timschochet
Footballguy
The war against competence and common sense.Which war did Trump start?
The war against competence and common sense.Which war did Trump start?
We’re still fighting that war.The war against competence and common sense.
Yes he’s been successful at continuing to wage it even out of office.We’re still fighting that war.
So you're saying the example you used of someone who would start a war for ratings, in fact didn't start a war for ratings.I said if a president would start a war to offset a lagging approval rating it fits Trump's MO perfectly. Luckily for us his constant adoration by MAGA guys was enough to keep him in check.
IMO every administration "wants" war in the sense that I think there is way too much money to be made by being in war.Courtjester said:It just seems like this administration "wants" this war. I just don't get all the tough talk Biden is trying to throw out there. I mean, the Ukrainian leader has been telling him to dial it back. He is trying to speak for the Germans and what they are going to do with their pipeline. We get constant updates on CNN from the Biden administration predicting how quick this battle will be over, what tactics Russian could use, when it will happen.
I've just never seen someone hoping for this conflict like Biden right now. Is he upset that people think he is a weak president? Is it because things are going so poorly domestically, they hope this will take people's minds off that? The polls show most Americans simply want no part of this conflict. I just don't understand the end game here.
Luckily for us he only had 4 years.So you're saying the example you used of someone who would start a war for ratings, in fact didn't start a war for ratings.
But yes I know, he's a great example.
I guess if you like wars.Luckily for us he only had 4 years.
Good evaluation of the situation. The ball is in Putin’s court.If Putin backs down (he still might) big win for Biden.
If Putin invades we condemn, place sanctions, and that’s it. It will be an ugly spectacle but we’re not getting involved. Similar to the Soviet invasions of Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968.
You really believe that? Damn thats depressingIMO every administration "wants" war in the sense that I think there is way too much money to be made by being in war.
Yes, I've said as much in other threads. We spend way too much energy #####ing about the POTUS and "teams". IMO our country is much more of a plutocracy than we talk about in these political threads, and more of our decision making is associated with that. Way too much money to be made being in perpetual wars, locking people up, etc.. The R/D stuff is just a sideshow distraction, and real change won't come as long as the same donors are dropping millions into both campaigns.You really believe that? Damn thats depressing
To wit, at this time two years ago our Secretary of Defense was on Raytheon's board.IMO our country is much more of a plutocracy than we talk about in these political threads
Exactly. Just follow the trail of where all these people end up or come from in these administrations.To wit, at this time two years ago our Secretary of Defense was on Raytheon's board.
Hmm. This is interesting to me.Exactly. Just follow the trail of where all these people end up or come from in these administrations.
I will start with the last one - yes the same ingredients are there. Similar concept we have people coming and going from administrations that are tied to pharma companies, etc. IMO we need to keep that in mind when talking about things. I don't think it's a surprise that despite popular support we still have a for-profit medical system, generic and alternative meds are suppressed, and our insurance is tied to our employment. Similar to no matter what team is in the WH we seem to get expansions of the war on drugs and more people locked up.Hmm. This is interesting to me.
I in general tend to be skeptical of government and people in government. I think its warranted and healthy when done reasonably.
But Karma, you here are basically saying we go to wars because people, like the current secretary of defense, will profit from it? Or at least they want us to go to war? It's very reasonable observation to make, that hey the guy who knows military stuff was on the board of a company that makes military stuff...but that's a big leap and a very blanket assumption.
And then I perceive you as very dismissive of sceptics of say governmental covid policy and the vaccine. Are the same motivations and/or ingredients not also there?
There’s no better evidence than that which does not exist, except in one’s mind.Don't stop him, he's on a roll.
For what?So Biden issued a severe warning today to Putin during their phone call. If Russia attacks Joe is ready:
IMO every administration "wants" war in the sense that I think there is way too much money to be made by being in war.
Hopefully with a boatload of sanctions from us and our allies. Not with troops.So Biden issued a severe warning today to Putin during their phone call. If Russia attacks Joe is ready:
I wouldn't say we bailed on the Afghans, we were there forever, trained them up, etc. They choose to roll over to the Taliban once it became clear the US was pulling out.That might be so. And Biden is old school Vietnam era type.
We bail on the Afghans, and going to fight Russia with Ukraine?
I will never understand politics.
I wouldn't say we bailed on the Afghans, we were there forever, trained them up, etc. They choose to roll over to the Taliban once it became clear the US was pulling out.
And I don't think anyone expects US troops to engage in Ukraine.
Does Biden really carry a big stick here?.So Biden issued a severe warning today to Putin during their phone call. If Russia attacks Joe is ready:
Russia and Putin really are the victims here.running out of words to describe how depraved US foreign policy is. to wit:
-spending billions arming Ukraine while covid & economy spiral out of control
-stopping a pipeline between Germany and Russia that both parties (and tons of Europeans) want
-Ukraine blames their collapsing economy on us; urges US to cool it with narrative about Russia invading Ukraine
-Russia preparing for western-sponsored violence against ethnic Russian minority in Ukraine
https://twitter.com/bidetmarxman/status/1492463774640476171
So you deter Russia by saying we and nato will not commit troops.Russia and Putin really are the victims here.
I completely agree with you. I know taking the Russians at their word is dangerous at best, but even tonight their official message was they are not going to invade, and they are just doing exercises.Hopefully with a boatload of sanctions from us and our allies. Not with troops.
I still don't understand what Putin hopes to gain from occupying a hostile country. His own country is in pretty bad shape and severe sanctions will make things even more difficult.
and the ukraine, germany, us citizens and antiwar people in general. thousands dying of covid and homeless people turning up on the street everyday while democrats drum up war with russiaRussia and Putin really are the victims here.
What’s this now?and the ukraine, germany, us citizens and antiwar people in general. thousands dying of covid and homeless people turning up on the street everyday while democrats drum up war with russia
Yep. Those darn democrats just keep making that dictator invade Ukraine.Russia and Putin really are the victims here.
It's bizarre to see people side with Putin. Putin is an expert at engineering reasons for a war (ask the Chechens). Now he's doing it right out in the open and it's sad to see people fall for it. 100k+ troops are just stationed there for defense. Right. War ships are there for defence. OK.What’s this now?
Questioning a government that has a long history of lying about threats posed by other countries is not siding with Putin.tymarsas said:It's bizarre to see people side with Putin.
You don't have to believe the government. You can read the BBC or Al Jazeera or whomever you like. Facts are facts. Russia has 130K troops on Ukraine's border. What is the "let's blame the US government" version of that? What's changed in the last 6 months that would justify Russia's action here?Questioning a government that has a long history of lying about threats posed by other countries is not siding with Putin.
All the same people who spent the last 20 years lying to us about Afghanistan are still in charge. But I'm sure this Russia thing is completely on the level.
What do you "justified"? Justified morally? That's not how foreign policy works.You don't have to believe the government. You can read the BBC or Al Jazeera or whomever you like. Facts are facts. Russia has 130K troops on Ukraine's border. What is the "let's blame the US government" version of that? What's changed in the last 6 months that would justify Russia's action here?
I generally agree with all of this. I've already stated multiple times that Putin won't invade because it would be too costly. But I wouldn't be surprised if he invaded and annexed eastern Ukraine "to protect the ethnic Russians".What do you "justified"? Justified morally? That's not how foreign policy works.
Regarding the troop build up, we have to ask: what does Putin want? Of course he could seize cast swaths of Ukrainian territory with relative ease. But can he occupy that territory?
While Putin may not have to worry about elections, if Russian soldiers come home in bodybags while the economy tanks as Russia is cut off from Western markets he may have his own Euromaidan to deal with.
Threatening an invasion destabilizes Ukraine and sends a message. It's not clear to me what actually invading would accomplish.
I think the administration is playing a dangerous game trying to escalate the possibility of war in order to claim credit for avoiding it (and goosing the profits of the arms manufacturers doesn't hurt either)
Edit: one additional point. Threatening an invasion has exposed divisions within NATO. Actually invading may the effect of uniting NATO which Putin does not want.
Of course this true. More powerful countries threaten less powerful ones regularly. It's the way of the world.What irritates me is that there is one person that is solely responsible for this mess. It is Putin. He put the 130k troops on the border.
Blaming the Democrats for drumming up war with Russia is definitely buying into Putin's narrative and thus siding with Putin.Of course this true. More powerful countries threaten less powerful ones regularly. It's the way of the world.
But that doesn't mean one has to support the course of action this administration has chosen. And dissenting does not mean that one is "siding" with Putin. The casual nature of these smears is gross and has to stop.
The French, German, and most importantly Ukrainian governments have all publicly dissented from the Biden administration's assessments. Are they all on Putin's side too?It's like Putin is slowly loading a gun and pointing it at Ukraine's head while saying "trust me, I'm not going shoot you". Then when Biden says "he's about to shoot Ukraine", everyone jumps on Biden for calling it out instead of the guy with the gun.
What is your assessment of Russia in regards to Ukraine?Questioning a government that has a long history of lying about threats posed by other countries is not siding with Putin.
All the same people who spent the last 20 years lying to us about Afghanistan are still in charge. But I'm sure this Russia thing is completely on the level.
I think Ukraine has mostly dissented from calling it out, not from the assessment. I mean they are training civilians including children to fight. And are trying to get an emergency meeting with Russia. So pretty sure they are concerned about an invasion even if they are trying to act unconcerned.The French, German, and most importantly Ukrainian governments have all publicly dissented from the Biden administration's assessments. Are they all on Putin's side too?