Bueno hasta los volodyas han pillao el mensaje

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1mth4aj/bskyrussiantroopsadvancingtowards_ukrainian/

@lowfour wrote in post #391:

Bueno hasta los volodyas han pillao el mensajehttps://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1mth4aj/bskyrussiantroopsadvancingtowards_ukrainian/

siguen siendo unos mierdecillas, pero ahora unos mierdecillas con bandera gringa

che, el rory y alastair lo dijeron clarísimo, rusa revienta en dos tardes si nos ponemos un poco, un poquito

lo vemos nosotros desde narnia, con nuestra ia paco (y sin ella, pero para entendernos), rusia está ko, kaput, muerta y enterrá, SOLO wetnoodle culicagao la mantiene a flote

qué cojones van a hacer zelensky y vonderleyen y el resto de ilumianos en la casa blanca?? decirle que, bueno, vamos a ver si llegamos a un acuerdo, vamos a negociar...

venganomejodas, que wetnoodle nos quiere ver reventaos, a ucrania y a la ue, y ser colegui del gnomo, que será lo que le ha dicho, quieres ser mi colegui feten? cárgate europa

@lowfour wrote in post #1:

Por qué esta fascinación del gordo naranja Trump con Putin? Por qué esta cercanía y sintonía con uno de los re...

abrimos el hilo el 20 de febrero, hace 6 meses, justo al mes de que wetnoodle culicagao (aun trump en aquel tiempo) tomase posesión del cargo

hoy nos desayunamos con esto, como comenta phill:

qué tiene que pasar? que usa mande patriots a rusia?

que les ceda satélites? drones? intel?

qué?

Timothy Snyder también se ha quedado a gusto hoy en substack

https://snyder.substack.com/p/common-sense-about-negotiations?utmsource=post-email-title&publicationid=310897&postid=171219179&utmcampaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=s8emj&triedRedirect=true&utmmedium=email

Common Sense about Negotiations

As Ukrainian and European leaders travel to Washington for discussions in the White House this Monday about ending Russia’s illegal war of aggression, Americans would do well to remember ten principles of negotiation.

1.  Outsiders should be aware of their information deficit.  Americans tend to think that we know everything.  This is never the case, and such a belief is especially harmful when we are outsiders to a horrendous war.  Both Ukrainians and Russians know things that we either do not know or tend to forget.  The Russians work put our knowledge gaps to good use.  For example, Russians have trained Americans to talk about “four oblasts,” as if the war were only taking place in four Ukrainian regions.  The number of regions currently under occupation or threat is seven.  Russia’s main war aim is to destroy Ukrainian sovereignty as such. And of course any obligations placed on Russia have to concern all of Ukraine and all of Russia.  When Ukrainians and Europeans point such things out, it is important for Americans to listen rather than be irritated.  If we allow our information deficit to become a Russian weapon, we will be both unjust and ineffective as negotiators.

2.  Outsiders should be aware of their emotional deficit.  The fact that Americans might prefer that the war end does not mean that they have access to the emotions that made war possible.  On the one side, Vladimir Putin is fighting a war of choice.  It matters to him in a certain way.  He wants to be remembered as a great imperial leader, like Catherine the Great, someone who took land for Russia.  As an enormously wealthy man with no political rivals, these posthumous stakes are all that matter to him.  The war is an oligarchical pet project, a personal immortality quest.  He has brought his people along through propaganda and payments to soldiers, but there was little organic popular support for a war.  In order to get Putin to negotiate, Americans have to understand where he is coming from, and create a situation where he worries that he will be remembered not as the man who enlarged Russia but as the man who brought about its disintegration.  The only way to move him to that place is to implement policies that make it easier for Ukraine to win, such as enforcement of sanctions, secondary sanctions, use of seized Russian assets, and the supply of arms to Ukraine.  On the other side, on the Ukrainian side, people are fighting a war of necessity.  They are fighting for their lives, and for a way of life.  We use such language so often ourselves that we trivialize it or make it cinematic, and so we may not recognize an actual existential situation when it is before our eyes.  There is no oligarchical whimsy at play here, unlike in the Kremlin.  Unlike Putin, Ukraine’s President Zelens’kyi is not fighting a war of choice.  He was elected in a free election and is doing what his people expect him to do.  Because Ukrainians have been attacked by Russia and then subjected to Russian murder campaigns, mass torture, and the kidnapping of children, they cannot simply stop fighting because they are asked or told to do so.  This is all the more true since Russia has violated every single pertinent agreement it has ever made with Ukraine.  Filling the emotional deficit means understanding that peace for Ukrainians has to include more than just assurances from Moscow that Russia will not attack (these assurances have been given multiple times and always been violated) nor for that matter just assurances that we will help next time (we gave such assurances in 1994 when Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons and they meant nothing when the time came).  Ukrainians want to join NATO because that is a meaningful security guarantee.  Russia attacks countries that are not NATO members.  It does not attack countries that are NATO members.

Upgrade to paid

3.  Outsiders should be aware of their linguistic deficit.  Russians and Ukrainians know English, but Americans do not know Russian or Ukrainian (generally).  When compounded with the informational and emotional deficits, this can create a situation in which Americans, as outsiders, repeat the language that they have been given, usually to the advantage of the aggressor, Russia.  The country defending itself, Ukraine, can generally only explain how things are.  If Americans are hungry for a quick solution, we may not listen, because the facts on the ground demand attention and then policy.  The aggressor is generally practiced at abusing language because the aggression itself begins with a lie: in this case genocidal lies about Ukraine not really existing, not really having a culture, or whatever.  As the aggressor Russia has years of practice now in generating formulae in English which are meant to be repeated, either to somehow justify its illegal invasion or to justify its gaining something from its illegal invasion.  The notion of “land swaps” is a topical example.  Americans are told by Russians to say "land swaps” and then they do: not just American negotiators but American reporters.  But Russia is not offering to swap any of its territory.  It is demanding to keep the land it has illegally invaded and to take more land that it has not even occupied.  That is not a “swap.”  When we repeat propaganda tropes, we make it harder to sensibly negotiate.

These three deficits would be best addressed by visits of high administration officials to Ukraine. It is hard to negotiate the end of a war without personal knowledge.

4, 5, 6.  In effective negotiations, concessions are not made in advance, not made in exchange for nothing, and not made in the name of other people without their agreement.  I am putting three principles in together here, because Americans are violating all three together on major issues, and thereby making the continuation of the war much more likely.  Americans have proposed that concession that Ukraine should not join NATO, have proposed the concession (implicitly, by ignoring the issue) that Russians not be tried for war crimes, have proposed the concession (implicitly, by ignoring the issue) that Russia not pay war reparations, have proposed the concession (implicitly, by ignoring the issue) that Russia’s frozen assets not be used.  All of this has been done in advance, none of it has yielded anything in return from Russia (except mockery of Trump on Russian television and the escalation of attacks in civilians), and all of this involves countries others than ourselves.  Now, these are all proposals, and as such can and should be withdrawn.  It is counterproductive and unjust, in general, to make concessions in advance, to make concessions in exchange for nothing, and to make them of other people.

A Ukrainian farm in Kherson oblast. One of countless examples of Ukrainian resources that Russia claims but does not control. Photo TS

7.  In negotiating the end of a war, it is important to be aware of the traditional means of dealing with aggression and deterring further attacks.  This need not involve a moral judgement; it is simply practical politics.  Traditionally, the country that illegally invades another country and carries out war crimes is held responsible legally and financially for these actions.  Trying war criminals and requiring aggressor states to pay reparations are part of the traditional set of measures used to bring wars to an end.  It is expected that countries return their armed forces to within their own borders.  It would be entirely normal (should Ukraine wish it) for Ukraine’s allies to station troops on Ukrainian territory.  This sort of thing has happened routinely in history.  It is possible to imagine negotiating these away in exchange for other things.  But Americans, negotiators and press alike, should remember that these are entirely traditional measures and not startling new developments.

8.  In negotiating the end of a war, it is important to remember that a war is going on.  This is not a game.  Words in themselves do not much matter.  Successful negotiations rest on policy and institutions and have to lead to structures of incentive and structures of enforcement that directly influence present and future actions.  This begins from knowledge of the battlefield.  So, for example, Russia is demanding that Ukraine concede territory that Russia does not control in the Donetsk region.  This is a historically quite a strange demand on its own, the more so as Russia is offering nothing in return.  Basic knowledge of the battlefield would include the information that Ukraine has built crucial physical defenses in the Donetsk region.  Giving control of this land to Russia makes it much easier for Russia to continue the war.  It cannot reasonably be seen as having any other meaning (except Russia’s desire to control Ukrainian mineral resources in exchange for nothing).

9.  In negotiating the end of a war, it is important to think of the future.  The United States may have the leverage to get Ukraine to do certain things.  But if those are simply things that feel right to us at the present moment, because of our linguistic, emotional, and information deficits, then their realization is unlikely to lead to anything like peace (let alone peace prizes).  Successful negotiators will have to think ahead to the situation (say) six weeks, six months, six years after the notional end of the war.  This means structural incentives for Russia not to attack again.  It means not lifting existing sanctions and indeed applying new measures for as long as necessary.  Going “back to normal” quickly will mean going back to war.  Thinking of the future means, for Ukraine, the concrete prospect of massive reconstruction assistance, which is, incidentally, a far bigger business opportunity than anything Russia can offer.  Ukraine must be supported militarily – and, here again, those who support Ukraine stand to learn from its extraordinary battlefield achievements, something which Russia cannot and would not offer.  But most fundamentally, Ukraine needs long-term aid to its non-governmental organizations, to its regions, and to its central government, as well as membership in the European Union.

10.  In negotiating the end to a war, it is important to keep in mind the fundamental difference between de facto and de jure concessions involving territory.  Troublingly, in our lingo of “swaps” and “deals,” neither American policy-makers or (generally) American journalists are making this distinction.  Failing to do so will be disastrous.  It is one thing for Ukraine to accept, de facto, that Russia is illegally occupying its territory, and agree informally not to take certain steps to regain it.  That is far from an ideal situation, but it has precedents, and does not break the entire international legal order.  It is another thing entirely to demand that Ukraine accept that Russia legally holds Ukrainian territory on the ground that Russia has invaded that territory.  This is not something that Ukrainians can accept.  But, most fundamentally, endorsing the principle that invasions can legally change the borders of countries puts in jeopardy the international order that was built after 1945.  It is an imperfect order, to be sure, but it is far better than what would be created if Russian aggression is legitimated: a world of all against all, with interstate war becoming the norm, and with countries all over the world building nuclear weapons.  This order is not an abstraction.  Although countries may disagree about how to evaluate or end the war in Ukraine, the idea that state borders should not be violated enjoys (as UN votes show) very high support.  Russia has called into question this basic principle by invading Ukraine.  Should the United States thoughtlessly legalize Russia’s war of aggression, it will invite global chaos.

This war can be brought to an end.  The United States has the power to help, but that power must be consciously directed to the benefit of the side that is defending itself, and in accordance with what we know about successful negotiations.  Just talking, especially repeating the propaganda of the aggressor, will not bring peace. 

Negotiations can work when basic principles are kept in mind.  All of them demand self-awareness, attention to the character of the war, knowledge of the difference between aggression and self-defense, and the willingness to make policy. 

@lowfour wrote in post #394:

Timothy Snyder también se ha quedado a gusto hoy en substackhttps://snyder.substack.com/p/common-sense-about-negotiations?utmsource=post-email-title&publicationid=310897&postid=171219179&utmcampai...

snyder también se huele lo peor, eh?

if Russian aggression is legitimated: a world of all against all, with interstate war becoming the norm, and with countries all over the world building nuclear weapons.  This order is not an abstraction.  Although countries may disagree about how to evaluate or end the war in Ukraine, the idea that state borders should not be violated enjoys (as UN votes show) very high support.  Russia has called into question this basic principle by invading Ukraine.  Should the United States thoughtlessly legalize Russia’s war of aggression, it will invite global chaos.

@elarquitecto wrote in post #395:

@lowfour wrote in post #394:Timothy Snyder también se ha quedado a gusto hoy en substackhttps://snyder.substack.com/p/common-sense-about-negotiations?utmsource=post-email-title&publicationid=310897&po...

He publicado el análisis del chatgpeto y es buenísimo y lo tiene también clarísimo. Esta traición trata de sentar "precedentes", donde los truchos pueda apropiarse espacios manu militari

ahora es wetnoodle quien "presiona" a zelensky para que se rinda y acepte paz por territorios

claro, primero le quita las defensas AA para que rusia bombardee a placer ucrania, ahora "mete presión" (todo esto de la presión lo dice el nytruchen con un descaro que atufa)

Esto es el peor bicho que tienen ahí dentro

https://www.reddit.com/r/craftofintelligence/comments/1mwom6e/gabbardbarredsharingintelligenceon/?shareid=RQo-T6fZSXBdMJwvAxaIv&utmcontent=1&utmmedium=iosapp&utmname=ioscss&utmsource=share&utm_term=10

@lowfour wrote in post #398:

Esto es el peor bicho que tienen ahí dentrohttps://www.reddit.com/r/craftofintelligence/comments/1mwom6e/gabbardbarredsharingintelligenceon/?shareid=RQo-T6fZSXBdMJwvAxaIv&utmcontent=1&utm_medium...

algo debió pasar ahí

me refiero a que si la gabarovna prohibió compartir info es por algo, posiblemente algo relacionado con la cara de susto de la levit y tal

pero pasa una cosa, si tú compartes info habitualmente con peña y de repente te quedas mudo... te delatas

es más, que salta en prensa no me parece ni medio casual, lo han filtrado por alguna movida

ya hemos dicho que si nosotros "vemos" las jugadas del ajedrez 4d y tal, los servicios de inteligencia deben de manejar info mucho más precisa y no-pública o no-publicada

si nosotros sabemos que a rusia le costaría 4,4 años joderle el donbas a ucrania, con 2 millones extra de bajas, fijo que los de intel saben hasta los apellidos de los que morirán en esos 4,4 años (exagerando un poco, pero para entendernos)

si nosotros vemos las injerencias ruskis hasta en la guerra de gaza (vía iran), nomejodas que no hay informes rulando sobre el tema??

si nosotros vemos desde nuestra ventanita internetera que la gabarovna es un agente ruski... se la han colao en el pentagono o qué?

o es que ya no queda nadie ahí, los han purgado a todos y tienen a los jack d ripper al mando??

@elarquitecto wrote in post #400:

pusimos esa imagen hace 6 mesesme estás contando que ahora los de inteligencia de uk, canada, australia, nueva zelanda se han coscao de que gabarovna no les pasa info?? que es un poco truchi??venganom...

Yo creo que lo saben pero no lo quieren creer, porque es la opción fácil.

• negación

• ira

• negociación <- LA EU ESTÁ AQUÍ (o quizás en negación)

• depresión

• aceptación

@lowfour wrote in post #401:

@elarquitecto wrote in post #400:pusimos esa imagen hace 6 mesesme estás contando que ahora los de inteligencia de uk, canada, australia, nueva zelanda se han coscao de que gabarovna no les pasa info?...

han tenido más de un año para hacer el duelo

ya hablábamos el año pasado, cuando se veía que biden no iba a ganar, que kamala lo iba a tener mal, que teníamos que prepararnos para un "occidente" sin usa, porque iba a implementar el project2025

se habló de planes de contingencia ante la llegada del trucho

que te puedo comprar que en febrero no quisieran ver la conexión ruski y a la gabarovna purgando o yoquesé, pero ahora?

de todos modos, si nos fijamos en zelensky en la casa oval en febrero y zelensky en agosto, vemos diferencias

diferencias bastante evidentes, de cuando fue a vender tierras al trucho por "seguridad" (que vimos justo ayer que era una trola) y de cuando fue a pedir un encuentro "trilateral" que casi sale de ahí con wetnoodle en el bolsillo, tanto que tuvo que interrumpir la reunión y llamar a su amo

al día siguiente le echaron la bronca (gabarovna, ni cotiza) y salió diciendo en su red trucha que ucrania empezó la guerra

y que estén filtrando que "no nos comparten info" no es casual

yo creo que se han estado haciendo un poco los locos, pero más que nada por no delatar a sus informadores no-purgados, ahora les están "diciendo", sabemos que sois truchos, para crear alguna reacción o algo así

oye, @lowfour, tú que opinas de esto?

justo hoy, cuando nos enteramos que la gabarovna está restringiendo info de inteligencia a los aliados (especialmente con lo que tiene que ver con rusia), el nytruchen nos casca un artículo en portada diciendo que "hay poco experto en diplomacia" por los recortes... como diciendo, nooo, no es la gabarovna, es que son novatos hombre, no hay mala intención...

o qué?

es que el nytruchen lo tenía a huevo para titular

las purgas de gabarovna favorecen la injerencia rusa

o algo así

luego en el artículo lo mencionan, pero pasan como de comer mierda sobre si gabarovna ha eliminado lo servicios de contra-propaganda ruski o ha purgado a todo dios que tuviera conocimiento sobre el spam ruski y las injerencias ruskis "por accidente" o de forma deliberada para facilitar el control ruski

es como si no quisieran "atar cabos"

lo achacan a "rencillas políticas"

pero es que está siendo todo desmantelado SISTEMATICAMENTE

luego han creado la cortina de humo de que maduro es un capo de la droga, el de seguridad nacional que dijo que eso era una mierda como una casa fue despedido, claro

supongo que no pueden acusar a gabarovna de forma rotunda de currar para rusia, pero nomejodas, un titular un poco más mordiente, qué mierda es "volando a ciegas"

ves como son truchos? o gilipollas... ya que no es fácil distinguirlo

@elarquitecto wrote in post #404:

es que el nytruchen lo tenía a huevo para titularlas purgas de gabarovna favorecen la injerencia rusao algo asíluego en el artículo lo mencionan, pero pasan como de comer mierda sobre si gabarovna ha ...

A ver que el NYT y tal dedican igual un reportero un año a cubrir un tema de estos antes de reventarlos. Eso hizo el de la puta loca de Theranos, (Elizabeth Holmes, ojos de reptiliana)

El Wet Noodle se mosquea con los Ucros (Spoiler: Siempre lo ha estado)

https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-ukraine-viktor-orban-russia-oil-pipleline-drone/

Trump ‘very angry’ at Ukraine hitting Russian pipeline feeding Orbán

Hungary’s leader complained to the U.S. president following a Ukrainian drone strike on the Druzhba oil pipeline.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he got “very angry” after Ukraine damaged a Russian oil pipeline that supplies his friend Viktor Orbán, Hungary's prime minister.

Trump responded to a note from Orbán, who complained about a Ukrainian drone attack overnight on Aug. 13 hitting the Druzhba oil pipeline, which supplies Hungary, Slovakia and other countries in Central Europe with Russian oil through Ukrainian territory.

“Viktor — I do not like hearing this. I am very angry about it. Tell Slovakia,” Trump wrote according to a letter published online by Orbán's ruling Fidesz party. “You are my great friend,” the U.S. president added.

pero tío, mira la carta del wetnoodle!

nomejodas

esto es decadencia y no lo que dicen los oswaldos de europa

@elarquitecto wrote in post #407:

pero tío, mira la carta del wetnoodle!nomejodasesto es decadencia y no lo que dicen los oswaldos de europa

Ostia le ha faltao un

PD Mándate unas putas que por aquí las tengo muy vistas

El borracho de mierda ha estado impidiendo el uso de ATACMS

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-has-quietly-blocked-ukraines-long-range-missile-strikes-on-russia-432a12e1?mod=hplead_pos1

Pentagon Has Quietly Blocked Ukraine’s Long-Range Missile Strikes on Russia

The Defense Department has withheld approval for attacks as the White House has sought to entice Moscow to open peace talks

@lowfour wrote in post #409:

El borracho de mierda ha estado impidiendo el uso de ATACMShttps://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-has-quietly-blocked-ukraines-long-range-missile-strikes-on-russia-432a12e1?mod=hp_lea...

por eso decía yo el otro día que al zelensky le deberían dar el oscar (bueno, no, que es un premio gringo, mejor uno europeo) al mejor actor

menudo papelón hizo el lunes con el wetnoodle diciendo paridas y sabiendo que les odian por "ucranianos" o algo así

a la vonderleyen se le nota más que anda encabronada y rígida, aunque luego te meta la sonrisa profident y te cuente que tienes un déficit comercial injusto y vamos a aprobar una puta mierda de aranceles (que en realidad, relativamente son más competitivos que el resto que imponen los truchos a los demás países, salvo rusia y bielorrusia y best-corea)