Russia is sure to lose in Ukraine, reckons a Chinese expert on Russia

OK - thanks. Gringo here - always thought it was jail because we get the word "hoosegow" from it. Watching too many western movies. I was wrong and I thank you for the correction. Confirmed by Google.

"A: Hoosegow is a slang term synonymous with jail. The word comes from the Mexican Spanish word “juzgado,” meaning “tribunal” or “judge.” The word is derived from a mispronunciation of juzgado, the last two syllables of which are sometimes slurred into the diphthong “ao.” Juzgado also gave us “jug” as the term for jail"

Today I learned. Muchas gracias.

 

I'm not sure it IS a correction. Your use of the term might be correct in some places. I don't know and have often wondered.

 

Perhaps in a Gringo-written song somewhat like this:
https://genius.com/Tom-lehrer-in-old-mexico-lyrics

or in a Mexican-themed movie, preferably starring Salma Hayek.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Once_Upon_a_Time_in_Mexico

Or perhaps not at all. No se preocupe, amigo.

 

Or, think about this, it might be United States colloquial Spanish. I can usually follow standard Mexican Spanish pretty easily but when the locals start talking amongst themselves, I quickly lose the thread.

Here's an example where I did learn. During Covid, we did a lot of Google Meets hearings. The PIN for Meets always ends in what we call the number sign or occasionally the pound sign or symbol. I overheard a local interpreter refer to the pound sign as "gatita". What? Turns out that's the name for "tic tac toe" in fontera Spanish.

Now there is no possible way I could have known that!

Another really common example. If you didn't hear what someone said to you, you might say "Desculpa me?" Or "Como?" Or even "Que?" (Which I personally think is rude.) Around here, you say, "Mande?"

So anyway, don't assume you're wrong.

 

And 'corte' vs. 'juzgado' discussed fully, and (I believe) professionally, here: https://www.transcend.net/library/legalCourts/PL_LangVarCourt.pdf

I'm thinking "hoosegow" which was borrowed to mean "jail" never meant exactly that in Spanish.
"Calaboose" probably did. "Calabozo" - dungeon in Spanish.
"Buckaroo" - another one - from "vaquero" (cowboy) in Spanish.

"Proto-Spanglish" in the Old West. Might be a good doctoral dissertation subject - for somebody else.

 

Russia is running out of tanks and other armored attack vehicles, I saw footage of one tank rushing toward Ukrainian forces trying to break through, with some 25 or 26 Russian solders on top and sides clinging to the tank, Ukrainian drone attacked tank and immediately solders were flying of the tank, half of the solders on it got hurt others fell and tried to escape the tank in flames.
Russia lost some huge #s of thanks and armored vehicles so far and grim milestone was reached of above 450,000 Russian losses. They can't even launch an attack with multiple tanks, instead they sacrifice a lot of solders.

 

It's interesting. Around here, what you might call a "gully" is an "arroyo". Always. The terms "gully" and "gulch" don't exist. On the other hand, a "camioneta" is a "peek up". Always.

 

A "ditch" for irrigation is an "acequia" and the guy in charge is the "Mayordomo". Almost always, at least in the North. Common usage down here.

 

On the other hand, "almuerzo" is usually rendered "lonche" even if the parties are speaking English.

 

Muchas gracias. Ahora tengo que conducir mi peek-up y comprar algo de lonche.
Espero no conducir hacia la acequia o el arroyo.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/nato-drills-show-preparing-potential-094244906.html

NATO drills show it is preparing for potential conflict with Russia, Moscow says

 

That is the stated purpose of NATO? To protect NATO members from attack. The most likely country to carry out such an attack is Russia.

 

Russians see it differently.
For them NATO is major security threat and an obstacle on a way to achieve their leadership interests/goals.

 

"NATO is a defensive alliance. It does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to Russia, or any other nations." (Reference: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm). That's a fact. NATO is not a a major security threat. Their perspective is not another legitimate way of seeing things. But NATO is a threat to current Russian leadership interests/goals. But these goals are not legitimate either.

 

We know it, they see a buildup and being surrounded. I'm not defending Russians, just saying, they see it as a major security threat.
That's how they sell it

 

They. Are. Lying. Not that hard.

When you are saying that "NATO is a threat to their goals", ask yourself: what goals are these? "Civil War was not about slavery, it was about states' rights" - yeah, states' rights to protect slavery. Same thing here.

 

This can be any goals, such as expending the borders, and turning Ukraine in to RF state, eliminating it as we know it.
Baltic states etc.
Be it resources or strategic lands.
All fall under their goals and interests.
For such goals NATO is a threat.

 

1. After some thought on this article, I am NOT surprised that the CCP allowed him to publish this opinion piece. In fact, the possibility exists that he may have been 'inspired' or otherwise encouraged to publish this as an effort to convince the West that Ukraine will eventually win, so that the West will back off somewhat, allowing the Russians to ultimately WIN... contrary to the prediction of the article. Thus, this article could/should be classified as a 'Passive Psychological Attack' in an effort to alter the West's commitment to Ukraine... If I am correct in this diagnosis, I would expect to see more Chinese academic support for this campaign of deception. (By allowing the academics to enter into this deception, it is most probably hoped that their lack of position in Chinese government will provide additional credibility for this ingenious campaign of deception.)

2. Mr Putin is so psychologically disturbed, that he 'creates' the NATO Threat in his head... The NATO Threat is in all actually a force kept in place by freedom-loving neighbors who do NOT want to fall victim to forcible Russian domination. Thus, the existence of the NATO Threat in Russian mentality. When thinking of Mr. Putin one must consider him with an ‘oppositional defiant disorder lens’... the unified NATO presence is a counter-force presence that attempts to prohibit him from doing what HE wants to do... therefore it is a THREAT to him. He is blocked in on the West by defiant neighbors who do not trust him and do not want him to 'bless their existence' with his 'charms.'

The necessary historical sidebar. Yes... to provide the proper background for this discussion, one MUST consider the comprehensive history of that region. For hundreds of years the region of western Russia has fallen victim to invaders from the west. The Swedes, Poles, French, Germans, etc. have all had a 'go' at attempting to conquer parts of western Russia. Thus the paranoia and the obsessive compulsive necessity to secure their western border by forcibly taking over their neighbor to ensure peace (while benefiting from seizing their industry, farm produce, and anything else of value and sending it to "Mother Russia').
Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Russia

Admittedly my position in this discussion comes from 25+ years of U.S. military service... so I am definitely jaded... clearly biased against the Russian 'charm.'

 

A very interesting take on point 1. We will have to wait and see but likely will never know for sure. Point 2, my guess is that Putin is very aware of the defensive posture of NATO. He obviously has expansionist aims so is against NATO. He fear mongers about NATO internally for that reason but also because autocrats like to fear monger to get the population on their side, an us versus them mentality.