1. Why did I give Zelensky the nom de guerre "hollywood"? Because he used to be an actor. 2. Why do I think he subjected his nation to war? Because he chose NOT to negotiate before the war and downplayed its likelihood of occurring.
3. Why did I make fun of Instagram game? Because he's an actor so this is his area of expertise, but also because as I expressed earlier, this is not a winnable war for Ukraine, so you can do all the propaganda videos you want, it's better to surrender to minimize loss of life.
4. Why did I sarcastically say that I was inspired by him losing his country? Because I believe he made numerous strategic errors and that this disaster for Ukraine could have been averted. I will explain how later.
This tweet was totally sincere. It was not for engagement (which I will talk about later). I wrote this when I was distraught. I didn't understand how people could think that Ukraine could win this war.
I think it's theoretically possible for them to win a guerilla war against Russia but the chance of them prevailing in conventional warfare against Russia is 0. It's zero. Maybe the unfolding of events will show that I'm wrong, but I very much doubt it.
Why do I think that Ukraine cannot win this war? I will explain.
1. Ukraine was surrounded 2. Ukraine did not prepare 3. Russia did prepare 4. Ukraine did not call for a draft until the war started 5. Russia has been fighting wars all over the place for decades
6. Ukraine has not (therefore Russian troops are better trained) 7. Ukraine was totally outnumbered 8. Ukraine had minimal to no help from allies.
(a lot of people are talking a big game about "LOVE FOR UA" or whatever but actions > words) 9. Russia has better weaponry
10. Putin is, in my opinion, much better strategically than the former actor and comedian Zelensky. 11. Ukraine is not mountainous. It's flat and easy to invade. 12. Russia has big time air superiority.
Now a lot of support for Ukraine and the United States is not propaganda as well!
So what is happening here? People in the US are generally patriotic and think Putin is evil, so if you take the other side of that most people are going A) change channel B) unfollow C) block etc
Trust me I know, I've lost almost 300 followers.
Also, for whatever reason, the Russians (who are increasingly disconnected from the world by Facebook and Twitter — speaking of which remember Hunter's laptop?), aren't getting out propaganda to the West.
To people, this gives the impression that Ukraine is somehow winning the war with their babushka army.
It's absurd to me.
Next tweet:
I don't believe in fighting wars you can't win. When you fight a war you cannot win, you and your people die. I think that's a waste and obviously very sad for the families of those who die. If your foundational assumption is that Ukrainians
should fight against the Russians because of some sort of nationalism concept, I cautiously disagree with you. Nationalism does a lot of harm. We're all people and we're all in this together so let's minimize the loss of life.
But also, if you want to fight, fight it guerilla style, because that actually has a chance of winning (I doubt it) but at least do the thing that makes strategic sense.
Next tweet:
Ukraine will lose. Stop resisting so you minimize loss of life. That's my thinking.
2. No one wants an adversarial nation on their border, or near them, funded with weapons from a bigger power (the US). How would you like it Mexico had an increasingly large army funded by China? How would we like it Cuba had missile silos from USSR?
You see this?
This is land the United States owns in Cuba when a foreign nation threatened us.
Next tweet
Putin is not Hitler. We can fight about whether or not the invasion of Ukraine was justified, but the guy is just NOT Hitler. If you think he's evil and the United States is good, you're just wrong.
The US does not have the moral high ground here. I don't think the United States is evil for doing this. I think the US is a big complex system with twisted incentives which result in horrible actions like the invasion of Iraq and destruction of Libya.
I think my followers are a little tired about hearing about Ukraine from me, so I'm going to return to our usual programming:
I have a penis infection.
Time for a thread 🧵👇
I went to the doctor today and I got into the examination room and a nurse (female) came in and, because I had written "suspected penis infection" when I booked the appointment, she knew.
And she started to ask me about it.
And well...
I started to think she was going to examine it!
And this, well, I think the technical term is "boner"...
I got a boner.
And then she went to take my blood pressure.
And my heart is beating realllllll fast, I'm thinking to myself:
Hey @robert_zubrin@NRO, I'm going to need a citation and apology for your rewriting of my 3 tweet thread and my followers' replies into your article, which cited neither.
1/4
It's based on the same concept and uses the same terminology.
2/4
And the article is structured in the same way as my 3 tweets.
What the Russian invasion of Ukraine means for the world going forward:
1. Volatility begets volatility. When something crazy happens, the chance that other crazy things will happen goes up. It's not a coincidence that Canada is freezing peoples' assets and Russia invaded
Ukraine after the most significant event in most of our lives, Covid. To give an example of why things like this happen, other countries around the world may look at what Russia did and say "Wow, I can do that." and when they do, we get another significant event.
2. It's an invitation for China to take Taiwan. China can do the same exact strategy as Russia. Instead of massing troops in Belarus, Crimea, and Donbass, the Chinese can (they'll need some time for naval improvement) just mass boats, missiles, etc and then just swallow Taiwan.
My company won an appeal in the 5th circuit court of appeals (on all counts).
That's a very good thing, but unfortunately, it's not a precedential decision, meaning it can be cited, but it is not binding.
If I had known that was a possibility I might've settled.
1/3
The best part of the case was a very big Chinese seller using this as their address with Amazon.
And they had the balls to appeal the decision against them on the basis that we didn't properly serve them when we actually went to this address to find an older white woman.
I used to think this was the fatal flaw of Bitcoin.
He’s right that this occurs. Mining is a commodity marker and economies of scale drive concentration, which is bad because it increases the chance of a 51% attack allowing a miner to double spend their Bitcoin.
However, once this occurs, and we would know because you can’t double spend your Bitcoin without someone being on the other side of that, it would cause massive loss of trust not only in the participating miners/their public addresses, but also in the entire network.