and refuse to be interrupted, he even made a big show of gifting documents supporting his arguments to Tucker. What this tells us is that the history component to the Russo-Ukrainian War is not just a point of legitimation or a general casus belli, but the motivating factor for VVP personally. That's really big! 

I've argued for a year now that we should understand the proximate cause of the war to be Vladimir Putin's deepening historical obsessions, his sense of personal grievance, and the unique isolation that allowed this to fester in the runup to 2022. You can find an article making that case here: ridl.io/putin-s-agency…. If you've taken my undergraduate course on Russian Politics, it's there as well. This interview is strong supporting data for that framing. Note how often Putin dismisses NATO expansion as the reason for action, as well as how much he does not care about Ukrainian democracy qua democracy. He doesn't even think it is a democracy (note the coup discussions). 

Rather, he's clearly motivated - then and now - by historical concerns most of all. And this is important, which some observers may not quite get. He was not always like this! That is, the long rants about history that justify political action have become more and more common in the last ten years, and especially the last four or five. Which fits a model of growing obsession - which, incidentally, also aligns well with Putin's post-2012 sense that only he can stably rule Russia, and that he wants to bequeath a legacy. Tucker wasn't able to get an answer to the core question - why 2022 and not earlier - but this is good material for a obsession interpretation. 

Second, another element that came out strongly was Putin's sense of personal insult and snubbing. He is butthurt by his world leader colleagues. We have dozens of minutes of him talking about the Bushes, about documents signed by the French and Germans, about negotiations generally - all of which end with Russia not getting what was promised or it expected. That could be read simply as justification for Russia's actions (i.e., the hypocrisy of the West) but what is mostly communicated, verbally and through body language, is that Putin himself feels slighted, and that he does not understand why others do not see the world, and the consequences of events, as clearly as he does. This is also quite interesting. 

There is very little reason to believe this interview is anything less than the sincere views of Putin himself, as a smarter-than-average Russian boomer who is trying to explain why he's right, why he's been aggrieved, and why the other sides are just so stupid and shortsighted. He's booming really hard, it's very evident. He's not sharing everything, but he's telling you that he's not sharing everything with a knowing, paternalistic smile while he says it. And he really wants to get it through your thick skull what actually matters. Rurik, Yaroslav the Wise, 1654, Bohdan Khmelnitsky, the Soviet Union and the border changes, leaders just not being reasonable, etc etc. 

Third, I don't think we can understand this interview as some sort of functionalist strategic communication exercise at all. VVP clearly did not care to talk about US political issues, he did not "throw red meat to MAGA" or whatever, he did not rise to the bait several times to get on a cleaner messaging narrative that would sell with an international audience of illiberal or West-skeptical types. At all! It was the above, which means this interview was about what Vladimir Putin himself thought rather than what he thought would sell best. That's incredibly unusual for an interview like this.  

We didn't get anything about cancel culture, or gender ideology, or Biden being senile, or the US being this evil tentacled hegemon that threatens global peace. He was actually incredibly circumspect on that sort of thing. Much more so than in other venues in the recent past. This was Putin as pedagogue-in-chief, trying to educate Tucker not only about history, but also about how the world actually works. Look to the wandering discussion on the Orange Revolution, Yanukovych, the various negotiations, for that. The personal resentment comes out here in a distinct way, as disappointment and confusion as to why other international partners just don't get it the way VVP does. 

Truly, the most framed or set-up part of this interview was the point about the spring 2022 negotiations (note his arg that instead of the Battle of Kyiv being lost, it was a part of a negotiation that got cut short by Johnson's intervention - an interesting assertion). And Tucker got him to talk about future potential negotiations as well. That was also enlightening, as it reiterated Putin's world-weary points that the other side doesn't get it and is stubborn, and that there is a 'reasonable' way out if only leaders would be clear-eyed. 

This is important to keep in mind, especially as Putin seems quite confident the war is going well enough that he can just wait for negotiations to inevitably appear. Also note his regular recourse to proceduralism - negotiations are detailed, complicated, have many moving parts. The bureaucratic KGB and legal background always shines through with Putin at the end of the day. 

Finally, as I've noted, this interview was pretty strange. Tucker tried to move things in a way that fit his own views (NATO expansion, the 'who runs the US' question, demonic forces on earth (?)), which was pretty cringe. But he actually did a decent job overall (sorry!). He asked about Gershkovich and pushed fairly hard all things considered, he got steamrolled by VVP but managed to barely hold on given the very meandering discussion (Putin's framing of 2004 and 2013-14 is genuinely difficult to understand if you don't already know the events quite well), he didn't crash the interview so bad that it ended early, he figured out he had a unique opportunity to let Putin talk, and in doing so he provided us a unique window into VVP. 

It turns out that Putin says the same thing to Tucker as he does to Ru journos, with even more Putinsplaining. Which is illuminating! The history thing is the real deal, as is his belief that negotiations (in Russia's favor and in accordance with Putin's own sense of what is reasonable) are possible. Both of these things are really important for us to get at analytically. 

I'm still thinking about this, but those are some topline takeaways as I process it this morning.

Edited February 10 by Viper

[Schulz2.0 28657]

[Schulz2.0 28657]

20 minutes ago, Viper said:

A serious analysis of Putin's interview from a GWU ph.D professor. He has a good theory that Putin is an increasingly history obsessed boomer who doesn't understand why the rest of the world doesn't see everything the way he does. 

 

A few thoughts on the Tucker-Putin interview:

Having watched the interview last night, I've been very interested in seeing the reaction here on this site. A lot of people have focused on 'Putin as an autistic history nerd' (good memes here), while others have stuck to variations on 'look how his history is a lie and bizarre and strange' or 'he whiffed the PR opportunity and didn't give MAGA anything.' 

Ok. The former is funny, the middle is standard signaling and positioning, and the latter is US politics brain. Fine! But there's really tremendous data in here if we want to look seriously. Some points below. 

First, the most important thing is indeed the half-hour history lesson. Not only did Putin start with this, and refuse to be interrupted, he even made a big show of gifting documents supporting his arguments to Tucker. What this tells us is that the history component to the Russo-Ukrainian War is not just a point of legitimation or a general casus belli, but the motivating factor for VVP personally. That's really big! 

I've argued for a year now that we should understand the proximate cause of the war to be Vladimir Putin's deepening historical obsessions, his sense of personal grievance, and the unique isolation that allowed this to fester in the runup to 2022. You can find an article making that case here: ridl.io/putin-s-agency…. If you've taken my undergraduate course on Russian Politics, it's there as well. This interview is strong supporting data for that framing. Note how often Putin dismisses NATO expansion as the reason for action, as well as how much he does not care about Ukrainian democracy qua democracy. He doesn't even think it is a democracy (note the coup discussions). 

Rather, he's clearly motivated - then and now - by historical concerns most of all. And this is important, which some observers may not quite get. He was not always like this! That is, the long rants about history that justify political action have become more and more common in the last ten years, and especially the last four or five. Which fits a model of growing obsession - which, incidentally, also aligns well with Putin's post-2012 sense that only he can stably rule Russia, and that he wants to bequeath a legacy. Tucker wasn't able to get an answer to the core question - why 2022 and not earlier - but this is good material for a obsession interpretation. 

Second, another element that came out strongly was Putin's sense of personal insult and snubbing. He is butthurt by his world leader colleagues. We have dozens of minutes of him talking about the Bushes, about documents signed by the French and Germans, about negotiations generally - all of which end with Russia not getting what was promised or it expected. That could be read simply as justification for Russia's actions (i.e., the hypocrisy of the West) but what is mostly communicated, verbally and through body language, is that Putin himself feels slighted, and that he does not understand why others do not see the world, and the consequences of events, as clearly as he does. This is also quite interesting. 

There is very little reason to believe this interview is anything less than the sincere views of Putin himself, as a smarter-than-average Russian boomer who is trying to explain why he's right, why he's been aggrieved, and why the other sides are just so stupid and shortsighted. He's booming really hard, it's very evident. He's not sharing everything, but he's telling you that he's not sharing everything with a knowing, paternalistic smile while he says it. And he really wants to get it through your thick skull what actually matters. Rurik, Yaroslav the Wise, 1654, Bohdan Khmelnitsky, the Soviet Union and the border changes, leaders just not being reasonable, etc etc. 

Third, I don't think we can understand this interview as some sort of functionalist strategic communication exercise at all. VVP clearly did not care to talk about US political issues, he did not "throw red meat to MAGA" or whatever, he did not rise to the bait several times to get on a cleaner messaging narrative that would sell with an international audience of illiberal or West-skeptical types. At all! It was the above, which means this interview was about what Vladimir Putin himself thought rather than what he thought would sell best. That's incredibly unusual for an interview like this.  

We didn't get anything about cancel culture, or gender ideology, or Biden being senile, or the US being this evil tentacled hegemon that threatens global peace. He was actually incredibly circumspect on that sort of thing. Much more so than in other venues in the recent past. This was Putin as pedagogue-in-chief, trying to educate Tucker not only about history, but also about how the world actually works. Look to the wandering discussion on the Orange Revolution, Yanukovych, the various negotiations, for that. The personal resentment comes out here in a distinct way, as disappointment and confusion as to why other international partners just don't get it the way VVP does. 

Truly, the most framed or set-up part of this interview was the point about the spring 2022 negotiations (note his arg that instead of the Battle of Kyiv being lost, it was a part of a negotiation that got cut short by Johnson's intervention - an interesting assertion). And Tucker got him to talk about future potential negotiations as well. That was also enlightening, as it reiterated Putin's world-weary points that the other side doesn't get it and is stubborn, and that there is a 'reasonable' way out if only leaders would be clear-eyed. 

This is important to keep in mind, especially as Putin seems quite confident the war is going well enough that he can just wait for negotiations to inevitably appear. Also note his regular recourse to proceduralism - negotiations are detailed, complicated, have many moving parts. The bureaucratic KGB and legal background always shines through with Putin at the end of the day. 

Finally, as I've noted, this interview was pretty strange. Tucker tried to move things in a way that fit his own views (NATO expansion, the 'who runs the US' question, demonic forces on earth (?)), which was pretty cringe. But he actually did a decent job overall (sorry!). He asked about Gershkovich and pushed fairly hard all things considered, he got steamrolled by VVP but managed to barely hold on given the very meandering discussion (Putin's framing of 2004 and 2013-14 is genuinely difficult to understand if you don't already know the events quite well), he didn't crash the interview so bad that it ended early, he figured out he had a unique opportunity to let Putin talk, and in doing so he provided us a unique window into VVP. 

It turns out that Putin says the same thing to Tucker as he does to Ru journos, with even more Putinsplaining. Which is illuminating! The history thing is the real deal, as is his belief that negotiations (in Russia's favor and in accordance with Putin's own sense of what is reasonable) are possible. Both of these things are really important for us to get at analytically. 

I'm still thinking about this, but those are some topline takeaways as I process it this morning.

He also twists the historical "facts" to show what he wants. Timothy Snyder has a multi video YouTube series on the history of Ukraine. He touches on some of the stuff Putin claims and how it's inaccurate.

[Armybrat 40562]

Hope PootyPoot enjoys his vacations on the beautiful shores of the Nork worker’s paradise…

 

[ABSR 5276]

11 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Creepy how much she looks like him.

In a Billy Joel’s daughter sort of way.  Ughhhhhh.

[ABSR 5276]

10 hours ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Most countries that trust us end up regretting it at some point.

Not true!

 

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing …. after they've tried everything else.

[Armybrat 40562]

5 minutes ago, ABSR said:

Not true!

 

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing …. after they've tried everything else.

 

[atomheartbevo 89096]

58 minutes ago, Viper said:

Much more so than in other venues in the recent past. This was Putin as pedagogue-in-chief, trying to educate Tucker not only about history, but also about how the world actually works.

1 hour ago, Viper said:

It turns out that Putin says the same thing to Tucker as he does to Ru journos, with even more Putinsplaining. Which is illuminating! The history thing is the real deal, as is his belief that negotiations (in Russia's favor and in accordance with Putin's own sense of what is reasonable) are possible. Both of these things are really important for us to get at analytically. 

40 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

He also twists the historical "facts" to show what he wants. Timothy Snyder has a multi video YouTube series on the history of Ukraine. He touches on some of the stuff Putin claims and how it's inaccurate.

Another history prof mentioned that with Tucker having a history degree, Putin felt the need to treat him like a student annd “educate” him about Ukraine.

[Viper 11956]

2 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

He also twists the historical "facts" to show what he wants. Timothy Snyder has a multi video YouTube series on the history of Ukraine. He touches on some of the stuff Putin claims and how it's inaccurate.

Tom Holland also touched on it. Wonder if he'll put out a long video on it

 

 

[wd40 1976]

15 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Creepy how much she looks like him.

which "him"?

[Schulz2.0 28657]

Someone should send this to dipshits like Lindsey Graham.

[statsman 5355]

https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/how-putins-obsession-with-history-led-him-to-start-a-war-6732f619?st=ncjjnhwh4syir6p&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

[Schulz2.0 28657]

[bolverk 29116]

36 minutes ago, statsman said:

https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/how-putins-obsession-with-history-led-him-to-start-a-war-6732f619?st=ncjjnhwh4syir6p&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

So far as I can tell, he's determined to subjugate all the peoples who speak a language (Russian, Ukrainian, Belarussian) from the East Slavic branch of the larger Slavic language family group and force them to live under the boot of a rejuvenated Russian Empire based in the Kremlin. Is he also hoping that someday West Slavs (Poles, Czechs, Slovaks) and South Slavs (Bulgarians/Macedonians, Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes) join in too? 

This sounds awfully similar. I know! Let's get all the Germanic language speakers together. First step, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Netherlands/Flanders from the West Germanic branch. Then, go for the Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians from the North Germanic branch. Now, the English (also technically West Germanic) will be tougher because a) there's the Channel, and b) theirs is bastardized with (ptooey) a bunch of French words. But let's go for it anyway!

[Chad Fuck 17311]

Someone should send this to dipshits like Lindsey Graham.

I’m no great fan of Ladybug, but hasn’t he been a strong anti-Russia/pro-Ukraine guy?

[Schulz2.0 28657]

33 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

I’m no great fan of Ladybug, but hasn’t he been a strong anti-Russia/pro-Ukraine guy?

Sorta. He's helping hold up legislation to provide Ukraine with funding as of now.

[statsman 5355]

Yes. He talked a good game earlier, but in the recent deliberations, he was not one of the 17 GOP senators to vote for Ukrainian aid

[AUS-97HORN 11558]

tangentally related since Hungary is still causing issues.

turns out that the Hungarian people dont take too kindly to their (mostly) ceremonial President pardoning a guy who help shield a child abuser.

 

Shes a very strong Orban ally.  But she resigned on live TV today

so far this pardon scandal has taken down 3 of Orban's key Lieutanants. 

[Gatorubet 29797]

On 2/9/2024 at 9:13 PM, Parliament said:

So...about her...

Based upon her six head, she has a promising future in Austin politics. 

[Nivek 16692]

45 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Based upon her six head, she has a promising future in Austin politics. 

not enough horn

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4962]

6 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

I’m no great fan of Ladybug, but hasn’t he been a strong anti-Russia/pro-Ukraine guy?

More of a Cat Noir guy?

[Schulz2.0 28657]

14 minutes ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

More of a Cat Noir guy?

I'm sad I got this reference.

[Schulz2.0 28657]

What in the ever loving fuck.

[SL Xpress 7492]

12 hours ago, statsman said:

Yes. He talked a good game earlier, but in the recent deliberations, he was not one of the 17 GOP senators to vote for Ukrainian aid

I know this is probably Cloak Room, but Lindsey Graham's middle name should be "Talks A Good Game." 

[Parliament 14027]

1 hour ago, Schulz2.0 said:

What in the ever loving fuck.

Led out by a beaming Adam Kadyrov, the son of the Chechen leader, Ramzan Kadyrov...

Man it's gonna feel good watching that little shit die.

[Neonmoon 38126]

He was great in Entourage 

[Armybrat 40562]

18 hours ago, Nivek said:

not enough horn

Plenty of beak though.

[Armybrat 40562]

10 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

I know this is probably Cloak Room, but Lindsey Graham's middle name should be "Talks A Good Game." 

Didn’t he have a cracker named after him, or was vice-versa?

[Schulz2.0 28657]

 

 

 

[NorthLoop 13955]

9 hours ago, Parliament said:

Led out by a beaming Adam Kadyrov, the son of the Chechen leader, Ramzan Kadyrov...

Man it's gonna feel good watching that little shit die.

Is that a TSwift hat? 

[Chopper 16735]

11 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

What in the ever loving fuck.

 

Apparently there's no legal or operational issues raised by Dubai paying all expenses so NYPD and SAPD could send their crews on a little propaganda escapade. /s

 

 

[Trey3216 15308]

On 2/9/2024 at 9:13 PM, Parliament said:

So...about her...

Her forehead is a topology equation.  

[Parliament 14027]

Still.  Might would.

[B00M 6045]

2 minutes ago, Parliament said:

Still.  Might would.

Clearly we need to stuff the comment sections of her very serious videos asking about them tittays. For freedom. 

[Schulz2.0 28657]

 

 

[Schulz2.0 28657]

 

[Schulz2.0 28657]