10 Comments
User's avatar
Chris's avatar

Has anybody ever diagnosed you as being anhedonic? You have been talking about the need to get rid of Yermak for at least a year and now he’s gone and you’re like, “good, not gonna change anything…” What on earth would it take to put a little Christmas cheer into your reporting? This is good news!

Yury Peskin's avatar

Thank you, Tom. Thank you, Don.

Marmot's avatar

> not buying it that any person older than 30 is ‘naive’

Yep, if voters (over 30) vote corrupt politicians which we have are not naive, then they are 1. very stupid or 2. know very well what they are doing. If you still believe, that the state of politics we have is to blame the politicians only, then you are ... very young, congratulations!

James Coffey's avatar

Number 1 definitely! (at least vis-à-vis the U.S.A.)

Anton's avatar

How do you read Zaluzhny coming out publicly just at the same time?

Hans Torvatn's avatar

Getting rid of Yermak is good. If we now can see Syrsky leave it is better. The reasons for this may matter, but the results matter more. So if Zelenskyy is angry with Syrsky it’s fine.

Alan King's avatar

Gosh what a surprise. Focus on corruption: very good. But Ukraine? Small potatoes compared to Russia or the USA. Or Belgium. Another gosh! Putin talking-points post.

Vadim's avatar

USA or Belgium can afford themselves corruption - they are not at war.

Donald Hill's avatar

And Ukraine's war is a fight for its existence.

There is always room for some amount of error that still allows for success. Continued mistakes reduce the room for error.