Read on Twitter
1. Time exists
2. Things change with time
3. In 2014, Russia could reasonably expect a fairly high level of acceptance
4. Which was not the case in 2022
5. This invasion was planned based upon the picture of how it *used* to be
6. Which became completely outdated by 2022
2. Things change with time
3. In 2014, Russia could reasonably expect a fairly high level of acceptance
4. Which was not the case in 2022
5. This invasion was planned based upon the picture of how it *used* to be
6. Which became completely outdated by 2022
https://twitter.com/dietheartnews/status/1698043255416312250
7. As time exists, you should not presume that the opportunities you have now will last forever
8. They probably won’t
9. In 2014-2015, Russia had a high chance to launch a successful full scale invasion
10. But it did not
11. I think this was due to the crash in oil prices
8. They probably won’t
9. In 2014-2015, Russia had a high chance to launch a successful full scale invasion
10. But it did not
11. I think this was due to the crash in oil prices
12. By the time Russia decided to invade (I have a reason to believe it was 2019) things changed
13. The popular sentiments changed
14. On the Ukrainian held territory, you could hardly find *young* supporters of Russia
15. The Russian fanbase had been reduced to the elderly
13. The popular sentiments changed
14. On the Ukrainian held territory, you could hardly find *young* supporters of Russia
15. The Russian fanbase had been reduced to the elderly
16. This included that part of Donbas that remained in the Ukrainian hands
17. Russians approaching -> exodus of the young people of both sexes
18. While Russia still had and has a lot of popular support, it has little support among the non senile part of the population
17. Russians approaching -> exodus of the young people of both sexes
18. While Russia still had and has a lot of popular support, it has little support among the non senile part of the population
19. I think that the permanent catastrophe of Donbas played a role in this change of attitude
21. Russia could have made the DPR/LPR a showcase of prosperity demonstrating the benefits of living under the Russian rule
22. It chose not to
23. DPR/LPR became a negative showcase
21. Russia could have made the DPR/LPR a showcase of prosperity demonstrating the benefits of living under the Russian rule
22. It chose not to
23. DPR/LPR became a negative showcase
To summarise:
A. Opportunities don’t last forever. You may be simultaneously:
- Correctly estimating the likelihood of your success
- Exaggerating how long will the window of opportunities last
Happens all the time. I think this is the case with Putin’s invasion. Chance gone
A. Opportunities don’t last forever. You may be simultaneously:
- Correctly estimating the likelihood of your success
- Exaggerating how long will the window of opportunities last
Happens all the time. I think this is the case with Putin’s invasion. Chance gone
B. Temporary and accidental divisions crystallise. While the specific borderline between the Russian and the Ukrainian held Donbas was largely accidental, with time these populations developed very different loyalties
Everything permanent used to be temporary
Everything permanent used to be temporary
C. Identity is a choice
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
