Coming soon - Get a detailed view of why an account is flagged as spam!
view details

This post has been de-listed

It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.

85
Ukraine intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov: Ukraine needs negotiations or risks existence
Author Summary
1DarkStarryNight is in Ukraine
Comments
[not loaded or deleted]

The problem is that people made the classic mistake of equating righteousness with the ability to win. Any implications of the situation being militarily difficult were met with accusations of lacking moral fiber. That muddied the waters to an unsustainable degree.

[not loaded or deleted]

What’s even the point of negotiating now? It’s too late too many people have been sacrificed in the meat grinder of this senseless war and now they’re asking for negotiations after losing so much manpower?

This is called the sunk-cost fallacy.

The point is to stop your citizens from dying. You can't win because you are Correctâ„¢, it doesn't matter how Correctâ„¢ you are.

[not loaded or deleted]

You can believe that your country is fighting the good fight and still believe that they aren't winning. This isn't Star Wars or anime. You can be at a disadvantage despite being in the right.

[not loaded or deleted]

Worse, honestly. In COD you usually win through a mix of being a near-peer adversary or overmatch and grit. No they thought war is cape movies where you just need to get beat up enough for the universe to grant you a win at the last moment.

They made it a matter of faith.

On that note, things kind of deteriorated PR wise once they tried counter invading. Is that completely justified? Of course.

Is it wise? No. It turned the war from "our men are being sent off to war and return as caskets" to "I personally know someone who was blown up while doing sone civilian job". That works wonders on the propaganda front.

Note how Islamic terrorist attacks vanishingly rarely seem to directly strike at nations fighting in the middle east.

That's not just because of increased security, but also because it makes it easier for the populations to consider their leadership to be engaged in excessive force abroad because it doesn't directly affect them.

You need to victimize those whose deaths will make sure the nation they belong to won't want to fight back.

If you bring the fight to the enemy you better well have the forces to crush & occupy them, otherwise it detracts from turning your own place into a point of no return.

Author
Account Strength
100%
Account Age
2 years
Verified Email
Yes
Verified Flair
No
Total Karma
302,263
Link Karma
273,783
Comment Karma
25,610
Profile updated: 1 day ago
:flag_GBSC: Scotland

Subreddit

Post Details

Location
We try to extract some basic information from the post title. This is not always successful or accurate, please use your best judgement and compare these values to the post title and body for confirmation.
Posted
3 days ago