Jump to content

Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)


chasfh

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

Add in...:

4) He waded into politics unnecessarily. Every dim-witted businessman who has a few dollars in his/ her pockets thinks their IQ went up 50 points and they can now solve all the world's problems... He made a good move to send assistance to Ukraine... But that doesn't now mean he has all the answers. Especially when...:

5) He spewed Vladimir Putin talking points, right after speaking to him... WTF? Did he think he was going to get positive responses from Ukraine or the U.S. for regurgitating Putin-speak?

In regards to 4, he threw his opinion on Twitter.  Obviously because of who he is, it got some extra attention, but the biggest issue I believe we see with Twitter is that all to often, it gives a voice to a lot of people that really shouldn't have one, or at least one big enough to report about.  

In regards to 5, he claims he did not speak to Putin recently and only once in his life.  The person that did say he spoke to Putin has lied before.  Honestly it should have never been reported, at least without an additional source or at least reaching out to Musk for his comment.  If he did speak with Putin, our intelligence knows about it and I'm confident there will be a leak confirming it soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ewsieg said:

In regards to 4, he threw his opinion on Twitter.  Obviously because of who he is, it got some extra attention, but the biggest issue I believe we see with Twitter is that all to often, it gives a voice to a lot of people that really shouldn't have one, or at least one big enough to report about.  

In regards to 5, he claims he did not speak to Putin recently and only once in his life.  The person that did say he spoke to Putin has lied before.  Honestly it should have never been reported, at least without an additional source or at least reaching out to Musk for his comment.  If he did speak with Putin, our intelligence knows about it and I'm confident there will be a leak confirming it soon.

"A leak"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Like what is his point?  Putin should get to keep Ukraine? 

I think his point is that we should be mindful and maybe instead of just writing off anyone that says we should look for peace as an obvious Russian asset, maybe keep some eyes out there to see if there is a possibility to bring peace.  

Dan Carlin had a podcast I still remember from years ago that basically pointed to the belief that most people essentially believed nuclear war could not happen any longer as there was no way either side was that stupid to pull the trigger.  He outlined a series of escalations that on their face, were all logical, eventually you got to the point where it made sense that one side or the other flipped the nuclear switch.  

From a foreign policy standpoint, this has been like the US winning the lottery.  Prolonging this, assuming it doesn't change, is just icing on the cake.  But death and destruction continues, the global economy is sliding down and will impact the poor harder than most.  Even if the foreign policy benefit continues, there will be drawbacks.  Those should be pointed out.

I'm pro Ukraine and at this point I'm pretty much on board with what Biden has done.  In fact at this point, I'm more hawkish on air defense than the US is.   But I am shocked at how if you have any caution in regards to war this is and could become, you're labeled a Putin sympathizer. 

If we're the policeman of the world again, why stop at Putin?  Shouldn't we go after Saudi Arabia?  MBS killed an American citizen in a NATO country and just turned his back on us in support of Russia after decades of support from us.  Pretty sure Yemen would like help defending itself against SA.

Women are dying in Iran because they want to show their hair in public.  Why are we not sending them Javelin's?  Do you hate women or do you like them... when they are in the kitchen and barefoot?

There were many in Afghanistan that wanted us to stay and fight the Taliban, but because Trump wanted us out, Biden apparently had no ability to change that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I think his point is that we should be mindful and maybe instead of just writing off anyone that says we should look for peace as an obvious Russian asset, maybe keep some eyes out there to see if there is a possibility to bring peace.  

Dan Carlin had a podcast I still remember from years ago that basically pointed to the belief that most people essentially believed nuclear war could not happen any longer as there was no way either side was that stupid to pull the trigger.  He outlined a series of escalations that on their face, were all logical, eventually you got to the point where it made sense that one side or the other flipped the nuclear switch.  

From a foreign policy standpoint, this has been like the US winning the lottery.  Prolonging this, assuming it doesn't change, is just icing on the cake.  But death and destruction continues, the global economy is sliding down and will impact the poor harder than most.  Even if the foreign policy benefit continues, there will be drawbacks.  Those should be pointed out.

I'm pro Ukraine and at this point I'm pretty much on board with what Biden has done.  In fact at this point, I'm more hawkish on air defense than the US is.   But I am shocked at how if you have any caution in regards to war this is and could become, you're labeled a Putin sympathizer. 

If we're the policeman of the world again, why stop at Putin?  Shouldn't we go after Saudi Arabia?  MBS killed an American citizen in a NATO country and just turned his back on us in support of Russia after decades of support from us.  Pretty sure Yemen would like help defending itself against SA.

Women are dying in Iran because they want to show their hair in public.  Why are we not sending them Javelin's?  Do you hate women or do you like them... when they are in the kitchen and barefoot?

There were many in Afghanistan that wanted us to stay and fight the Taliban, but because Trump wanted us out, Biden apparently had no ability to change that.  

Glenn Greenwald is a Russian agent.  I don't take anything he says with any seriousness.  I'm merely asking...what would the rational argument be that he's making that people would believe who were not already in the Russian camp?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

There were many in Afghanistan that wanted us to stay and fight the Taliban, but because Trump wanted us out, Biden apparently had no ability to change that.  

well, I would say Biden wanted out too....

In any case, the difference is that there is a huge difference between joining an established international defense alliance a la NATO, to aid an ally nation defend itself using their own armies to defend their own land, and intervening out of the blue by yourself in someone else's country. The 1st has a chance, the 2nd generally fails. So that is why it makes a lot more sense to give material support to Ukrainians fighting in Ukraine than to send American fighters into say, Iran. 

I know we all know this, but just for the sake of trivial rigor.

Edited by gehringer_2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

well, I would say Biden wanted out too....

In any case, the difference is that there is a huge difference between joining an established international defense alliance a la NATO, to aid an ally nation defend itself using their own armies to defend their own land, and intervening out of the blue by yourself in someone else's country. The 1st has a chance, the 2nd generally fails. So that is why it makes a lot more sense to give material support to Ukrainians fighting in Ukraine than to send American fighters into say, Iran. 

We left Afghanistan because we needed to bolster our functional alliances to protect Europe and East Asia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

well, I would say Biden wanted out too....

In any case, the difference is that there is a huge difference between joining an established international defense alliance a la NATO, to aid an ally nation defend itself using their own armies to defend their own land, and intervening out of the blue by yourself in someone else's country. The 1st has a chance, the 2nd generally fails. So that is why it makes a lot more sense to give material support to Ukrainians fighting in Ukraine than to send American fighters into say, Iran. 

I know we all know this, but just for the sake of trivial rigor.

There was no international alliance assisting in Afghanistan?  Additionally, there were no Afghani's fighting against the Taliban right up until our departure?  Plus we weren't intervening.....we were already there.  

You're absolutely right about the "value" in defending Afghanistan, it doesn't make as much sense.  But that argument doesn't seem to be allowed if you advocate anything but a Ukraine complete win resulting in Putin losing power.  As of today, if the war ends with Russia keeping some Ukrainian land which is more pro-Russian already, but humiliates Russia on the world stage, results in his power being questioned at home, the Russian economy destroyed, a lesson learned that Russia better stay the F out of any country west of Ukraine (and including Ukraine) otherwise you'll encounter NATO again, combined with requirements to bring so many of the kids/people kidnapped by Russia back to Ukraine, you'd be labeled a Putin sympathizer.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

anything but a Ukraine complete win resulting in Putin losing power. 

One problem I think the world has now is that Putin has taken Russia so far outside the bounds of civilized statecraft that Russia has to take a strategic loss as matter of 'policing' policy/game theory/overal justice, whatever box you want to put it in. IMV,  Russia in Crimea but otherwise out of eastern Ukraine would not have been the worst outcome - it's sort of a toss based on purely historical grounds; but Putin has put the world into a situation where we don't really want to leave a rogue Russian state in such control of the Black sea, so the strategic need to contain Putin's Russia  now plays strongly against leaving Crimea in Russian hands (assuming the Ukrainians could ulitmately wrest it back) in a way that would not have be a factor given a Russian state less inclined to imperialist warfare.

Edited by gehringer_2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, ewsieg said:

As of today, if the war ends with Russia keeping some Ukrainian land which is more pro-Russian already, but humiliates Russia on the world stage, results in his power being questioned at home, the Russian economy destroyed, a lesson learned that Russia better stay the F out of any country west of Ukraine (and including Ukraine) otherwise you'll encounter NATO again, combined with requirements to bring so many of the kids/people kidnapped by Russia back to Ukraine, you'd be labeled a Putin sympathizer.

Are those Ukrainian lands as pro-Russian now as they were when the war began? Personally, I think it's an open question given the response in the East toward the invasion.... 

Either way, I think it's a privileged position for Glenn Greenwald and Elon Musk to screech about "death and destruction" while ignoring or not caring about the reasons that this conflict is happening in the first place or the fact that the country who was invaded wants the help of the world community in pushing back.

As usual, it's the standard fare western chauvinism from the far left and right that treats erases actual Ukrainians from the picture and treats them as if they don't have agency in the conflict that they are currently fighting and dying in. 

Edited by mtutiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day the 30-40% of the US that believes that globalism is the result of alliances are susceptible to propaganda that stresses that only strong leaders who slaughter hundreds of thousands are our bulwarks against the anti-Christ who will bring the end times.   In other words, we have a lot of people who are fucked in the head and lack discernment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, romad1 said:

At the end of the day the 30-40% of the US that believes that globalism is the result of alliances are susceptible to propaganda that stresses that only strong leaders who slaughter hundreds of thousands are our bulwarks against the anti-Christ who will bring the end times.   In other words, we have a lot of people who are fucked in the head and lack discernment.

Every country has those people, the ones who were only 50-50 to be successfully potty trained, but it seems like that percentage of the population is increasing.  It probably is not, it's just that we underestimated it before.  But now, after the past 8 or 10 years, people don't have to be embarrassed about being stupid anymore, they can actually be proud of it and shout it out.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Jim Cowan said:

Every country has those people, the ones who were only 50-50 to be successfully potty trained, but it seems like that percentage of the population is increasing.  It probably is not, it's just that we underestimated it before.  But now, after the past 8 or 10 years, people don't have to be embarrassed about being stupid anymore, they can actually be proud of it and shout it out.  

I wonder what the 3 percenters really mean if they were only 50-50 potty train percentage (PTP).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...