Mr Zelenskiy is a man of so many contradictions, all of which make perfect sense.
He invokes admiration wherever he goes, and rarely if ever goes anywhere. More than that, he invokes it, but never provokes it. He doesn't have one-liners, yet he's a comic by training; he's a signal example in leadership, but he's no leader by training. He leads from the front, by example: giving orders, but not telling folk what to do. He tells no one how to win a war, but he knows how to win a war and he tells folk how he can win this one. He has belief, and belief breeds belief. If he lost tomorrow and were wiped from existence, he'd be remembered for ever. That's an accolade that only the brave would disagree with, that only the foolhardy would wish on him and that will never be bestowed on his detractors, even were they to be right. This man is very ordinary, and very extraordinary.
The wider regional conflict of which you speak. What is that region? The world is embattled in Ukraine; yet the world is not fighting there. We sit at a boxing ring as seconds and egg the fighter on. But fight, we do not. Zelenskiy is a fighter who fights his own battles. And, the rest of us?
Cyrillic names transliterate differently according to target language. However, Russian uses a Cyrillic alphabet that, while differing from Ukrainian slightly, is unlikely to cause serious transliteration difficulties.
Latinisation became official in Ukrainian in April last year, after having been mooted for some considerable time (since the 19th century). The "-yy" ending is the spelling convention applied by the Office of the President, but, while entirely valid, looks odd to English eyes - I know of no English word with a double-y. UK newspapers generally transliterate it as "-iy", retaining the "-ee-ye" pronunciation. The US tendency to include only a single "-y" at the name's end is a perfectly acceptable transliteration convention, the subtlety of the "-ee-ye" being virtually lost when spoken by a native English-speaker anyway. In short, Russians spell the name in an entirely different alphabet, so can hardly be accused of misspelling his name when a Latin alphabet is used.
You'll doubtlessly be aware that the letters "Z" and "V" form part of neither the Ukrainian nor the Russian alphabet, their sole merit as markers, as I see it, being that they can be daubed by those of a less accomplished educational level using a paint brush without thereby needing to remove the brush from the surface being painted.
I do not think that Republicans who oppose aid to Ukraine should be called pro-Russian. Dishonorable though some of them may be on other grounds, they revive an honorable tradition of Republican isolationism that goes back through Robert Taft to midwestern Progressives like La Follette and Borah. Refusing to accept that every problem in the world is our problem, they object to spending endless American billions to defend a backward country to which the world owes nothing and with which the United States has no treaty obligations at all. War for the heck of it.
We are told that we fight for freedom and democracy. This is romantic nonsense. As a lifelong student of American history I have a pretty good idea where our freedom and democracy comes from. Definitely not from excessive military expenditure. And it does not hinge on Ukraine.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Milley has said that Ukraine cannot win this war. Ukrainian war aims are beyond reach, especially since in Washington Zelensky cried that a just peace requires not only territory but revenge. He refuses to negotiate with the present Russian government. (What other Russian government is there to talk to?) The war will drag on indefinitely, wholly paid for by the United States, as even Zelensky admits, while calling for yet much more. Another Afghanistan, deftly engineered by our State Department.
Without us this war had never happened. Without us it would end tomorrow.
Colourful, and correct in many regards. But the colour needs some adjustment: may I? A world view is a view of the world, so, isolated snapshots don't give a true picture.
To oppose aid is indeed not to be pro-Russian. However, this is a conflict that invites, if not convincing, a polarised view, since the midway point is hard to define, lying as it does somewhere between encouraging Ukrainian criminality and endorsing Russian criminality. To endorse neither side verges on abrogation of any responsibility whatsoever and, while that is a stance you defend, I suspect it is predicated on simple geographical distance from the conflict. When 9/11 struck, distance became less of a factor in deciding how to react to belligerents elsewhere: whether the manner of the reaction was in that case right or not, it was the shrinking of distance that urged it. What dissuades many from a stance of "lay down the arms and go back to work" is perhaps the nature of the work that would then be resumed. Boxers can be sent to their red and blue corners and the next bout rung in; but observers wish there to be no next bout from the Russian corner, so a crunch moment has arrived. To offer no reaction to a crunch moment is to take sides, however one views it. No man's land is no option, say many, and say I.
For many months, UA advocated a position of "Get out and stay out". However, its rhetoric has become more vengeful. This is unfortunate, but understandable as we near 12 months of warfare. Moderating voices should therefore be raised, but not till the point at which they might have the intended moderating effect, otherwise it's wasted breath and saps morale.
The degree of freedom and democracy enjoyed in the lands that vaunt them is questionable. Plato invented the term "democracy" and immediately disapproved of it as a political system: for the freedom it encapsulates, in the wrong hands - which he considered all hands to be, inevitably deflects the "equality of all before the law" into "equality only for some", moneyed interests being the main deflector. Call it by whatever label, however, the look and feel of Russia as a state system is palpably different from Ukraine. That palpability is, I suppose, what is meant by the two words, freedom and democracy. Not till the conflict is over will we actually know what that means in Ukraine, however. What it means in Russia is, in so far, set in tablets of stone.
Your final remark is in my view spot on. NATO has a large part to play in the background against which the conflict arose. The status quo that would arise by stepping out, aside from that being impossible in light of NATO's current position, would not, however, be the status quo ante bellum; it would be quite, quite different. Because any resolution that is not Russia's defeat poses the question lurking in the wings: "Who's next?" For my money, within days it'd be Taiwan. Does the US perchance have an interest in that potential theatre?
The man is a leader who leads from the depts of his being. Note, I was ashamed of the those who were not wholeheartedly supportive of him and his mission. What he does now is far reaching as is the support the world community offers. Slava Ukraini!
I think too much of the American infrastructure has become overly dependant on things from other countries. Maybe we should consider minimizing consumption to essential items to minimize over dependance on foreign made items. Maybe if we could minimize consumption maybe Zelensky could more likely get United States military aid against Russia without reservation.
Too many Americans have forgotten what the Founding Fathers sacrificed to get the United States of America created from the 13 original British Colonies such as New York, Delaware, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Massachusetts,Connecticut,Rhode Island,Pennsylvania,Maryland, Virginia,North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. From 1776 until 1959 when have increased the number of states from 13 to 50 states. The non contiguous states of Alaska and Hawaii were both added as US states in 1959. The United States of America was born in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was signed that year by George Washington and other founding fathers. There was a seven year Revolutionary War from 1776 to 1783 that had to be fought to force The British to finally recognize The United States as a separate nation. George Washington was the top general military leader that untimately lead the United States forces to victory in the Revolutionary War against the British forces. During the cold winters a lot of the soldiers were poorly clothed but still managed to follow Washington's leadership anyway to ultimately win against the British miltary forces. We have forgotten all about this because we prospered as a nation for a long time after the Revolutionary War was over.
I’m my Younger Days it was Party Harty Rock Snd Roll Drink S z fifth. And Smoke. A bowl ... but nowadays l’m pretty boring. I just say blind em, defen them , burn them and when you are really fucking serious you freeze them!!!!!!!!!!!!
Все это ширма настоящая игра будет видна через 40лет неверю ни тем ни этим просто жалко уникальных людей которые гибнут а те кто дёргает за нитки ничего не принесут в этот мир
40 years from now, I'll be well out of here. But string-pullers do contribute, very much. They contribute a sense of security and peace of mind. This contributes to our regular sleep patterns and allows us to enjoy family get-togethers. But, like insurance, which mimics such contributions to our lives, they cost a lot of money, achieve nothing like the permanence we enjoyed for 290,000 years before politics was invented, and offer assurance, albeit without guarantees. "Assurances without guarantees" by politicians is about all we can be certain of in this life: even Old Faithful isn't that faithful these days.
Yes, that's right. I really question the ability of NATO to take serious concerted action against the RF for any reason. Hence the piecemeal approach to aiding UKR. But Zelenskyy does not have the luxury of waiting around until we all get our political act together. I do think that suffice to say that a Ukrainian Donald J. Trump would already be in jail.
another proxy war that we watch this time from afar--much like we continue to watch the gun violence in our own country--what with much emotional symbolism of "our thoughts and prayers". war is wrong! if only the NATO had not insisted on expansion like it was agreed upon at the Minsk accord, none of this would have unfolded like it has.
Proxy wars sound so ugly: they fight, we reap gains. But, between Russia and the US, proxy is what is best, even if the only gain reaped is non-nuclear, and not nuclear, conflict.
Proxy is no prettier as a form of warfare. But it keeps the guys in between out of the line of fire, if nothing else. Valid point, though the proxy aspect is better upheld with occasional nonchalant whistling.
I would revisit your wording "insisted on expansion". With retrospect, which is a luxury that has no price, a quiet word in some ex-Eastern Bloc ears questioning the advisability of applying to NATO might have caused a rethink: but I think the rethink would have resulted in a retort, "Yes, and what about us, then?"
You can trace that back to having the USSR as an ally in WW2. Without whom, Europe would have lost the war with Germany.
In WW1, with Germany, Russia and Britain all ruled by first cousins, we still couldn't be one big happy family.
Yes, we are aiding a country when we have our own needs here in the US. BUT, this battle needs our support. The future of our European allies depend on defeating Russian aggression by another sociopath! I am a proud American who supports our fight to save freedom.
For those that deny the bloody ruthlessness of Vladimir Putin and those that mock Zelenskyy... for shame. Hang your sad heads in shame. Thank you Dan Rather for your wonderful writing and influence. You really are "steady" in your intelligence and opinion. This Canadian girl applauds you.
Mr Zelenskiy is a man of so many contradictions, all of which make perfect sense.
He invokes admiration wherever he goes, and rarely if ever goes anywhere. More than that, he invokes it, but never provokes it. He doesn't have one-liners, yet he's a comic by training; he's a signal example in leadership, but he's no leader by training. He leads from the front, by example: giving orders, but not telling folk what to do. He tells no one how to win a war, but he knows how to win a war and he tells folk how he can win this one. He has belief, and belief breeds belief. If he lost tomorrow and were wiped from existence, he'd be remembered for ever. That's an accolade that only the brave would disagree with, that only the foolhardy would wish on him and that will never be bestowed on his detractors, even were they to be right. This man is very ordinary, and very extraordinary.
The wider regional conflict of which you speak. What is that region? The world is embattled in Ukraine; yet the world is not fighting there. We sit at a boxing ring as seconds and egg the fighter on. But fight, we do not. Zelenskiy is a fighter who fights his own battles. And, the rest of us?
Rising above with dignity and courage; what a noble thing it is.
We should back Ukraine like the French backed us, If the stories of Putins illnesses are true he's not long for this world.
Please write his name as he spells it: Zelenskyy. Not the way the russians spell it.
Cyrillic names transliterate differently according to target language. However, Russian uses a Cyrillic alphabet that, while differing from Ukrainian slightly, is unlikely to cause serious transliteration difficulties.
Latinisation became official in Ukrainian in April last year, after having been mooted for some considerable time (since the 19th century). The "-yy" ending is the spelling convention applied by the Office of the President, but, while entirely valid, looks odd to English eyes - I know of no English word with a double-y. UK newspapers generally transliterate it as "-iy", retaining the "-ee-ye" pronunciation. The US tendency to include only a single "-y" at the name's end is a perfectly acceptable transliteration convention, the subtlety of the "-ee-ye" being virtually lost when spoken by a native English-speaker anyway. In short, Russians spell the name in an entirely different alphabet, so can hardly be accused of misspelling his name when a Latin alphabet is used.
You'll doubtlessly be aware that the letters "Z" and "V" form part of neither the Ukrainian nor the Russian alphabet, their sole merit as markers, as I see it, being that they can be daubed by those of a less accomplished educational level using a paint brush without thereby needing to remove the brush from the surface being painted.
I do not think that Republicans who oppose aid to Ukraine should be called pro-Russian. Dishonorable though some of them may be on other grounds, they revive an honorable tradition of Republican isolationism that goes back through Robert Taft to midwestern Progressives like La Follette and Borah. Refusing to accept that every problem in the world is our problem, they object to spending endless American billions to defend a backward country to which the world owes nothing and with which the United States has no treaty obligations at all. War for the heck of it.
We are told that we fight for freedom and democracy. This is romantic nonsense. As a lifelong student of American history I have a pretty good idea where our freedom and democracy comes from. Definitely not from excessive military expenditure. And it does not hinge on Ukraine.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Milley has said that Ukraine cannot win this war. Ukrainian war aims are beyond reach, especially since in Washington Zelensky cried that a just peace requires not only territory but revenge. He refuses to negotiate with the present Russian government. (What other Russian government is there to talk to?) The war will drag on indefinitely, wholly paid for by the United States, as even Zelensky admits, while calling for yet much more. Another Afghanistan, deftly engineered by our State Department.
Without us this war had never happened. Without us it would end tomorrow.
Colourful, and correct in many regards. But the colour needs some adjustment: may I? A world view is a view of the world, so, isolated snapshots don't give a true picture.
To oppose aid is indeed not to be pro-Russian. However, this is a conflict that invites, if not convincing, a polarised view, since the midway point is hard to define, lying as it does somewhere between encouraging Ukrainian criminality and endorsing Russian criminality. To endorse neither side verges on abrogation of any responsibility whatsoever and, while that is a stance you defend, I suspect it is predicated on simple geographical distance from the conflict. When 9/11 struck, distance became less of a factor in deciding how to react to belligerents elsewhere: whether the manner of the reaction was in that case right or not, it was the shrinking of distance that urged it. What dissuades many from a stance of "lay down the arms and go back to work" is perhaps the nature of the work that would then be resumed. Boxers can be sent to their red and blue corners and the next bout rung in; but observers wish there to be no next bout from the Russian corner, so a crunch moment has arrived. To offer no reaction to a crunch moment is to take sides, however one views it. No man's land is no option, say many, and say I.
For many months, UA advocated a position of "Get out and stay out". However, its rhetoric has become more vengeful. This is unfortunate, but understandable as we near 12 months of warfare. Moderating voices should therefore be raised, but not till the point at which they might have the intended moderating effect, otherwise it's wasted breath and saps morale.
The degree of freedom and democracy enjoyed in the lands that vaunt them is questionable. Plato invented the term "democracy" and immediately disapproved of it as a political system: for the freedom it encapsulates, in the wrong hands - which he considered all hands to be, inevitably deflects the "equality of all before the law" into "equality only for some", moneyed interests being the main deflector. Call it by whatever label, however, the look and feel of Russia as a state system is palpably different from Ukraine. That palpability is, I suppose, what is meant by the two words, freedom and democracy. Not till the conflict is over will we actually know what that means in Ukraine, however. What it means in Russia is, in so far, set in tablets of stone.
Your final remark is in my view spot on. NATO has a large part to play in the background against which the conflict arose. The status quo that would arise by stepping out, aside from that being impossible in light of NATO's current position, would not, however, be the status quo ante bellum; it would be quite, quite different. Because any resolution that is not Russia's defeat poses the question lurking in the wings: "Who's next?" For my money, within days it'd be Taiwan. Does the US perchance have an interest in that potential theatre?
The man is a leader who leads from the depts of his being. Note, I was ashamed of the those who were not wholeheartedly supportive of him and his mission. What he does now is far reaching as is the support the world community offers. Slava Ukraini!
I think too much of the American infrastructure has become overly dependant on things from other countries. Maybe we should consider minimizing consumption to essential items to minimize over dependance on foreign made items. Maybe if we could minimize consumption maybe Zelensky could more likely get United States military aid against Russia without reservation.
Too many Americans have forgotten what the Founding Fathers sacrificed to get the United States of America created from the 13 original British Colonies such as New York, Delaware, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Massachusetts,Connecticut,Rhode Island,Pennsylvania,Maryland, Virginia,North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. From 1776 until 1959 when have increased the number of states from 13 to 50 states. The non contiguous states of Alaska and Hawaii were both added as US states in 1959. The United States of America was born in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was signed that year by George Washington and other founding fathers. There was a seven year Revolutionary War from 1776 to 1783 that had to be fought to force The British to finally recognize The United States as a separate nation. George Washington was the top general military leader that untimately lead the United States forces to victory in the Revolutionary War against the British forces. During the cold winters a lot of the soldiers were poorly clothed but still managed to follow Washington's leadership anyway to ultimately win against the British miltary forces. We have forgotten all about this because we prospered as a nation for a long time after the Revolutionary War was over.
You Have The Tools.
You Have Your Orders.
I’m my Younger Days it was Party Harty Rock Snd Roll Drink S z fifth. And Smoke. A bowl ... but nowadays l’m pretty boring. I just say blind em, defen them , burn them and when you are really fucking serious you freeze them!!!!!!!!!!!!
A gold LP exists of such a thing.
Все это ширма настоящая игра будет видна через 40лет неверю ни тем ни этим просто жалко уникальных людей которые гибнут а те кто дёргает за нитки ничего не принесут в этот мир
40 years from now, I'll be well out of here. But string-pullers do contribute, very much. They contribute a sense of security and peace of mind. This contributes to our regular sleep patterns and allows us to enjoy family get-togethers. But, like insurance, which mimics such contributions to our lives, they cost a lot of money, achieve nothing like the permanence we enjoyed for 290,000 years before politics was invented, and offer assurance, albeit without guarantees. "Assurances without guarantees" by politicians is about all we can be certain of in this life: even Old Faithful isn't that faithful these days.
Yes, that's right. I really question the ability of NATO to take serious concerted action against the RF for any reason. Hence the piecemeal approach to aiding UKR. But Zelenskyy does not have the luxury of waiting around until we all get our political act together. I do think that suffice to say that a Ukrainian Donald J. Trump would already be in jail.
another proxy war that we watch this time from afar--much like we continue to watch the gun violence in our own country--what with much emotional symbolism of "our thoughts and prayers". war is wrong! if only the NATO had not insisted on expansion like it was agreed upon at the Minsk accord, none of this would have unfolded like it has.
Proxy wars sound so ugly: they fight, we reap gains. But, between Russia and the US, proxy is what is best, even if the only gain reaped is non-nuclear, and not nuclear, conflict.
Proxy is no prettier as a form of warfare. But it keeps the guys in between out of the line of fire, if nothing else. Valid point, though the proxy aspect is better upheld with occasional nonchalant whistling.
I would revisit your wording "insisted on expansion". With retrospect, which is a luxury that has no price, a quiet word in some ex-Eastern Bloc ears questioning the advisability of applying to NATO might have caused a rethink: but I think the rethink would have resulted in a retort, "Yes, and what about us, then?"
You can trace that back to having the USSR as an ally in WW2. Without whom, Europe would have lost the war with Germany.
In WW1, with Germany, Russia and Britain all ruled by first cousins, we still couldn't be one big happy family.
Yes, we are aiding a country when we have our own needs here in the US. BUT, this battle needs our support. The future of our European allies depend on defeating Russian aggression by another sociopath! I am a proud American who supports our fight to save freedom.
For those that deny the bloody ruthlessness of Vladimir Putin and those that mock Zelenskyy... for shame. Hang your sad heads in shame. Thank you Dan Rather for your wonderful writing and influence. You really are "steady" in your intelligence and opinion. This Canadian girl applauds you.