Mingles with Jingles Episode 421

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4,090 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Close Ad ×

Go to https://nordpass.com/jingles and use code JINGLES to get 70% off a 2 year NordPass Premium plan plus 1 free month! It’s risk free with 30 day money-back guarantee.

00:00 Start
01:37 We’ve raised nearly $50,000
02:50 Logical fallacies – and why using them pretty much means you have no argument
04:56 Anyone can be both the Good Guys or the Bad Guys. We’re not special.
08:13 Why Russia invaded Ukraine – Military Reasons
16:16 Why Russia invaded Ukraine – Economic Reasons
23:57 – Why Russia is NEVER giving back what they occupied around The Crimea.



  1. There’s only one thing to conclude from this – Jingles is paying too much in the Salt Mines :-)! Also Jingles read my comment last week :-)! Only one detail – actually the Kremlin did offer a fantastic deal to Ukraine to help them extract their oil and gas (entirely in their own interests of course.) Ukraine decided it didn’t fancy being under Putin’s thumb anyway….

    • Oddly, wasn’t that Russian offer originally still going to require the infastructure by the big oil companies, basically putting the Russian companies and the Kremlin as middle men anyway? My limited knowledge of the time was basically Ukraine cutting out all the Russian interests and influence that led to the puppets Kremlin installed there. It’s a dynamic crappy situation either way.

    • @CrazyLocha the infrastructure would have come from Rosneft and Gazprom which are basically Putin’s cash cows (with a few obediant oligarchs hanging around), with that in place and his puppet in the PM’s job in Ukraine he would basically have had a similar situation to the one he has in Belarus and could have sent his heavies in if the government needed them (like in Belarus and Kazakhstan). The Ukranian’s kicked out his man (even when he fled to Harkiv the russian speaking part). You then get the “Russian separatist movment” now it may all be coincidence and you could expect some response to the western movment of their government by people naturally opposed to that and also some racism and nationalism when you’re faced with a larger foreign state atempting to control yours, however that would all be very convenient to encourage from Putin’s point of view and by doing so he would essentially remove access to the oil and gas in Dontesk and Luhansk too (which perfectly suited him), as well as preventing NATO membership due to an “ongoing teritorial dispute” all in all he’s played a pretty good hand for a cold war kgb agent until now but his army is now stuck with insufficient logistical support to advance and a collapsing economy that wont be able to fund the war with collapsing morale in the army and growing domestic opposiiton requiring ever more radical and oppressive measures. The only down side of this is where it ends. Yes Putin could go, in the good scenario Nevalny (main sane opposition leader) becomes PM but there’s alot of dirty money and bodies (literally the body of putins previous opponent – Boris Nemtsov) that people would like to stay burried so it could get very messy, and that’s messy with Nuclear weapons. Plus there’s the question of whether the various countries on Russia’s borders might try to take advantage of the situation.

  2. Bogdan Toma-Silai

    So glad the donations got to such a great start. Last week, after donating, I picked up one of my friends, went shopping and dumped 2 car trunk loads of goods (canned food, sweets, clothes, other assorted stuff) off to a relief organization just outside Bucharest.
    Gotta say, the amount of effort people put in towards helping refugees would melt even my stone cold heart.

    Well done to everybody contributing in any way!

  3. watching you, jingles, invading and raiding while talking about invading and raiding is … mesmerizing

  4. Mighty Jingles, I have to take my hat of to you sir. You are reaching an audience, that doesn’t necessarily go looking for news and even less so the background info for the news. You are also doing it in a, dare I say, objective way where you encourage critical thinking and at least trying to see it from all the angles. I mean clearly you have taken a side, but it’s based on evaluating the whole story, instead of what your favorite new source pushes to you.

    Your work is truly valuable in these times and I bet you know it as well, so keep it up.

  5. Great White North

    It really is nice to hear some intelligent and well thought out discussion on the situation. Jingles should start his own news network! Far more reliable and trustworthy than anything else being spewed right now

  6. Jingles, just wanted to say that I donated to my local Red Cross branch just like you asked us to. Cheers.

  7. Haha
    Jingles, this is the first time I’m saving one of *your* videos into my Philosophy playlist. Solid work for a game-centric channel.

  8. “Innocent civilians shouldn’t have to bear the brunt of this conflict, sadly it’s always the case in war, but it’s our responsibility to help where we can.”

    I certainly don’t disagree with you on that. However, I do find the West’s reaction rather hypocritical as we turned both Iraq and Afghanistan into hellholes (well, you might argue that Afghanistan was already there when we invaded…) and yet there was no uproar, no support… In fact, the general attitude seemed to be one of “they deserved it”.

    And those were only the latest countries in a string of interventions and proxy wars. These days, does anyone remember the “other 9/11”? You know…Back when the US helped Pinochet rise to power in Chile. Does anyone remember, or even care, about the horrible suffering that followed?

  9. Raimondas Čiuplys

    It was a good investment. Three foot thick walls should withstand the blast, if the worst came 😉

  10. subtlewhatssubtle

    There is also the fallacy which I can’t find the name for, but will just call “reductio ad conatus,” reduction to effort, a fallacy which is best summed up as “if you really cared you would be doing everything possible to help, the fact you haven’t booked a ticket to go help in person/emptied your savings/etc. shows you don’t actually care as much as you do.”

    Don’t let people get you down if you can only afford to give $5 to a good cause you believe in. You still need to look after yourself, and you deserve to look after yourself. If you truly support something and give honestly, then that’s good enough. $5 still means someone else can eat a warm meal that night.

    • Roboticus Prime RC

      Sounds a lot like “Moving the Goal Post.”

    • subtlewhatssubtle

      @Roboticus Prime RC Very similar, but this is specifically a fallacy about the amount of effort you put in. It’s unusual in that it can come from both nominal supporters *and* detractors of the act in question, where both parties feel that a person who doesn’t give 100% of themselves to a cause must not believe in it, or that they can’t be respected because they haven’t sacrificed everything for a goal.

      Of course, this is flawed and foolish thinking that also undercuts and negatively affects acts of charity, which is all the more reason to speak out against it.

  11. This is what i love about this community, when things like this happens we all step up and get counted. Ive donated already ( and will do again no doubt ) it definitely warms the heart and restores my faith in Humanity that there are really some “Good eggs” out there. i salute you all good sirs!

  12. @Chaos Carl This is exactly the “what about-ism” that Jingles referred to.

    Yeah, we’re hypocrites. That doesn’t excuse the current behavior of Russia, nor should we allow it to be a distraction.

  13. I love that you took the time to go over logical fallacies, I wish more people would familiarise themselves with them

  14. Yes, Jingles you should really, really, really have at least put in there that they have ruled out intervening militarily. Categorically. We can say about our elected leaders what we want, but they are not willingly leading us into a nuclear war.

  15. Jingles, I think you did an excellent job in laying out why the Russians started this war and what their objectives have been in the Ukraine and in relation to NATO. I would also point out that I think that Russia has not trusted the West’s intentions for about 20 years or so, and by extension NATO.

    But as horrible as this war is I think there are a couple of things that may be positive, not so much for the Ukraine, but in other places in the world.

    1. The strong reaction by the West with sanctions that are crushing the Russian Economy, the seizing the wealth of Russia and its oligarchy in the West, the West supplying the Ukrainian’s with weapons and other assistance, and most importantly the apparently poor performance of the Russian military, may have very well made the CCP in China reevaluate the feasibility of invading Taiwan. The Chinese are even more dependent of the West than Russia, and we on the Chinese. But if the Russian military is having such a hard time with such an overwhelming military presence in a land invasion of the Ukraine the Chinese military would probably fair far far worse in an amphibious operation to invade Taiwan. I think the CCP is watching this and reevaluating whether or not its a wise idea to invade Taiwan. Time will tell.

    2. Hopefully in the West a lesson has been learned that there is still evil in the world and it is a dangerous and unpredictable place and that this begins to curb policies that have weakened the Wests militaries and institutions. That the West is being reminded that freedom is not free and to stop attacking half or more of its own populations by calling them “Deplorables” and worse, the same “Deplorables” who go and do the fighting and the sacrificing for our freedoms, while the other half of the population sits back and spits on them.

    3. That the need to stop nuclear proliferation is taken seriously. That the threats by Putin to use nuclear weapons are a reminder that some people in the world use the threat of a nuclear attack to get what they want if they were to come into possession of nuclear weapons and the ability to deliver them. But this is also being undermined by the fact that now other nations fearing a similar fate to that of the Ukraine may desire nuclear weapons to defend themselves from a future invasion by an aggressor, nations like Japan, Taiwan, come to mind here along with those that have desired the possession of nuclear weapons for a long time like Iran, North Koria and others. This may be one the most long lasting and important legacies of this conflict and one that will have massive consequences.

    The invasion of the Ukraine by the Russians reminds me a little too much of what lead up to WW II and its beginning phases as more and more nations and peoples seem to be, in one way or another, brought into this conflict or forced by others to chose sides. The diplomatic ramifications not only for Russia, but also for the US and Europe might not be positive if cooler heads do not prevail.

    Again I hope this war ends as soon as possible and that the loss of life and the extent of human suffering is kept to a minimum. I am saddened by the fact that humanity just cant stop hurting and killing its brothers and sisters. I really question the ability for our civilization to survive if even in this day and age we keep treating each other like this.

    • @Robert Eltze Russia was one of those countries too, as was Britain (IIRC). Incidentally if Russia didn’t have nuclear weapons we’d probably be in a world war already…. also Russia has relied on it’s nuclear weapons for its actual security ever since the end of the cold war, there’s absolutely no way they’re going to give them up and actually given how paranoid they are I personally think they’re better off with them. China will not invade Taiwan after this. As for Deplorables, some people really are idiots, and I don’t have a problem calling them that. If Trump gets elected again we’re probalby all stuffed.

    • Don’t be so sure about Taiwan, yes a Chinese invasion would be an amphibious operation, but so to would any western attempt to support Taiwan. In the case of Ukraine there are NATO land borders permitting easy provision of military and humanitarian aid.

    • Not all military members and veterans are deplorable, and not all so-called Deplorables are military members or veterans. That’s a false dichotomy.

    • @PhoenixSc China also have nuclear weapons and has noted that the US has refused to actually get involved in the invasion in Ukraine. This will make them bolder, because they can bank on the US not actually doing anything to stop an invasion of Taiwan. As for mutually reliance, with an invasion of Taiwan China would control most of the worlds silicon chip manufacturing, and although it could sanction China, China would cripple the west by simply stopping all exports of chips. The West trying to build up their own chip production, will only speed the invasion up.

  16. I remember the even simpler times when Jingles had to return a coffee machine and that was a 30 minute Mingles episode.

  17. Mindaugas Stankus

    Add a bit to “West” reaction: Conflict/war not few thousand kilometres away any more, it’s on EU/NATO/”West” border, few hundred kilometres away. And if thought couple/few hundred thousands refuges coming over decade(s) was a lot from Africa, Middle East and Central Asia. What about million or two or three just from single country in a weeks time.

  18. For up coming 10th, Happy Birthday you young man. Mine is the 19th and I be 55

  19. Re: Japan being caught without a plan
    This depends on which plan one points to– Adm. Yamamoto’s original plan was to shut down access to the Panama Canal, which would have certainly spooked the US Navy even further. The IJN actually had a decent shot at knocking out the US Navy in the Pacific in 1942, except for the fact that we could break their encryption thanks to the Brits.

    Re: Potential Russian investment in Crimean oil/gas
    The Russian economy was propped up by foreign oil corporations like BP and Royal Dutch Shell– sure, they got a ton of money from the sale of oil/gas, but without those global oil giants, they couldn’t even access that product. There was a slim chance they would’ve been able to bankroll Ukrainian exploration/drilling/extraction of those oil fields, and they would have had to work with the aforementioned foreign corporations to even have the tech available to extract the oil/gas. The fact that they went to the trouble of snatching Crimea instead of securing these deals means that they couldn’t convince BP, Shell, etc., or Putin felt that it was a waste of time with an increasingly pro-EU Ukraine.

    Russia’s fate is now tied inextricably with Ukraine’s. Putin has betrayed many separatists after having promised them they wouldn’t invade. Russia is going to see an insurgency in Crimea and east Ukraine, potentially sabotaging water supplies, pipelines, and power connections.

    Importantly, they do NOT have the tech to extract the oil from off the coast of Crimea. BP, Shell, and even Exxon have pulled out of agreements with Russia following massive sanctions (funnily enough, there’s a project off the Pacfic coast of Russia where the Japanese government is more or less holding the bag after Exxon bailed out). Xi certainly isn’t happy that Russia is now using Chinese payment systems to keep its economy on life support.

    Russia is doing the economic equivalent of imperial Japan trying to stave off the Allies’ advance, and they are losing. Meanwhile they’re committing war crimes in full view of the entire world. “The only move is not to play.”

  20. @James Cabrie ah the sweet times

  21. @SapperEffect I hope you are right.

  22. please stop confusing Iraq and Afghanistan…. I know they took place at the same time but they are not equivalent at all. 30000 people were injured and 3300 people died in the preceding 3 years before the US entered Afghanistan to protect itself. So when you want to give an example of a totally unjust war say Iraq without adding “and Afghanistan”. Hell say “Iraq, Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, Grenada, Spanish American, Mexican American, French American Quasi, American Indian” etc etc etc. Plenty of them to point at but Afghanistan simply isn’t one.

  23. Actually if you look back in Russian history – apart from a brief atempt by Tsar Alexander II and Yeltsin, both of which ended poorly pretty much all Russian Leaders have been autocratic (interestingly Trotsky did not think Stalin was kind enough to be leader but had a stroke and so was unable to prevent his election). There’s a big difference between what happened in 2014 and what is happening now. NATO and the west had warned Russia (and Ukraine) about invading and the consequences – this is a full scale invasion and extinction of a functional democratic state (arguably more so than in 2014) by what is a far more autocratic and totalitarian Russia than it was in 2014. On the back of several other moves by Putin (proping up Asad in Syria, Belarus, recently Kazakhstan) the result was always going to be a much more severe response. I agree with you about Iraq, the aim of removing Saddam was not necessarily a bad one (and actually disagree slightly with Jingles in that I believe Saddam wanted the international community to believe he had WMDs to give him some bargaining/deterance power and also to shore up his position domestically (several of his generals afterwards said they thought he had them) but overplayed his hand, obviously the complete lack of a plan about what to do afterwards (Rumsfelt apparently dropping the State departments several inch thick advice into a bin) was a fuck up.

  24. @Mechakid “what about” ukraine’s 8 year bombardment of luhansk and donetsk? i think russia’s behavior is totally excusable in comparison.

  25. @em1o smurf what about no

  26. @Lucas Henry NATO is a DEFENSE alliance. Maybe you should read the charter.
    NATO members are not required to support the offensive actions of a member state.

  27. Heck, I would even take Jingles talking about video cards….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *