[flagged]
All of us tech people used to know a fascist when we smelled one, now some of us lick their boots for a paycheck.
If you were the son of a fascist, would you not still tell people the truth about your dad even if you told him to shove it long ago?
If people were complaining about the influence of fascism on, say, the footwear industry, I would not tell people the truth that my father invented those plastic things on the ends of shoelaces (that are called aglets and whose true purpose is sinister) because that would come off as an apology for fascism.
That DARPA invented one small part of what would become the internet half a century later isn't germaine to criticisms of the influence of the government, intelligence or military on that internet. Silicon Valley has always been in the pocket of the military industrial complex, but most of the tech industry, to say nothing of tech and hacker culture, isn't from there and doesn't need to worry about biting the hand that feeds it.
All the modern semiconductor industry, including the discovery of transistors and of solar cells, has its origin in the research done during WWII, mostly at Bell Laboratories, to make improved detectors for the military radars, which lead to the development of the technologies needed to make pure germanium and pure silicon and of semiconductor diodes made with them.
Without DoD money, an electronic computer of the complexity of ENIAC would have been built only many years later. Nevertheless, both ENIAC and the British cryptographic electronic machines (and the Atanasoff computer) have been enabled by the invention of various kinds of electronic digital counters during the decade that has preceded WWII (mostly in UK), all of which had been invented for the use in experiments for the study by physicists of radioactive substances and of cosmic radiation, so there are also decisive civilian contributions (like also the discovery of nuclear fission as a precondition for the nuclear bombs and reactors).
Russia has consistently angled for Ukraine to be a neutral border between two blocs to facilitate trade — and that clearly would have been better for Ukraine than a senseless slaughter which destroyed a generation, by maiming or killing hundreds of thousands and displacing millions.
But that wouldn’t have satisfied warhawks like Victoria Nuland and the geriatric Cold Warriors (TM) who are intent on their senile, unhinged drive to destroy Russia as a nation.
Also, at this point it is hilariously obvious that A) Russia will never take all of Ukraine like they wanted (huh, how would that have been for a "nuetral border between the two) and B) whatever portion they don't take will be far far more closely aligned than the west than would have been possible in the absense of their invasion.
Even if you buy it as a reasonable desire and reasonble response to not getting their way, it has very, very obviously not gotten them what they wanted.
Ukraine negotiated nonstop with Russia from 2014 (when Russia first seized some of their territory) until literally 1 week before the invasion in 2022. It was 8 years of nonstop negotiations, brokered by France & Germany. I'm always amazed more people don't know about this. How did negotiating work out for Ukraine?
https://braveneweurope.com/michael-von-der-schulenburg-hajo-...
For example, from the article:
In March 2022, direct peace negotiations between Ukrainian and Russian delegations and mediation efforts by the then Israeli Prime Minster, Naftali Bennet created a genuine chance for ending the war peacefully only four to five weeks after Russia had invaded Ukraine. However, instead of ending the war through negotiations as Ukrainian President Zelensky and his government appeared to have wanted, he ultimately bowed to pressures from some Western powers to abandon a negotiated solution. Western powers wanted this war to continue in the hope to break Russia.
According to him:
1. There was no negotiated solution.
2. Western powers were forcing Ukraine to negotiate with Russia and reach a solution at any cost.
3. Western powers relieved the pressure to negotiate after mass grave was discovered in Bucha and leaving Ukrainians on occupied territories to the same fate became indefensible.
That is not supported by facts. Western powers stalled military aid to Ukraine every way they could in the hope that forcing Ukraine into negotiations with Russia would sweep the whole thing under the rug and business with Russians could continue as usual, as it did after Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, and the invasion of Eastern Ukraine and Crimea in 2014. If western powers wanted war, then where were the jets, tanks and artillery pieces that Ukraine was asking for? Why are they tiptoeing around Russia and providing too little, too late out of escalation fears?
Members of Ukrainian delegation at the negotiations have recently said that they negotiated just to satisfy western demands. Ukrainian delegation had no confidence that Russia would follow any agreements.
Furthermore, experts like Kozyrev, the former minister of foreign affairs of Russia (now living in exile), have pointed out that the negotiations deserve no attention at all, because the people negotiating on Russian side were total nobodies with no authority, and that the entire exercise looked like a stalling tactic.
It is standard psychopathic tactics — DARVO — Deny, Attack, Reverse victim and Offender.
"Ukraine left us no choice to invade!" — Utter bullshit start to finish
"NATO forced us to invade!" — Mor of the same. NATO is ZERO threat to Russia's integrity, and Putin knows it. when Finland joined NATO, Russia PULLED troops from away from Finnish border, the exact opposite of what they'd do if NATO was actually a threat, or even a perceived threat.
The list is endless (because they'll always come up with more, just throw it up there and see what sticks).
Stop falling for it.
Yet another example of the general rule that the fact of one having held at one point a high-status position does not, ipso facto, validate what one has to say about any particular topic.
As to the content -- some interesting history, albeit with a lot cherry-picking and selective omission; and apparently not a few simple misstatements or reversals of fact. The sibling commenters have done a better job of dissecting its content.
But beyond their words -- it's important to look at who these guys are, and crucially -- who they associate with, and who's buying them lunch.
As to Harald Kujat, from Wikipedia:
Since July 2016, Kujat is a member of the Supervisory Board of the Berlin-based Research Institute Dialogue of Civilizations[4] (DOC), allegedly financed by Vladimir Yakunin,[5] until 2015 CEO of the Russian Railways and by some sources considered a member of the Russian president Vladimir Putin's inner circle.
By some conservative German media (Bild-Zeitung, Die Welt) Kujat was criticized for his pro-Russian views in German TV talk shows,[6][7][8] allegedly being considered with misgiving by the German Federal Government.[9]
As for mister Hajo Funke (translated):
In February 2023 Funke was one of the first signatories of the Manifest for Peace initiated by Sahra Wagenknecht and Alice Schwarzer that calls for [essentially the same "peace" plan described in the article]
That tells you what you need to know about these guys (2 out 3 anyway).
Would any of your theoretical compromises have satisfied the Cold Warriors in the Kremlin? These people literally believe that NATO is coming to invade Moscow. How do you negotiate with someone who lives in a place so disconnected from reality?
That line is merely one of dozens of bullshirt excuses they trot out to claim victimhood and "justify" their relentless aggression.
I mean, it's going to absolutely wreck Russia, but again: the Russian government for basically the last 1,000 years sees the citizen as a resource to be expended for it's greatness.
And regardless, does any of that give Russia the right to invade another country?
That clearly would have been better for Ukraine
As if you know better than the Ukrainians themselves as to what's best for them.
No treaty with Putin has ever been honored. He is attempting to rebuild the Russian Empire and "peace" agreements are merely used to get the opponents to stand down while Russia prepares aggression.
Putin and his govt have said that they have rights to the Baltics, Poland, Germany and more. They have said that Ukraine should not, indeed DOES NOT exist. The very existence of the idea of a free, and especially prosperous Ukraine is seen by them as an existential threat. And they may be right, as it certainly makes Russians wonder how those awful Ukrainians can live so well, having toilets and all.
Read Winter Is Coming by Garry Kasparov. He's a former world chess champion, former candidate for President of Russia, and deeply involved in global democracy. He knows more than you or I ever will.
No one intends to destroy Russia as a nation. It is the autocracies of Russia, Iran, NK, China, etc. who see that international law and order threaten their criminal way of life, and are working hard to destroy democracy. If you are so big on Russia, go live there and report back after a year (if you aren't conscripted and killed in one of their 'meat assaults' on Ukraine.
The decapitation strikes might have worked if Ukraine didn't have advance warning from very detailed intelligence, and if the Russian military was as competent as everyone assumed.
That the West has been unable to provide sufficient support to Ukraine to stand against this aggression is a mark of shame that will take a long time to wash away.
It's hard to know if the person saying that about Putin is a plant for propaganda or if he really was being honest. He could be unknowing be spreading misinformation to benefit Putin and I could be doing the same quoting what the man said.
Was it though? Within the last 30 years you've got Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Russia/Georgia, and the Russia/Chechnya civil stuff.
I guess no super lengthy wars in 20 years, sure.