Cont: The Russian invasion of Ukraine part 6

[jeremyp]

If Putin ends up face-down in his stroganoff, it will be because the financial impact of the war is hurting the interests of the oligarchs.

That's what I used to think but there are people pushing the narrative that Russia is losing because they are not being ruthless enough and these people are also vying for power.

Nuking Ukraine into oblivion won't make money for anyone. Putin built a kleptocracy and now the kleptocrats can't earn.

But not everybody in Russia is a kleptocrat. Some are ultra nationalists. Putin didn't start this war to appease the people who want to make more money.

ETA: If Putin was concerned about his cronies' money making opportunities more than other threats to his power, this war would never have happened.

 

[Craig4]

That's what I used to think but there are people pushing the narrative that Russia is losing because they are not being ruthless enough and these people are also vying for power.



But not everybody in Russia is a kleptocrat. Some are ultra nationalists. Putin didn't start this war to appease the people who want to make more money.

ETA: If Putin was concerned about his cronies' money making opportunities more than other threats to his power, this war would never have happened.

Murdering Putin, a laudable goal, is the ultimate in how-to projects. It would take a level of resources the ideologues don't have. You could get lucky and there's an ultra nationalist body guard who takes him out for the glory of the Motherland and then takes two in the chest.

To do a proper job of it, including moving in to take over, killing or capturing the other controllers of national power before the body is cold would take a lot of resources.

 

[Aridas]

Some tankies look like they may be trying to push "this war is designed to be continuous (by US/NATO military industrial complex and leaders), not to be won."

Needless to say, that's facepalm territory, as usual.

 

[Drewbot]

To poke at something said on the last thread about Musk claiming to be losing money on Starlink in Ukraine, despite Poland, the UK, and the US already paying for most of it, his numbers don't make sense.

If the rates he claims he'll be able to offer Starlink service for generally are correct, Starlink has made at least a small profit off the units sent to Ukraine. If the costs cited in the letter to the Pentagon are correct, then Starlink will not be a viable operation at the rates Musk says he will continue to offer to the rest of the planet.

Most of the units sent to Ukraine are the home units, with plans between $60-150 USD, yet Starlink claims it costs them $4,500 a month each unit.

At least some part of this is nonsense, possibly all of it.

Someone may have 'pointed that out' to him... he recently changed his course on this.

The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money & other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free
2:06 PM · Oct 15, 2022
·Twitter for iPhone

 

[Drewbot]

The free world cannot accept so-called referendums conducted during war or foreign occupation. Therefore Ukraine does have the right to try to retake Crimea. Unless we start seeing mass demonstrations there in support of the Russian annexation.

Mass demonstrations by the Russian populace that has moved into the Crimea since 2014, replacing the Ukrainians who were deported to Russia? Those mass demonstrations?

 

[SpitfireIX]

Mass demonstrations by the Russian populace that has moved into the Crimea since 2014, replacing the Ukrainians who were deported to Russia? Those mass demonstrations?

I suspect most of those transplanted Russians already have or soon will flee back to Russia, so I don't think we need to worry about any mass demonstrations. But your point that even if such do occur they will be illegitimate is still well taken.

 

[Olmstead]

Someone may have 'pointed that out' to him... he recently changed his course on this.

All that money, and he refuses to spend any of it on a PR guy. This should be so simple.

Or maybe pettulant rich guy is the image he is going for. I don't know.

 

[Drewbot]

All that money, and he refuses to spend any of it on a PR guy. This should be so simple.

Or maybe pettulant rich guy is the image he is going for. I don't know.

And by 'pointed it out' I mean, might have reminded him how much $$ in incentive money he's gotten over the last 15 years.

 

[Jimbo07]

Companies aren't charities. At some point, it might have been perfectly reasonable (and just due course of business) to ask for more money.

He didn't help himself, though, by publishing his 'peace plan' before that. It just makes him look stupid and petty.

 

[The Don]

Companies aren't charities. At some point, it might have been perfectly reasonable (and just due course of business) to ask for more money.

He didn't help himself, though, by publishing his 'peace plan' before that. It just makes him look stupid and petty.

It's also a bit rich making a big deal about your charitable actions and then asking for payment for them.

 

[Jimbo07]

It's also a bit rich making a big deal about your charitable actions and then asking for payment for them.

I don't twit. I've only got an account to follow some other twits. I've felt that a problem with it, from the beginning, is that it's too fast and makes it too easy to share passing thoughts with too many people. Who of us hasn't had weird thoughts (or what might be considered out-of-character thoughts)? If you don't twit them right away, you have at least a few minutes to reflect. Even here, we're able to go back and edit posts. Stream of consciousness posting brings a host of issues.

His peace plan, or on the one hand acknowledging donations, and on the other, thinking about asking for money, is something else. He should have stayed up late at night drinking with a buddy and floating those ideas then. He's a very public face on a couple of disruptive companies, and in Ukraine, lives may be hanging on his words. But, I guess, Elon is gonna do Elon...

 

[jeremyp]

I don't twit. I've only got an account to follow some other twits. I've felt that a problem with it, from the beginning, is that it's too fast and makes it too easy to share passing thoughts with too many people. Who of us hasn't had weird thoughts (or what might be considered out-of-character thoughts)? If you don't twit them right away, you have at least a few minutes to reflect. Even here, we're able to go back and edit posts. Stream of consciousness posting brings a host of issues.

His peace plan, or on the one hand acknowledging donations, and on the other, thinking about asking for money, is something else. He should have stayed up late at night drinking with a buddy and floating those ideas then. He's a very public face on a couple of disruptive companies, and in Ukraine, lives may be hanging on his words. But, I guess, Elon is gonna do Elon...

I think the most dangerous thing about this - leaving aside the possible disruption of Starlink in Ukraine - is that the Musk fanbois will now be of the opinion that the only rational thing to do is to adopt Musk's appeasement plan and force Ukraine to stop fighting by, for example, putting pressure on the US government to stop supplying weapons. I'm already seeing comments by Musk fans elsewhere to this effect.

ETA: By the way, I think your diagnosis of the problem with Twitter is right on the nail. I would add that, also, the main stream media loves it because the sound bytes are ready made.

 

[Jimbo07]

ETA: By the way, I think your diagnosis of the problem with Twitter is right on the nail. I would add that, also, the main stream media loves it because the sound bytes are ready made.

Bit of a derail, but apropos:

It's funny how you've put twitter and the MSM right in the same paragraph. I had an encounter years ago which informed my opinions of both.

I was the subject of a 'streeter.' The reporter asked me a question, and I responded that given only a few seconds to think about it, I was sorry, but couldn't form a good answer. She turned away to talk to others. Just for fun, while we were waiting for a walk light I raised my fist into the air and shouted (it was a court case), "He's guilty as heck and should fry goddamit!" I think I even jumped a bit for my own amusement (hint - it was already a foregone conclusion that he was (and was ultimately found to be) innocent). Anyway, she turned back to me and asked, "Why couldn't you have said that a minute ago?"

Some journalists see value in doing streeters, and others hate it! Good journalists, who want to get to the heart of the story, are sometimes at odds with their editors or publishers. A lot of really good work gets lumped in with a lot of utter nonsense all under the broad brush strokes of mainstream media. With this mixed bag, you can't always trust mainstream media, but there is nothing else you can trust more! At least some of the journalists actually care. It's very similar (in this thread, for example) to labels like democracy and science. As broad categories of human activity, they sometimes have very grievous things to answer for... but they are still better than all the rest!

 

[SpitfireIX]

Musk is spouting off about appeasement again. From his Twitter:

If Russia is faced with the choice of losing Crimea or using battlefield nukes, they will choose the latter.

We’ve already sanctioned/cutoff Russia in every possible way, so what more do they have left to lose?

If we nuke Russia back, they will nuke us and then we have WW3.
​

So much ignorance in so few words.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Musk is spouting off about appeasement again. From his Twitter:

If Russia is faced with the choice of losing Crimea or using battlefield nukes, they will choose the latter.

We’ve already sanctioned/cutoff Russia in every possible way, so what more do they have left to lose?

If we nuke Russia back, they will nuke us and then we have WW3.
​

So much ignorance in so few words.

This makes me even more certain that Putin won't even contemplate to use nukes as anything more than threats - he is using Musk to scare the West, which means that he is bluffing.

 

[theprestige]

I think there's a difference between appeasement - giving a bully what they say they want, in the hope/belief that this will be the end of their demands - and negotiating some kind of quid pro quo with someone who is in a strong negotiating position.

I've been saying all along that there are corners Russia/Putin could be backed into where escalating use of nuclear weapons seems like their best option. And I've been saying all along that I would rather try to keep from backing Russia into one of those corners - even if it means negotiating some sort of quid pro quo.

If you go back to the beginning of this thread, there's been a fairly consistent narrative that NATO* cannot intervene more robustly or decisively, because Russia has nukes and nobody wants to incite them to start a nuclear war. We'd rather help the Ukrainians grind out however many Ukrainian casualties it takes to win this the "safe" way, rather than just end it tomorrow and then find out whether Putin is bluffing or not.

So it's a bit rich now to see people saying we should just keep grinding this out until Russia's destruction and humiliation is so thorough that nukes are the only thing they have left, and they cannot imagine conceding. If it's gonna be like that, then we should just let slip the dogs of NATO* air power tonight, and put Ukraine in Crimea by the end of the week. Get it over with.

 

[theprestige]

This makes me even more certain that Putin won't even contemplate to use nukes as anything more than threats - he is using Musk to scare the West, which means that he is bluffing.

Too conspiracy-theoretical for my taste.

 

[lobosrul5]

Too conspiracy-theoretical for my taste.

Musk has made himself a "useful idiot". Theres no doubt in my mind about that. Its only whether Russia actually made that happen or Musk did it to himself that is unknown. I don't see how its proof that they won't really use a nuke though.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Too conspiracy-theoretical for my taste.

gien Musk's personality, he would think it's his idea, not Putin's, to tell the world how serious Putin is about using nukes.

 

[theprestige]

Musk has made himself a "useful idiot". Theres no doubt in my mind about that. Its only whether Russia actually made that happen or Musk did it to himself that is unknown. I don't see how its proof that they won't really use a nuke though.

gien Musk's personality, he would think it's his idea, not Putin's, to tell the world how serious Putin is about using nukes.

That's nice. Can we get back to talking about the war itself, and leave Musk's state of mind and epistemology for some other thread?