‘We Cannot Win’ Says Top Russian Commander
‘We Cannot Win’ Says Top Russian Commander
The leader of the Russian battalion defeated at liberated Urozhaine calls for “freezing the front” after his unreinforced troops were devastated in a rout.
The Russian commander of the “Vostok” Battalion fighting in southern Ukraine said on Thursday that Ukraine will not be defeated and suggested that Russia freeze the war along current frontlines.
Alexander Khodakovsky made the candid concession yesterday on his Telegram channel after Russian forces, including his own troops, were devastatingly defeated by Ukrainian marines earlier this week at Urozhaine in the Zaporizhzhia-Donetsk regional border area.
“Can we bring down Ukraine militarily? Now and in the near future, no,” Khodakovsky, a former official of the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic, said yesterday.
“When I talk to myself about our destiny in this war, I mean that we will not crawl forward, like the [Ukrainians], turning everything into [destroyed] Bakhmuts in our path. And, I do not foresee the easy occupation of cities,” he said.
You're viewing a single thread.
I'm glad to see that incessant and pervasive whataboutism is welcome in the Fediverse. I was afraid for a few weeks that I had left it behind with Reddit but clearly that's not the case.
Are you talking about the amount of people who do a 'whataboutism', or the people who throw 'whataboutism' around in every thread as soon as they're being pressured on their own ideological inconsistencies?
Yes
Whataboutism is pretty well defined. We know what it is and when people are using it to deflect from issues they don't want to discuss.
Is what about whataboutism whataboutusm? If not, what about whataboutism about whatabout whataboutism?
what about it ? whats wrong with comparison ? It gives perspective on Claims and Hypocracy ..
Nothing is wrong with it, it's awesome and I love it. I'm something of a whataboutism aficionado and am planning on printing out this thread and laminating it for future reference.
exactly i dont know what the big issue is it leads to wisedom (do let me tell you , sometimes i think there is a evil empire out there putting out all these words out into impressional youngpeoples Mouth to confuse and Mislead them , Aliens probably)
anyway , now that we have established "what- about -ism" as a valid instrument of Analysis , we can use it on historical data ..
On this scientific Paper , yo ucan see the generall DIFFERENT reaction of the Western Puplic towards the SAME ACT. this is very significant , and its tells us that THE ACT ist not the real issue here ! Something Else is the Issue here ! can we investigate the underlying dynamic ?
Could there be another Set of Data ?,
Another reference point ? ,
That puts the Reaction to "the Act" in order ?
Is there Something that connects all of the "mild Reaction cases" , and is there opposingly also something that conects all the "non -mild Reaction"
we are working the Mine of Knowledge and wisdom here , do you feel it .. Rich rich Soil .. , we are nearly there !!! Do you Feel it allready , there is wisdom here !
you do the last step ..
and then you see it ..
All thanks to your trusty local organic Shovel called "what about it"
"no wonder the -'Belive Us Blindly -Conglomerat™ ' Dont want me to use this Product , you think while you dig further , it is actually interesting ! ",
you think , while you dig further ...
Whataboutism isn't perspective. It is just calling out completely unrelated wrongs in an attempt to deflect from the wrong being discussed.
Yet, usually related. It's only whataboutism when what it's about is an inconvenient rebuttal to the former statement. Claiming whataboutism is an attempt to deflect the rebuttal.