Political Roundtable Part XXX

[Zonkerbl]

It's interesting to me to see former neocons desperate to brutally force Iraq to be our "friend" in the middle east doing a complete 180 to lick the boots of the former head of the KGB. My how the mighty have fallen. It's embarrassing to watch really.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=BVblwftf8vaMr-5U7_scCA&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=phfAss8ko9MaNxjIWKVXDg&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=iv9rZmiymp9TvauB_eOvXw&s=19

[dobrojim]

Like I said, when has Russia been a good faith actor in their
dealings with other countries?

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

?t=BVblwftf8vaMr-5U7_scCA&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=phfAss8ko9MaNxjIWKVXDg&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=iv9rZmiymp9TvauB_eOvXw&s=19

Yet according to some posters on here the US is the aggressor….. Putin is on some Bond level movie villain **** right now.

[Pointgod]

And so it starts. And before anyone accuses me of being a corporate, establishment, Neo liberal, Mehdi Hasan is far from pro war and pro military complex, but he’s honest in calling this out for what it is. An invasion.

Read on Twitter

[TGW]

Like I said, when has Russia been a good faith actor in their
dealings with other countries?

Why do you keep saying this like it matters? This isn’t about good faith…that was thrown out the door a long time ago when the Clintons blatantly interfered in Russian elections in the 90s and openly bragged about it. This isn’t about good vs evil (despite what American liberal classers push ad nauseum). It’s about deliberate American provocation on the Russian borders eliciting a response from an authoritarian President with a hatred for western foreign policy. There are no good guys…this is geopolitics. Get off the soapbox.

[Zonkerbl]

Speaking of lunatic right wingers screaming about their hatred for liberals:

Read on Twitter

?t=p_miuWcEHnM-Q9PfO3p7Lg&s=19

[dobrojim]

Like I said, when has Russia been a good faith actor in their
dealings with other countries?

Why do you keep saying this like it matters? This isn’t about good faith…that was thrown out the door a long time ago when the Clintons blatantly interfered in Russian elections in the 90s and openly bragged about it. This isn’t about good vs evil (despite what American liberal classers push ad nauseum). It’s about deliberate American provocation on the Russian borders eliciting a response from an authoritarian President with a hatred for western foreign policy. There are no good guys…this is geopolitics. Get off the soapbox.

If you think the actions of the US and Russia are morally equivalent, maybe you thought Hitler
was justified at Munich (and later). Whatever we may have done 25-30 years ago to 'interfere'
in their election pales in comparison to what Putin is doing now. This isn't like our installing
the Shah of Iran or a number of other misguided episodes of interference in other countries.
Putin has no legitimate basis for what he's doing now regardless of what we have done.

[pancakes3]

This stuff is blatantly obvious to anyone who isn’t a kissass msnbc watching establishment liberal. The US has slowly strategically moved closer and closer to the Russian border, using NATO as their crutch. Russia is simply pushing back because western diplomacy has historically been proven to be complete ****. Unfortunately, Ukraine is caught in the middle, and I feel badly for those people because they’ve had to deal with American and Russian puppet presidents, the CIA, CIA backed neo-nazis, and Russian backed opposition. They were so desperate for a non-politician, they elected a comedian to be their president (sounds familiar).

This is literally the equivalent of our Cuban missile crisis, except in reverse. Putin simply isn’t going to let some NATO backed country (i.e a US satellite) on their doorstep. So yea, they’re going to push back. Duh.

[citation needed]
also
[flagged as nonsensical]

I appreciate the debate. Here's some citations for you:

https://jacobinmag.com/2022/01/cia-neo-nazi-training-ukraine-russia-putin-biden-nato

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cia-trained-ukrainian-paramilitaries-may-take-central-role-if-russia-invades-185258008.html

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/rights-groups-demand-israel-stop-arming-neo-nazis-in-the-ukraine-1.6248727

https://therealnews.com/the-us-is-arming-and-assisting-neo-nazis-in-ukraine-while-congress-debates-prohibition

I have more coming, just to satisfy your need to be informed. I'm at work right now.

*

Spoiler:

oh and MSNBC commentator and hero Alexander Vindman is one of the spearheads of this Ukranian training program. MSNBC loves to promote CIA propaganda unchecked, and this is just another example.

Sorry, citations not found, except for maybe the part about the unsavory bedfellows of the CIA - but from your own admission, there are no good guys; this is geopolitics. There's nothing provided that supports your narrative that the US is actively using Ukraine as a puppet state to edge closer to Russia's turf baiting Russia into a war of self-defense. Democratic Ukraine wants to be protected under NATO for this exact situation where Russia is annexing their land directly.

Have you looked into any of Russia's active influences like flooding the country with misinformation by buying up and influencing TV stations, saying that the EU and NATO are actually anti-European hegemonies, and that it's better to unite under Russian? Or you know... Russia's actual buildup of troops on the border? I don't mean to invoke Bush-era coalition of the willing, but there is an actual coalition of the willing from all over Europe gathered in Ukraine.

Like, this isn't a joke. Russia invaded Crimea, and now they're going to invade the Ukraine. You say you feel bad for the Ukrainians in having to fight a proxy war between the US and Russia, but Russia is the one making this an actual war. It's a shame that you can't set aside your deep-seated hatred of the Clintons to see it for what it is. Try not to filter everything through your American-centric lens.

What I take issue with is that I'm not entirely sure what your point is, other than the US is the sole instigator for this war, and that we should feel bad for what we're doing. Then when other people point stuff that Putin and others have done, you are quick to explain away the sins of the others, but cling onto your hatred for the center-left. We get it. You don't like the Clintons. I don't either. But they are not the root cause of every piece of awful in this world for time immemorial. Diversify the targets of your frustration.

Also, the cuban analogy doesn't work in the day of ICBMs.

[Zonkerbl]

What's happening is W rushed us into a war he didn't know how to win in Iraq and Afghanistan to limit Russia's political influence over oil producers in the fsu and the me and lost, but no one was willing to admit it until Biden. Now that we've left the theater Putin is asserting his dominance in the region in as humiliating a fashion for Biden as he can manage. Basically tell everyone you're invading Ukraine and no one can stop you, and then prove it's true by doing it.

There's a real simple solution to this - concede control over fossil fuels to Putin and then switch to alternative fuels so it doesn't matter.

[dobrojim]

Speaking of anti-democratic forces...

https://tinyurl.com/4pw26cvb

Clarence Thomas was and is a really poorly suited person for a Supreme Court justice.

Early in the Reagan administration, several Christian conservative leaders founded a group called the Council for National Policy. It soon turned into what my colleague David Kirkpatrick has described as “a little-known club of a few hundred of the most powerful conservatives in the country.” One of its main functions was introducing political activists to wealthy donors who could finance their work.

After Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, the group’s political arm, known as C.N.P. Action, sprang into action. It encouraged its members to spread stories about “election irregularities and issues” in five swing states that Joe Biden had won narrowly. The goal was to persuade Republican state legislators to adopt Trump’s false claims about election fraud — and then award their states’ electoral votes to him, overturning Biden’s victory.

One vocal proponent of the effort was a C.N.P. board member who had spent decades in conservative politics. In the lead-up to the Jan. 6 rally at the Capitol, she reportedly mediated between feuding factions so that they would work together to plan it. On the day of the rally, she posted a message on Facebook: “GOD BLESS EACH OF YOU STANDING UP or PRAYING!”

This board member’s name is Ginni Thomas, and she is married to Clarence Thomas, the longest-serving justice on the Supreme Court. Today, The Times Magazine has published an investigation of Ginni Thomas’s work and its connections to her husband, written by Danny Hakim and Jo Becker.

also (by Jane Meyer)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/31/is-ginni-thomas-a-threat-to-the-supreme-court?te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20220222

The claim that the Justices’ opinions are politically neutral is becoming increasingly hard to accept, especially from Thomas, whose wife, Virginia (Ginni) Thomas, is a vocal right-wing activist. She has declared that America is in existential danger because of the “deep state” and the “fascist left,” which includes “transsexual fascists.” Thomas, a lawyer who runs a small political-lobbying firm, Liberty Consulting, has become a prominent member of various hard-line groups. Her political activism has caused controversy for years. For the most part, it has been dismissed as the harmless action of an independent spouse. But now the Court appears likely to secure victories for her allies in a number of highly polarizing cases—on abortion, affirmative action, and gun rights.

[pancakes3]

absolutely laughable that Ginny is going off about the deep state when Thomas is about to be the longest tenured justice by almost double (he's on his 31st year, Bryer is retiring in year 28, and Roberts is on year 16 years).

conservatives are so gosh durn awful.

[dobrojim]

I was struck by her use of "transexual fascists".
What is she even talking about?

[TGW]

Like I said, when has Russia been a good faith actor in their
dealings with other countries?

Why do you keep saying this like it matters? This isn’t about good faith…that was thrown out the door a long time ago when the Clintons blatantly interfered in Russian elections in the 90s and openly bragged about it. This isn’t about good vs evil (despite what American liberal classers push ad nauseum). It’s about deliberate American provocation on the Russian borders eliciting a response from an authoritarian President with a hatred for western foreign policy. There are no good guys…this is geopolitics. Get off the soapbox.

If you think the actions of the US and Russia are morally equivalent, maybe you thought Hitler
was justified at Munich (and later). Whatever we may have done 25-30 years ago to 'interfere'
in their election pales in comparison to what Putin is doing now. This isn't like our installing
the Shah of Iran or a number of other misguided episodes of interference in other countries.
Putin has no legitimate basis for what he's doing now regardless of what we have done.

Did you just pull the hitler card? Lol this is why I stay away from this thread…full of hyperbolic nonsense. Sorry bro…not going there.

[Pointgod]

That’s a myth and gaslighting from Putin to justify trying to take over a sovereign country.

Is it?

There's been talk about those assurances being rendered to Russia during the 2+4 meetings that were held to discuss Germany's ambition at a unified East and West Germany but none of them were ever put into writing or any official agreements.

There seems to be ample evidence that points into the direction that those guarantees were in fact made and subsequently ignored.

https://www.spiegel.de/ausland/nato-osterweiterung-aktenfund-stuetzt-russische-version-a-1613d467-bd72-4f02-8e16-2cd6d3285295

edit: a more comprehensive overview realizing that not everybody may be aware of the browser translation functions.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

Please note on the subject of NATO talks only relating to Germany.

Feb 1, 1990
Source
U.S. Department of State. FOIA Reading Room. Case F-2015 10829

One of the myths about the January and February 1990 discussions of German unification is that these talks occurred so early in the process, with the Warsaw Pact still very much in existence, that no one was thinking about the possibility that Central and European countries, even then members of the Warsaw Pact, could in the future become members of NATO. On the contrary, the West German foreign minister’s Tutzing formula in his speech of January 31, 1990, widely reported in the media in Europe, Washington, and Moscow, explicitly addressed the possibility of NATO expansion, as well as Central and Eastern European membership in NATO – and denied that possibility, as part of his olive garland towards Moscow. This U.S. Embassy Bonn cable reporting back to Washington details both of Hans-Dietrich Genscher’s proposals – that NATO would not expand to the east, and that the former territory of the GDR in a unified Germany would be treated differently from other NATO territory.

This is what the crux of the conversation comes down to. Nothing formal or in writing was agreed to. What Putin is trying to do is confirm revisionist history like there was an agreement in place, but because the U.S. went back on the agreement he’s justified in invading a sovereign country which is just all kinds of crazy pants.

Those topics were discussed but I didn’t find the scope or urgency in any of the supporting links. Using unofficial talks of officials 30 years ago to justify actions now, doesn’t make sense if you’re an honest broker. Hell an official agreement such as the Iran deal was torn up by Trump and I’m not sure anyone all of a sudden wants to see a nuclear powered Iran.

[Pointgod]

Like I said, when has Russia been a good faith actor in their
dealings with other countries?

Why do you keep saying this like it matters? This isn’t about good faith…that was thrown out the door a long time ago when the Clintons blatantly interfered in Russian elections in the 90s and openly bragged about it. This isn’t about good vs evil (despite what American liberal classers push ad nauseum). It’s about deliberate American provocation on the Russian borders eliciting a response from an authoritarian President with a hatred for western foreign policy. There are
no good guys…this is geopolitics. Get off the soapbox.

So how should this be addressed? You’re obviously against US Imperialism but you don’t seem to have any smoke for Russian imperialism. Should other countries just let Russia invade Ukraine? Isolationism then?

[doclinkin]

Why do you keep saying this like it matters? This isn’t about good faith…that was thrown out the door a long time ago when the Clintons blatantly interfered in Russian elections in the 90s and openly bragged about it. This isn’t about good vs evil (despite what American liberal classers push ad nauseum). It’s about deliberate American provocation on the Russian borders eliciting a response from an authoritarian President with a hatred for western foreign policy. There are no good guys…this is geopolitics. Get off the soapbox.

If you think the actions of the US and Russia are morally equivalent, maybe you thought Hitler
was justified at Munich (and later). Whatever we may have done 25-30 years ago to 'interfere'
in their election pales in comparison to what Putin is doing now. This isn't like our installing
the Shah of Iran or a number of other misguided episodes of interference in other countries.
Putin has no legitimate basis for what he's doing now regardless of what we have done.

Did you just pull the hitler card? Lol this is why I stay away from this thread…full of hyperbolic nonsense. Sorry bro…not going there.

Hitler card? Look in general Godwin's Law (the longer an internet conversation goes on the more likely someone will compare something to Hitler) is a humorous wink at the level of hyperbole we can swiftly reach. IN THIS CASE we are talking about an impending land war in Europe where tanks are massing on the border of a US ally, in preparation for a tank blitz. If we don't discuss Hitler in this context we are freakin idiots.

I'm lefty, don't agree with pointless proliferation of arms or US adventurism overseas or involving ourselves in 20 year standing wars in areas of no great strategic importance or obvious end goals. However, putting up a roadblock of some sort against the idea that might makes right is not a moral debate, it is a strategic necessity.

We can complain about the farce of democracy here in the US or world wide. That it is skewed to protect the interests of the powerful. Or make a wry statement that Democracy in america is a nice concept that we should try some day. But Vladimir Putin published a position paper where effectively he stated that democracy was a "weapon of mass destruction". That allowing the will of the people to determine their own destiny, was not only irrelevant in the face of military and ancient historical borders, but that the concept itself was dangerous. His position: What Russia says is Russian belongs to Russia because they have the will and military to take it.

That does not really lead to world stability. Ruins markets. Human rights. Peace on earth. Risks provoking WW3.

Yeah. No. Unless you are employed by a Russian troll farm (and you know, hey, no judgement, everybody has to feed their family) it is tricky to justify a hands off approach to Russian power on the move. There are a number of former Soviet States over which Putin asserts dominion, where he would like to re-write the history that Gorbachev set in motion. Some of those states voted to join us in NATO. Should we hand those back to him as well?

Yeah. No. Land war in Europe means a comparison to Hitler is an Apples to different kind of Apples comparison. Oranges to tangerines. Only you know, this time with Nuclear missile technology perfected. And cyber assault. Etc.

[pancakes3]

it's actually bonkers how deep and precise that the current Russian buildup maps onto 1930's german militarization.

a couple decades after a massive international humiliation (WW1 reparations v. collapse of USSR), the handicapped nation picks itself up by the bootstraps through intense nationalistic grit and fascist governing to reclaim its bygone glories.

same can be said about China, except they're engaged in a more sophisticated form of reclamation. they're not concerned with maps and borders. why take over a country, when you can just economically rape it without dealing with the messiness of actually governing the citizenry? privatized colonization works a lot better - and that's a page straight out of the U.S.'s playbook. and less risk of a messy bullet war. just shrug and cite to the invisible hand.

[dobrojim]

Thank you Doc and 'cakes.

There are times when Godwin's law is a useful reminder to keep it real.
This ain't one of them.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=qBHIYb5fzsurjdl45VTXZQ&s=19