Discussion: The NYT Spelling Bee Thread

alha said:

jimmurphy said:

Partita?

Early QB today.

yep, "partita" ... another obscure word. Nicely done on the early QB...I'm stuck at QB -2 yet again

I have failed miserably in the last week or so, but just got QB! Congrats, jim, as usual.

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

mtierney said:

from RCL.

Votes for Biden: 926,633

Votes for Trump: 788,833

Democratic votes not Biden: 123,921

Republican votes not Trump: 163,748

Were you trying to tell us something?

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

Diplomat: Why the Minsk Agreements Failed in Ukraine (jacobin.com)

Wolfgang Sporrer is former head of the Human Dimension Department of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine.

"There were three main reasons for the failure of the Minsk agreements. First, the Minsk agreements did not address the root cause of the conflict. It was stipulated, so to speak, that there was or had been some kind of ethnic conflict between Russians and Ukrainians in Ukraine, and that this was the reason for the outbreak of violence. And by settling this alleged ethnic conflict, the conflict could be pacified.

This was pure fiction. The ethnic conflicts that existed in Ukraine were no more serious than ethnic tensions in many other countries.

Moreover, the dividing lines in this conflict, if one insists on understanding them in ethnic terms, are incredibly blurred. This is not about the Russian versus the Ukrainian language or Ukrainian versus Russian national identity. Nor is it about religion, not even in the slightest. At most, one could find something like an eastern Ukrainian Donbas identity. But this regional identity of the Donbas is not much stronger than strong regional identities in other countries.

What this conflict is fundamentally about is Russia wanting to exert influence over the domestic and foreign policy orientation of the government in Kyiv. In the Minsk agreement, however, this fiction of an ethnic conflict was constructed instead, although Russia actually had no particular interest in obtaining any autonomy rights for eastern Ukraine, for Russian-speaking or ethnically Russian Ukrainian citizens.

A Ukraine that is neutral between Russia and the West is no longer a realistic option, simply because this would no longer be accepted by a large majority of the population in Ukraine.
Russia was not really interested in these issues, but Ukraine was not at all eager to grant such rights either, for fear of a supposed fifth column. However, Moscow was not only concerned with what was happening in the Donbas, but above all with what was happening in Kyiv. The Ukraine conflict is about the orientation of Ukraine, pure and simple. But the Minsk agreement addresses completely different issues. That’s why the process didn’t work.

The second reason for their failure was the low technical quality of the Minsk agreements. There were far too many provisions for their verification, and the sequencing of various measures also remained controversial to the end, as the agreement itself didn’t specify any.

The third reason for the failure — and this may sound banal now, but it is true — is that it has not been possible to meet in person since the end of 2019 because of the COVID-19 pandemic. As little as the Minsk agreements were actually implemented in practice, they did help to build trust.

The very fact that the parties were sitting around a table had a de-escalating effect. You don’t get the same sort of benefit online. For that, you need coffee breaks, shared meals, unofficial contacts and the like. If you lose the seemingly ancillary aspects of diplomatic talks, such a process is doomed to failure. With the Minsk process, therefore, an early-warning instrument pointing to a possible escalation of the conflict was also lost."

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: German Lab Leak

A German joke is no laughing matter.

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: Twitter is a Private Company

 

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: Anyone got new (allergy friendly) recipes for Seder?

Chag sameach! 

Like  3 Likes

Discussion: The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

Is someone is choosing to vote for Trump instead of Biden, because of the possibility of Kamala Harris becoming President, it would be a waste of time to try to argue with that person. 

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

I mean, we could tell you a thousand times that Shokin was forced to resign because he WASN'T investigating corruption in Ukraine, and you'll still believe the crap in that Real Clear Investigations article.

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

nan said:

Here is an article on a frequent MOL Ukraine thread topic.  

The author, Gordon Hahn challenges you to: Read it all and test your faith that the war in Ukraine was unprovoked and began in February 2022.

I'm reading it now, but I did not have that faith.

-------------------------------------------

Did the West Intentionally Incite Putin to War?

https://gordonhahn.com/2024/02/27/did-the-west-intentionally-incite-putin-to-war/

February 2024

And a recent update from 4/19/24.  I don't know what happened to Update 1:

UPDATE 2 TO “Did the West Intentionally Incite Putin to War?”

https://gordonhahn.com/2024/04/19/update-2-to-did-the-west-intentionally-incite-putin-to-war/

It's the same old stuff. It ignores the fact that Ukraine wasn't in NATO, and Russia invaded instead of negotiating.

"Ukraine might join NATO to attack Russia" is the same kind of threat as "Saddam might get WMDs". Putin and Bush launched pre-emptive wars with the goal of regime change. Supporting Putin's rationale is the same as supporting Bush's excuses for invading Iraq.

Like  2 Likes

Discussion: What does Putin want (and whatabout it)

For the record, nan, last night you raised two unconvincing arguments in just a couple of hours. One, that the Nuland dialogue is evidence of a U.S. attack on Ukraine. (See the unconvinced replies from nohero and PVW.) Two, that having NATO on Russia’s doorstep is an existential threat, since it first happened 20 years ago and by your own description Russia is thriving.

This is why letting the thread speak for itself was my response to your request for examples. It’s full of them, and only Sisyphus would have had the endurance to roll them out again.

Like  2 Likes