Russia Russia Russia

[snafu]

3 minutes ago, Foxx said:

There is always the view that the conflict was manufactured to get the US and Europe out of fossil fuels and into Green Energy. The only question is, is Russia in on the game?

 

What is the end game? Climate Change of course. Of course, with everyone a bit poorer but better off for it ().

 

I, for one, welcome my new Climate Change Overlords!

 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, snafu said:

 

Geez, I couldn't disagree more with most everything you wrote .

I suppose the unanswerable question is whether you'd complain just as much if the US ignored this conflict and intervened elsewhere.

 

 

 Disagreement is fine, of course. 

 

Everything is dependent upon the goal. If the goal were to help bring peace and prosperity to Ukrainians, I'd be for it. But that's not the goal based on the moves and actions taken. The goal, stated many times, is to "bleed Russia" at the expense of Ukraine. 

 

That, to me, helps no one but the corrupt western officials looking to line their pockets, the arms industry, and our enemies. 

 

I'm not an isolationist. But it's like we've learned nothing from the past 22 years of this nonsense. The people running the show right now have blood on their hands - in multiple theaters, in multiple conflicts, some righteous, some not - but none of them were successful in their stated goals of bringing stability to the geopolitical situation or prosperity to the downtrodden. If anything, the opposite keeps happening. 

 

I suggest that's because the true goal is instability. Not just in the halls of power in Moscow, but right here in the USA too.

 

The evidence that this is the true goal is almost undeniable at this point. From Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Libya, to Yemen, to Syria, the US war effort has not made the world safer or more stable. It's done the opposite, at great cost to our country and brethren. That's not the fault of the soldiers, airmen, or sailors. It's the fault of the policy makers. 

 

The ones who were shown the door four years ago, and the world experienced the most peaceful four years of the 21st century in return. Then, almost as if by magic, the moment the old crew regains control we're right back in the shit. 

 

You may say that's just coincidence or the fault of Putin. I don't. I say it speaks to an agenda US and Western leaders have boasted about for two decades +. 

 

1 hour ago, snafu said:

 

Where are we giving China or Iran a free pass?

In fact, Iran has serious anti-government protests in more than half of its provinces because the sanctions relief stemming from a new nuke deal isn't forthcoming.  Either our focus on Eastern Europe has delayed the deal, or our foreign policy CAN do two things at once.

 

 

* Removing the IIRGC from the terror list

* Stopping covert activities into Tehran that had been paying huge dividends

* Publicly stating that we're going back into the Nuclear deal - giving the Mullahs a stay of execution

 

Those Iranian protests have been going on in earnest since 2017. They've tapered off from their peak due to Biden's words and actions. 

 

China literally owns key members of Biden's administration and cabinet - and likely Biden himself. We were in the process of rebuilding our HUMINT network in China until the plug was pulled in 2021. To date we still have almost zero HUMINT sources inside China, this after the Clinton scandal(s) and OPM breach identified our covert assets in country for the CCP to exterminate in 2008-2016.

 

That's just off the top of my head. 

 

1 hour ago, snafu said:

 

No.

And I think China might be regretting their cozyup with the Russians.

Why do you believe the U.S. is the only country that makes poor decisions?

 

 

They are though. We know they're sharing intelligence:

 

https://www.axios.com/2022/02/25/china-russia-us-invasion-ukraine

 

We also know that they've both been actively building wedges between the US and India (a key strategic partnership for dealing with both China and Russia): 

 

https://thehill.com/policy/international/596948-strained-us-india-relations-under-pressure-over-russia/

 

But for the record, I most certainly do not believe the US is the only country that makes poor decisions. That's never been a part of my argument. My argument isn't even that Biden, Obama, Clinton, Bush, and company are making poor decisions as much as they're making decisions guided by interests other than what's best for the American people and the Republic. 

 

1 hour ago, snafu said:

It has always been a matter of "when".  Again, the U.S. foreign policy can multi-task.  There's a coalition of willing states in the Eastern Hemisphere who want to see China contained.  Our government has fostered those relationships.  That effort hasn't stopped since the end of February.  Why would you think is has?

 

Are relations with Japan better in 2022 than they were in 2020, or worse? 

Are relations with India better in 2022 than they were in 2020, or worse? 

 

Those are the two key countries to help reign in China, and those relations have deteriorated greatly since Blinken and company came in. Ditto with the DPRK, though they're still very much a proxy of the CCP. 

 

My argument isn't that the US is incapable of multitasking. Not at all. My argument isn't that the people running the show here are inept or incapable. Far from it. 

 

My argument is that they're proven liars with an agenda that is NOT what they claim. And it's backed up by receipts stretching 20+ years now. 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

No, they're not more dangerous today.

 

They would absolutely have been more dangerous if the sanctions response against Russia and military aid to Ukraine had been weaker.

 

Explain if you would how Russia is a threat to the US or its people today. Take Ukraine out of the equation, what threat do they pose outside of a random nuclear strike? 

 

We were told they were a threat to our democracy, that they attacked it, when they didn't. Five years of fear and hysteria were devoted to trying to push that lie. Why would that be necessary if Russia were such a threat? Why would the powers that be need to invent a piece of fiction, like that 45 was a Russian asset, if they could have used factual information instead to make their case that Russia is a terrifying, world altering threat to us? 

 

Russia does not have global ambitions. WE DO. Are they a threat to that? Maybe to a small extent, but again, how does that translate to you and me and our families? Do you think there's a threat that Russia is going to roll tanks across the Mexican border into California? 

 

They're not the USSR anymore. They're a gas station with nukes and an admittedly tyrannical leader at the helm who has been in power for going on 30 years. And in that time, who did more damage to US interests - Russia or ourselves? 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

Perhaps.  But you're ignoring the fact that this war spending isn't the inflation-creating catalyst.  If you want to complain about bad policies of this administration (not to mention China's zero Covid policy and Russia's use of energy and food as geopolitical weapons) that have contributed to inflation, have at it.  Ukraine money is a small fraction of that.

 

 

In 2003 we dumped $3 trillion of treasure into fighting in the sand. Five years later the world was rocked by the housing market collapse. No one saw that coming, and had we not spent that cash in the sand the bubble still would have burst but maybe, just maybe, as a country we would have been in a better financial situation to combat it. To help our people when they needed it most. 

 

In 2022 everyone sees the inflation crisis coming and a looming recession if not depression headed our way. Dumping 100s of billions of dollars into a cesspit of corruption (where we know our leaders are taking kickbacks) seems outright criminal to me. It's not the leading cause, but what it's doing is making sure when the pain truly comes, the nation's coffers won't be able to help its people who footed the bill. 

 

That's the issue. 

 

Saving Ukraine doesn't provide a ROI, no matter what the hawks say. It just means we have less in our own pockets when we know we'll need it. 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

This is your interpretation.  I completely disagree with the above (except Biden's weakness -- which hasn't proven to be the disaster you're making it out to be, yet).  I actually worry more about Blinken.

 

 

Biden's team is much more of a threat than Biden. Biden doesn't know what day it is, let alone wield any power. He's a puppet for the very same people who mapped out our adventures in the sand, mountains, and Libya. They're provenly corrupt. Provenly poor at strategic thinking. Proven enemies of everything this country is supposed to stand for. 

 

You don't have to agree, but it's hard to argue when you look at their track records in waging wars - proxy or otherwise - this century. 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

Really?

Germany.

Finland.

Sweden.

Turkey cutting off access to the Black Sea.

Poland showing leadership.

All of Eastern Europe was considered a neutral buffer prior to Russia's excursion.  Now, they're all involved.

 

The EU has increased its defense spending by less than 1% to date. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-24/military-spending-passes-2-trillion-as-europe-boosts-defenses

 

Less than 1% - and they were already not meeting the minimum requirements of NATO to begin with.

 

We are absolutely footing the majority of the bill, there's no sign that's changing. If anything, our eagerness to do so only assures the EU doesn't need to change. 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

You can have your opinion.  I simply disagree.

This time, it's different.  

 

 

 Fair  

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

Putin's M.O. from the start is to create or capitalize on chaos to weaken and distract the U.S. and chip away at our influence.  Good for him.  I won't root for it.

 

I'm not rooting for it. 

 

I'm asking, why did the people in charge today, right now, have to lie about Russia for five years if they were such a threat? Why did 44 have to invent a lie to expel 20+ Russian diplomats, shutter embassies, and make diplomacy even more difficult if their goal was peace not inciting a conflict with Russia? 

 

Again, Clinton campaigned on waging war against Russian pilots in Syria. That was her primary plank. 

 

Why has every bit of neocon/neoliberal foreign policy the past 8 years been aimed at ginning up support for regime change in Moscow itself? 

 

Putin's a bad guy, I don't disagree. But not every bad guy has to be our problem. We went out of our way to make him our problem - so that whenever he acted, the public would blindly support whatever actions we took in response. 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

Did you like it when Russia intervened in Syria?

Wasn't it great when Russia held trilateral strategy and training sessions with Iran and Turkey?

Wasn't it great that Russians have influenced nearly every South American election in recent history?

I loved hearing that the Russians moved into Western Africa after France left (to provide "security"), didn't you?

 

 

Again, we were in all those same places, doing the same thing. 

 

Chicken and egg scenario... 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

 

Until the Russians showed their ineptitude in Ukraine, they were considered a real threat.  I honestly don't think they've gone all-in so far.  Show me anyone who thought in January, 2022 that the Ukrainians were going to hold their own.

 

 

I'll just reiterate no one knows what's happening really on the ground. All the analysis so far has been terrible, false, or outright gaslighting. 

 

2 hours ago, snafu said:

Should the Ukrainians NOT fight because of Russia's nukes?

 

 

I've never once begrudged or said the Ukrainians shouldn't fight. They're being invaded, they have the right to fight for their homes as anyone else would. I don't begrudge them, I don't blame their leadership for playing propaganda games, or begging for help. 

 

What I have said, and continue to say, is that just because that's happening doesn't mean we have to get involved as we - and by "we" I mean this specific leadership down to its unelected officials - tend to make things worse, not better, for the people on the ground. 

 

We tied Ukraine to a stake in the T-Rex pit for the past few decades, and now are pretending to be surprised that the T-Rex took a chomp. And sometimes the goat gets eaten. If that has to happen to keep the world from turning into nuclear ash, that's fine with me - as an American. 

 

As a Ukrainian, obviously, it wouldn't be. But I'm not Ukrainian. I'm not Russian. My responsibility lies in holding our leaders accountable, not Putin or Ukraine's. 

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Again... if you pay attention to what's actually being said instead of how it's spun, you can't land on any other opinion other than the US wants this fight. And has wanted it for a long time. 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Again... if you pay attention to what's actually being said instead of how it's spun, you can't land on any other opinion other than the US wants this fight. And has wanted it for a long time. 

 

It won't be too long before the administration takes the position I'm seeing others parrot: it's justified, because the Russian cyber attacks that put Trump in power were an act of war.

[Deranged Rhino]

5 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Monkey said:

 

It won't be too long before the administration takes the position I'm seeing others parrot: it's justified, because the Russian cyber attacks that put Trump in power were an act of war.

 

100%

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

High. The odds are high. 
(Though I haven't seen any hint as to what this is about, most likely is about inflation/economic news - that they'll try to blame on this crisis)

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

26 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

High. The odds are high. 
(Though I haven't seen any hint as to what this is about, most likely is about inflation/economic news - that they'll try to blame on this crisis)

 

"It's Trump's fault."

[Deranged Rhino]

5 minutes ago, Crap Throwing Monkey said:

 

"It's Trump's fault."

 

I guess it's going to be about guns. 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

The "experts" are never wrong. 

 

(Masks, vaccines, asymptomatic spread, WMD, Russia/Trump - the list is endless from just the past six years)

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

Just now, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I guess it's going to be about guns. 

 

Can't be about guns without being about racism and white supremacy...which is also Trump's fault.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Which is why

1) Ukraine needs to be propped up with economic aid.  This is, coincidentally, the situation the Soviet Union found themselves in in the summer of 1942: Their economy in complete disarray, near collapse, but being propped up by Lend-Lease, which completely bollocksed German estimates of Soviet resiliency and staying-power.

2) The initial Russian invasion plan was breathtakingly idiotic.  Trying to go full-tilt for Kiev, when the theater center-of-gravity was to the south-east, between the Dneipr and the Don bends.

[Koko]

5 hours ago, Crap Throwing Monkey said:

 

Can't be about guns without being about racism and white supremacy...which is also Trump's fault.

 

 

Remember when Romney gave that chick cancer? Yeah... &#%$ing Trump made him do it!

[Dubs]

 

[Dubs]

33 minutes ago, Dubs said:

 

the comments following this article are….well….what you’d expect from a NY Times audience. Pathetic. 

[Foxx]

This is what war by proxy gets you.

 

Russia will strike West if US rockets hit us, says Putin ally

[Nouseforaname]

19 minutes ago, Foxx said:

This is what war by proxy gets you.

 

Russia will strike West if US rockets hit us, says Putin ally

Empty threats?

[Foxx]

22 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Empty threats?

Would you like to find out?

[Nouseforaname]

15 minutes ago, Foxx said:

Would you like to find out?

Is that a threat ?

[Foxx]

53 minutes ago, Nouseforaname said:

Is that a threat ?

Answer the question.