Global Events & Politics Überthread

Jaw said:
I have no problem with spending relatively small amounts of money, mostly in the form of second rate or aging weapons, to help Ukraine maintain independence and weaken a bad global actor. Long term this will make focusing on the ChiComs easier, we've proven that large American presence in Europe is no longer necessary.
Click to expand...

We weaponized the dollar to take out the Russian central bank.

It should have been used against the CCP but the powers that be would never do that. Putin is apparently the real enemy.
 
If I'm following, the argument is that if Putin is not stopped, he will then invade other countries, and eventually those invasions will hurt American interests.

I'm not sure there is any evidence of that, but I fail to see why nsacpi wouldn't support us troops heading to Ukraine right now to stop it
 
sturg33 said:
If I'm following, the argument is that if Putin is not stopped, he will then invade other countries, and eventually those invasions will hurt American interests.

I'm not sure there is any evidence of that, but I fail to see why nsacpi wouldn't support us troops heading to Ukraine right now to stop it
Click to expand...

There is no need to send U.S. troops. Ukraine is a very big country (population over 40,000,000). They have the manpower to do this. What we can help them with is with the military equipment. Of course, we should also be looking at legal avenues for transferring funds from frozen Russian accounts (including their central bank) to the Ukrainians. The reparations for the damage being done to Ukraine's infrastructure and economy (not to mention loss of life and atrocities) by the Russians is going to be very costly.

As I noted there are Russian-speaking populations in many places. Vlad the Dim has used them to stir up conflicts all over the place. It is similar to what Hitler did with the Sudetenland.

But the Russians are not the only ones who can play this game. I've been to Eastern Siberia several times. Many people there do not look Russian. Their first language is often not Russian. Some of the territory in Eastern Siberia once belonged to China or Japan. Ultimately, Russia too will benefit from a general principle that these claims to territory based upon history or the presence of ethnic or linguistic minorities should not be settled by war.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
There is no need to send U.S. troops. Ukraine is a very big country (population over 40,000,000). They have the manpower to do this. What we can help them with is with the military equipment.

As I noted there are Russian-speaking populations in many places. Vlad the Dim has used them to stir up conflicts all over the place. It is similar to what Hitler did with the Sudetenland.
Click to expand...

Did those nations have the US lead a coup to overthrow a democratically elected government and therefore take the voices away from the Russian speaking provinces?
 
Notice who avoids the fact that we led a coup against the will of the people in Ukraine. That same person wants to pretend this is just Putins war.
 
nsacpi said:
There is no need to send U.S. troops. Ukraine is a very big country (population over 40,000,000). They have the manpower to do this. What we can help them with is with the military equipment. Of course, we should also be looking at legal avenues for transferring funds from frozen Russian accounts (including their central bank) to the Ukrainians. The reparations for the damage being done to Ukraine's infrastructure and economy (not to mention loss of life and atrocities) by the Russians is going to be very costly.

As I noted there are Russian-speaking populations in many places. Vlad the Dim has used them to stir up conflicts all over the place. It is similar to what Hitler did with the Sudetenland.

But the Russians are not the only ones who can play this game. I've been to Eastern Siberia several times. Many people there do no look Russian. Their first language is often not Russian. Some of the territory in Eastern Siberia once belonged to China or Japan. Ultimately, Russia too will benefit from a general principle that these claims to territory based upon history or the presence of ethnic or linguistic minorities should not be settled by war.
Click to expand...

Great. But if the funds and weapons aren't enough, is Putin advancing detrimental enough to not send US troops?
 
Jaw said:
That seems pretty clear to me. No one since the end of the Cold War comes close to the foreign policy success of the Trump administration.
Click to expand...

Afghanistan wouldn't have been a national embarrassment as well and those poor kids would have came home to their families alive instead of in a casket.
 
Btw it is interesting that the Soviet Union was the world's last large multinational empire. Even now Russia encompasses significant populations who are not ethnic Russians.

Yet if you look at the very large literature on imperialism, you will see a lot of research on the British Empire and other empires. Very little on the Russian or Soviet Empire. It is an interesting thing.

When you go to France or the UK reminders of past imperial glory are quite visible. There may be some nostalgia for the days of empire in some quarters. But those are small quarters. The body politic in those countries has more or less come to terms that the imperial period is over (though some unhealthy meddling does still happen in the internal affairs of former colonies). Spain has come to terms with the loss of its empire. This is where Russia (at least the Russia under Putin) is different. It would be a very healthy thing for Russia to set aside these imperial ambitions and delusions as other countries have. Its failure to do so is one of the outstanding problems that other countries will be facing for the foreseeable future.

We don't see Portugal trying to annex its former colony Angola, even though many Angolans speak Portuguese and some ethnic Portuguese still live in Angola. It would be absurd. What Russia is trying to do to Ukraine is similarly absurd. Except it is happening.
 
Last edited:
sturg33 said:
Great. But if the funds and weapons aren't enough, is Putin advancing detrimental enough to not send US troops?
Click to expand...

In the event Russia prevails (unlikely as that is) I don't think sending troops would be wise. The fallback plan in that situation would be robust support for guerilla warfare on the part of Ukrainians aimed at maximizing the price the Russians have to pay for their aggression. Needless to say sanctions can and should be tightened considerably. And frozen funds (if legally possible) should be disbursed to the victims of Russian aggression.
 
I can't help but go back and remember when Trump told Germany at NATO that their dependence on Russian oil was a problem that would cause them issues... and the German coalition literally laughed at him

Does the lecturer believe Trump had that one right, with the benefit of hindsight?

And why would a Putin Puppet offer a warning like that if heeded, would have hurt Putin?
 
Just a reminder to y'all

very poorly chosen one froze military aid to Ukraine in an attempt to extort Zelenskyy for a personal political favor

the contortions that y'all continue to go through never cease to astound me...i would have thought the Big Lie and events of January 6 would have presented y'all with a wonderful gift-wrapped opportunity to distance yourself from the sordid saga that was his presidency...but no...it is an interesting phenomenon...once in the tank always in the tank
 
Last edited:
sturg33 said:
I can't help but go back and remember when Trump told Germany at NATO that their dependence on Russian oil was a problem that would cause them issues... and the German coalition literally laughed at him

Does the lecturer believe Trump had that one right, with the benefit of hindsight?

And why would a Putin Puppet offer a warning like that if heeded, would have hurt Putin?
Click to expand...

Why would you not answer this question?
 
nsacpi said:
Just a reminder to y'all

very poorly chosen one froze military aid to Ukraine in an attempt to extort Zelenskyy for a personal political favor

the contortions that y'all continue to go through never cease to astound me...i would have thought the Big Lie and events of January 6 would have presented y'all with a wonderful gift-wrapped opportunity to distance yourself from the sordid saga that was his presidency...but no...it is an interesting phenomenon...once in the tank always in the tank
Click to expand...

And Zelensky said that never happened.

Turns out Trump knew the Bidens were corrupt though and Zelensky should have given up the goods.

Another thing Trump was right about.
 
sturg33 said:
Why would you not answer this question?
Click to expand...

i have a certain amount of ambivalence regarding a more militarily muscular germany

some wag once said NATO had 3 purposes:

1) to keep Russia out

2) to keep the United States in

3) to keep Germany down

there is a fair amount of truthiness to that

there is a strand to German politics and public opinion (at low ebb at the moment but never far from the surface) that looks at Russia as a natural ally...i can't deny a certain logic to it...but a grand alliance between Russia and Germany would not be good for us or the rest of Europe...NATO can be viewed in various ways...but one of its objectives has been to limit any sort of drift on Germany's part toward Russia...some of you may not be old enough to remember this...but there was something called the nuclear freeze movement in the 1980s...it was very strong in Germany...in effect it was the high water mark for this pro-Russian strand of German public opinion...it posed under the guise of anti-nuclear pacificism, but in reality it was effectively a pro-Soviet movement
 
Last edited:
[tw]1518885204445782016[/tw]

This is why what Lloyd Austin said yesterday was important. Russia's capacity and appetite for bullying and trampling on other countries must be diminished. It has been growing under Vlad the Dim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top