shnsky

I was amused to hear first about naivete and immediately afterward about "absolute evil". It's like I'm back on Ukrainian media again. Or Putin's speeches. Or Bush Jr.'s speeches in 2001. Or any other leader of a belligerent nation over the last few centuries. I wouldn't be surprised by passages about freedom vs tyranny, fascists, and other platitudes. If you had the slightest interest in these events, mass psychology, or the workings of the media, you'd be laughing yourselves out of your own simplifications, dichotomies, and emotionalism. A perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect: the less you know about something, the more specialized you think you are in it. Your level of self-confidence is such that you are telling how this war works to a person who: 1. Has studied the history of the conflict comprehensively and has seen tons of historical events that you have only read about. 2. Is quite familiar with mass psychology, media, military propaganda, and systematic economic analysis. 3. Worked in some related activities for many years. 4. Lives a couple of kilometers away from where the fighting took place and sees and hears orders of magnitude more information every day than you do. Instead of developing your own understanding, you just found a ready-made answer and are trying to impose it on me and other opponents. You also attributed to me a number of statements that have nothing to do with my position. But, as @Danioover9000 correctly pointed out in one of the posts, such an approach does not come close to a comprehensive solution at all. I partly understand you, you are not risking anything. Circumstances have not forced you to evolve in the above directions. P. S. The funny paradox is that even many military men I know who have been to the front are much more restrained in their rhetoric than you are.

Your thesis about self-defense is a massive overgeneralization. You are missing the systemic, geopolitical and economic aspects of this conflict, the interests of all the parties involved. I understand you as a human being, it is easier to perceive it that way. But I'm sad that the theses from the previous post passed you by. I conclude that you have not burdened yourself with studying both the history of this particular conflict and mastering approaches to their study in general. In my opinion, this is the main reason for your aggressive rhetoric. I cannot comment on appeals to my alleged desire to appear to be a good person (or to various belief systems). You know best why you feel that way.

Decided to see what is written about my country on this forum. I expected to see a certain bias towards Western propaganda narratives. This is ok, because you grew up in this informational space. But I was sincerely sure that at least here I would not see such bloodthirsty expressions as in our media in recent years. I was wrong. Ukrainian authorities have whole bot farms fomenting similar emotions in people. I personally know someone who worked in one of these. They use exactly the same words and phrases that you use. Explore how cognitive warfare and military propaganda works. You will hate to admit it, but you (like Z-patriots from Russia or chauvinists and radical nationalists here) have been its victim and soldier at the same time. If you believe in all seriousness that more violence / weapons / murders will somehow solve geopolitical conflicts, that's very sad. The dichotomy in such issues among a critical mass of people (to put it in the language of political technologists, the "politicized minority") is a 100% guarantee that you won't get to a systemic and comprehensive solution. Hate speech and calls for violence have been spewed on both sides of the border for years, especially after 2013. And it hasn't helped, as you can see. Do you feel like continuing this war? Then continue to see the problem from where you see it now. Naive, emotional, biased and one-sided. Greetings to you from Kiev.