Ukraine, one year later

Honor to the defenders and supporters of Ukraine. In such a major geopolitical struggle, it's wise to ask: Are we seeing it correctly; is our media presenting it fairly? Kruschev's daughter, who lives in the US and keeps in touch with Russian sentiment, says that Russians don't want the war; they see the body bags coming back but are told not to talk about it; they are imprisoned if they complain about the war, so they have to outwardly support it; but they also see the war as "Putin v Biden"--a political dispute--with both of them at fault.

What we see is naked aggression and war crimes committed by a dictator desperate to become a Russian hero leaving a great legacy. That he invented a false narrative to justify his mass killing. That he will fail, if the US and Europe remain committed to Ukraine's defense. An entire city administration in Karkhiv has been moved to a big basement, where mostly middle-aged and older women run everything (as most of the men and younger women are fighting)--the mayor says simply "Ukrainians are unbreakable." That Ukraine does not see itself as a wayward USSR satellite, but as a proud, independent nation, with its own long, independent history, that it was was minding its own business until it was invaded.

What I see, if we continue our support, is a hard-fought victory for a very brave and determined people, a free Ukraine that is a member of the EU and NATO, and a colossal failure for the despot in Moscow. Hopefully with global condemnation of the invasion, and war crime trials.

But I am not there; all this is subject to revision, if our media and gov't are not fairly portraying it. We are all subject to whatever we are told, when we cannot see and hear for ourselves.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's time to harp on the US deficit again!

Image
Time to harp on the deficit again. 43% of every dollar spent by our federal govt is being borrowed. The government's expenses are only 57% covered by revenue (from taxes, mostly). This is wildly unsustainable, and in a strong economy it is beyond reckless--it's criminal. In my opinion, it can only lead to the destruction of our currency, our economy, and our very country, which means of course that you and I may lose all our assets and possibly our lives. The only way to avoid this is to do what no politician is willing to even talk about: Dramatically raise taxes and dramatically cut spending. Doing that might cause a deep recession and greatly increase poverty, but it would save the country. The irony is that NOT doing it will also cause a deep recession and increase poverty, but it will further bring about the end of the US. When you've borrowed all that you can, then you are out of options. You are bankrupt; the game is over. We are close to that point. No one can kno
Read more

Oh, this is nice: Shell Oil feigning support for renewable energy while worsening climate change:

Image
  This article is interesting:  Oh, this is very nice: Shell Oil is paying its shareholders $23B in a special dividend, while cutting its staff 25% in the group that's working to move the company into low-carbon business. Nice. The only way to fight this, on a personal level, is to work very hard to use less oil and natural gas. Fly less! Drive a hybrid or all-electric car! Replace gas stoves and furnaces and water heaters with electric. Look for ways to use less plastic. You know, if any company has a spare $23B that they don't know what to do with, it might be nice if they paid more in taxes, or donated to nonprofits that feed, house, and educate people. Our governments don't take care of the destitute, so maybe the big corporations should.
Read more

Absolutely there are limits on free speech

Image
  Absolutely there are limits on free speech*. College presidents are clueless when they defend free speech so much that they fail to discipline students who call for the extermination of Jews. And they should discipline students who call for the extermination of Palestinians, or any civilian peoples. It's surprising, that high-paid college presidents, who have access to good attorneys, would let themselves be paraded thru a shitshow in Congress, over this. Rep. Stefanik, though guilty of grandstanding for political gain, was right to complain about this, though I hope she remembers there are limits to free speech, whenever she has an opportunity to combat hate speech against gays, atheists, and liberals, which has been so vociferously spouted by some members of her party. (*Most people agree that you can't shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Similary, I believe that the intentional publication (especially by mass media) of a known lie, as true, should carry civil an
Read more