See other Resistance Articles
Title: What If Putin Doesn’t Back Down?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.theamericanconservative. ... hat-if-putin-doesnt-back-down/
Published: Feb 4, 2015
Author: SCOTT MCCONNELL
Post Date: 2015-02-04 06:55:28 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 1510
Comments: 75
The Beltway's blind confidence in its ability to break Russia could push Moscow into desperate measures. What if Vladimir Putin really was tough? What if he would prefer to fight to the death rather than see his country humiliated by the West or his regime collapse into chaos—outcomes he likely regards as equivalent. Is this not possible? There is no shortage of American politicians ready to attribute the most vile traits to Putin: Hillary Clinton, far from America’s most extreme rhetorician, likened him to Hitler. It’s not, of course, a remotely legitimate comparison. But if Putin were one-tenth as reckless as he is commonly depicted, what conclusions ought we to draw? Leading papers of the Anglosphere are now promoting American plans to escalate the fight against Russia and its Ukraine intervention. Former government officials, polishing up their tough-minded credentials in preparation for their next administration job, recommend we begin major weapons shipments to Ukraine. Are trainers and advisers on how to use them included as well? Strobe Talbott in the Washington Post, Ivo Dalder in the Financial Times, the Washington Post editorial board, other major figures from Clinton-land and the permanent government are all on board for a major roll-out. Their idea is to make Russia pay a higher price in casualties if it continues to intervene on behalf of anti- Kiev rebels in the eastern parts of Ukraine. Mr. Putin “will settle only when the costs of continuing the war are too high” says Dalder. Supplying arms will “raise the costs” to Russia thereby leading to a settlement. Strobe Talbott says the same thing in the Washington Post—”further aggression” must be rendered “so costly” that Putin is deterred. Nowhere in these admonitions is there a suggestion that a negotiated settlement might include a codification of neutral, non-aligned status for Ukraine. The Russian leader who is regularly likened to Hitler is expected apparently to own up to his mistake and allow the country that has countless times served as an invasion route into Russia to be incorporated into NATO. Here’s a thought experiment—not original to me. I heard it voiced last week at a Washington think tank; it was expressed by a Russian immigrant to America, a man I know to be well informed about the thought processes of Russian leaders. What, so the idea was presented, would happen if the tightening economic sanctions, in conjunction with the collapsing oil prices, really did bring about a crise de régime in Moscow? Faced with hard currency shortages and galloping inflation, would the Putinites say simply, “OK NATO You Win. The Ukraine is Yours”? Or would they contemplate measures that might totally rejuggle the underlying realities? Take, for instance, the price of oil. It’s low, it’s collapsing. It’s the major source of Russia’s fiscal difficulties. Would it remain low if Israel launched an attack on Iran? The hawkish Israeli foreign minister Avigidor Lieberman was warmly received in Moscow last week. I don’t think Netanyahu would require much in the way of encouragement to launch an attack, and the promise of the backing of one major outside nuclear power might suffice. Or, playing the other side, would the oil price remain depressed if Saudi Arabia’s monarchy—we all know how stable monarchies are—began facing an armed insurgency, potentially targeting its oil rich eastern provinces? Take your pick, the Islamic State or Shi’ites, it’s not hard to find people who need little encouragement to fight the Saudi monarchy. Could Russia accelerate such insurgencies? Surely a desperate enough Russia could try. Or consider this scenario, the most shocking thing suggested by my Russian emigré interlocutor. Which Baltic country, in the midst of some manufactured crisis between pro- and anti-Russian elements, would be the best place to try out a tactical battlefield nuclear weapon? I can’t imagine such a thing happening—it would certainly be the most alarming event in international politics since what—the Cuban missile crisis? But, to say the least, one such explosion would pretty rapidly put an end to all speculation that Putin and his government are going to meekly comply if we only “raise the cost” to Moscow of intervening in Ukraine. I’m not a Russia expert, though I’m not really persuaded that Ivo Daalder and Strobe Talbott and company are either. But they, like much of the Washington political class, are convinced that it is their God-given role as elite Americans to manage the world, to bend it to our neoliberal capitalist sense of what the good society is. They are part of the seamless Washington web—the term military-industrial complex hardly seems adequate anymore—whose role it is to continuously expand the range of human activities that are supposedly Washington’s business, our ” vital interests”—invariably presented as what is best for everyone else. The Ukraine crisis originated, of course, with the efforts of various American and European elites to exploit longstanding historic resentments in that tragic land in order to count up a win for the West, a defeat for Moscow. Billions of dollars were spent laying the groundwork for a coup d’état and popular revolution—the Maidan campaign was a bit of both—and the efforts were successful. Bravo, said everyone. “It’s one for the history books” said our meddling ambassador after last February’s coup. Then Russia responded, and Washington and all the chanceries of Europe were taken aback by the vigor and violence of the response. So now they plot how to respond to Russia’s reaction. If the West amplifies the pressures just a bit, “raises the price” to Putin for trying to keep NATO out of his backyard, he surely must then submit and bless the transfer of Ukraine into the Western alliance. It’s logical that he would, just as it was logical that the North Vietnamese would submit to Washington’s carefully calibrated escalations of bombing of their homeland. Doesn’t Putin realize that he is up against a superior, more advanced social system? But what if Putin doesn’t respond as all the think tank warriors say he will, then what? Has anyone thought about that? Scott McConnell is a TAC founding editor.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-35) not displayed.
.
.
.
#36. To: Katniss (#17)
The more the old fool can be drawn out from one word droppings the the more his nonsense and contradictions come to light for all to see. I especially enjoy it when he takes diametrically opposed positions on the same thread. It's "wisdom" like his that got us here. “Anti-semitism is a disease–you catch it from Jews”–Edgar J. Steele “The jew cries out in pain, as he strikes you.”–Polish proverb “I would like to express my heartfelt apologies for the unfortunate and tasteless quotes I published in my tag lines. I am very sorry and ashamed. I never wanted to offend anyone, or to encroach human rights."- Hmmmmm
These are not considered to be 'nuclear weapons' and I doubt that they're under any NPTs yet. They're so effective that I doubt we'll be giving them up soon. A beam weapon of some sort could take their place but that's unlikely anytime soon. The number of troops available to China are still a big concern, but their technological approach is even more worrisome. They'll likely be focused on building simple, EMP-proof platforms that are easy to build in quantity. But we agree: China isn't likely to attack Russia if NATO tries to push the Russians out of the Crimean or northeastern Ukraine. According to military theory, NATO would require 10x or better superiority in forces, which they can't deliver. To attack Russia near its core would be suicidal. This whole charade is disgusting considering how many troops Europe and America would lose to gain a few hundred square miles of territory. It reminds me of Napoleon in fact.
Imagine stealth-based paratroop transports... It could happen. The Zbig camp is done with Afghanistan AFAIK. There's a difference between him and the NeoCons as led by the PNAC think tank. Oddly enough both PNAC and the Zbig schools appear to be happy to work with Islamists.
From the Treaty of Aigun page. See also the nifty map below and more history: news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/analysis/29263.stm Russia and China have apparently come to an understanding on how to endtheir centuries-old border dispute, agreeing to the joint development of several islands on the Amur and Ussuri rivers, which divide the countries. President Boris Yeltsin has spoken of it as a possible model for settling of other border disputes in the region. Is this just a pious hope, or a real possibility? Here's our regional analyst, Malcolm Haslett. The islands in the middle of the rivers which separate Chinese and Russian territory have been one of the main causes of the border disputes between the two countries. In 1969, for example, there was a major gunbattle on Damansky island [Chinese - Zhenbao] on the Ussuri [Wusuli] river, in which dozens of soldiers were killed on both sides. This was territory already claimed by the Chinese Empire, though never effectively controlled. There was sporadic fighting between the two sides before the Treaty of Nerchinsk, in 1689, defined the border well north of the Amur river, along which it runs today. But later, with China weakened by the various Opium wars of the 19th century, Russia was able to force the local Chinese commander to sign the Treaty of Aigun, ceding everything north of the Amur, and the large slice of land east of the Ussuri, to Russia. This in effect established today's frontiers. But efforts to resolve the issue permanently only began again when Mikhail Gorbachov was in power in the 1980s. The improvement in relations has continued under Boris Yeltsin. Clearly if joint exploitation goes ahead as planned, it would help greatly to overcome past suspicions. A lot remains to be done, however, to put them into practice
I'm flattered! You needn't call me a sympathizer. I wear jack boots and a black leather trench coat everywhere I go. I'm your worst NAZI nightmare come true :)
So when will Mexico be taking Texas back from the US? Oh that's right, they already have. As other posters have so aptly stated, China has no intent on facing off against Russia, and at the moment they are allies and share mutual defense agreements. Russia is in fact selling them their latest generation anti- aircraft missile systems, the SS-400. In terms of Vladivostok, Russia did not TAKE it from China, but ok, they did prod them a bit for it. So should the US give the majority of the US back to the Native Americans, since the US government pretty much stole all their land a couple of hundred years ago? They didn't just prod them for it, they TOOK it. And BTW Deasy, are you pinging Christine to get her to fight your battles for you? You are beginning to follow a familiar modus operendi. Yeah, I've noticed the same at times. A tinge of senility? He's supposedly no spring chicken. He's a decent civil person however which is more than I'll say for 90+% of most message board posters. I'm not sure I'd say that, but it's "wisdom" like that that at least contributes to us remaining here once we get/got here. "Here" is not a perpetual state however. 40/50 years ago it came and went. 911 did the trick, apparently. Then again, that was their stated goal.
Yeah, they have both tactical ones for individual use by each soldier, as well as shells for use in artillery and armor. War in general is disgusting. The people rarely want it, modern America is among the exceptions. Even here however, people weary of perpetual war. Once it hits home a lot more, which could come with a heightened police state action, then they'll be dead set against it. Ironically, that will be a decade or more too late to do anything about it. And remember, everyone "voted" for it. LOL As to Russia China, we agree that China is not likely to attack Russia, but even if they did, it would not be with ground troops having to march over serious mountain ranges and 4,000 miles +/- to boot. That will never happen and if the Chinese were stupid enough to attempt that, which I cannot even remotely fathom, then they'd be stopped via methods in our discussion or others.
;)
Agreed. I see absolutely no difference, in fact even a bigger fool's errand, the Chinese launching a ground war under even more adversarial conditions and circumstances. Some are, some aren't. I'd say that they are almost all categorically cunning, but that doesn't necessarily equate to intelligent. They certainly lack morality and wisdom, but then so does the vast majority of the population of the US at large. LOL, yeah, funny that, isn't it.
I remember some sentiments along the lines that Obama would "make peace." I don't know if that's how he got voted in, but the media played up his ambitions to ease the world's tensions. But like you I don't think Americans really want peace. WWII is enshrined as a golden calf that is worshiped daily around the nation. One can't have an argument in favor of isolationism without ending up back on the subject of the evil Axis and the poor Jude.
Roger that, and everything always seems to come back to "he's the next Hitler" type of thing, which grows wearying and falls into the boy that cried wolf category, especially since that model and broken record is 70+ years old. War in general, along with mammon, are on the altar of the average American. Our society is one that has transformed into one that use to truly be Christ-ian at its core, but due to the lobbying and special interest groups, primarily Zios, that base has eroded and our nation now worships at the altar of mammon. As such, we reap what we've sown and deserve. I wanted to see Obama win just to see what his supporters would do when he was just as warmongering as his predecessors. He might even be more so depending upon the criteria. Either way, he's hardly generated an image of being any different in that way. Next we need a GOP guy, which will happen anyway because that's the next best move for the creators of this charade, and not that anything's ideal for them, but it's the best option. But that will be interesting when that person doesn't repeal "Obamacare," which is really central-bank-care via the insurance companies, their subsidiaries, and toes the Dem line, to see how the Neos react as their eyes pop out of their skulls.
I believe that morality is a relative thing. If it's universal, global government might make sense. But every culture has its own unique assets and liabilities. The depleted uranium and phosphorous shells come after concluding that we're more ethical than "they" are. Like I said earlier, if you and I were running foreign policy, we would speak softly at home only to our domestic citizenry consulting them about their domestic security preferences such as borders and industrial safety, and almost never speak internationally unless there were both a secular domestic benefit and a consensus from the foreign countries requesting our help. We would be carrying a right-sized defensive stick. We would never form alliances with any country on the entire planet, including Canada and Mexico. I would be advocating research to keep up with foreign weapons systems but think of the USA as our castle and make sure that no one could even consider attacking us militarily. Missile defense would be one way to do that. Caution on immigration would be another.
But I see average families and friends reacting as if we didn't do enough for the empire, and that's why we're failing. Younger people are changing, thankfully. I don't know what it means, but it's hopeful.
Without the Golden Rule morality is dead. Christ is the source of that Golden Rule. This is especially true of a nation that's essentially an island, a rather large one, given that we are bordered by two countries, one of which is a friend, the other primarily a friend as well, and given that neither even comes close to possession the military might or resources to do any harm to us in contrast to what we have, even if they tried.
Let's hope so.
Buddhism teaches that for every moral action, there is a reaction. It's the same thing. Sometimes one has to calculate a few dozen permutations of reactions and counter reactions but usually, just following the golden rule is the right thing. The problem with Christian ethics is the resulting humanism. If human beings were the only purpose of creation then we might have a right to see the golden rule applied or else waft clouds of depleted uranium rounds across an entire city for failing to live up to our standards. I think we should limit the scope of our moral judgement to our own sovereign territory. That isn't the way things worked, and you can bet that a brand of Christianity that you don't personally follow had something to do with it.
There must be some huge reason why Ukraine is so important to the US right now, and it's something huge that is being hidden from the public. The desperation on the part of the Obama admin is pretty obvious. Is it to attempt to delay the collapse of the dollar?
Shades of 'Dollar Bill' Clinton's much-heralded "peace dividend": that fucker ended up bombing Christians in favor of invading Muslims in SE Europe and managed to whack a Chinese embassy. The Halfrican is even more incompetent on the intl. stage and the whole world laughs at him when they aren't shaking their fists at his hamfisted approach to waging illegal wars on behalf of his Zionist masters. Not sure you're making much sense here.
#37. To: Katniss (#34)
Yes, exactly.
It wouldn't take much to create an impassible zone for Chinese foot soldiers trying to move via NE China into SE Russia.
This sounds like Douglas MacArthur. Neutron weapons on actual troops would be more likely scenario, and both the Russians and the Chinese have them, AFAIK.
#38. To: Katniss (#35)
Not seeing it [huge numbers of Chinese troops crossing into Russia]
Just because these guys are in high positions, doesn't mean that they're any brighter or more intelligent, much less more astute or possessive of common sense.
This is the problem: they really are smart. But that makes them overconfident and self-righteous. Moral superiority is a dangerous excuse because it's probably an artificial construct in their minds. Consider napalm as used on Dresden at the end of the war, for no good reason. Yet Germans were hung for collective punishment. Just look at our country's take on Afghanistan and the end result that the world's most powerful and technologically advanced military could not conquer it.
Yes, entering Afghanistan was a fool's errand, and if the 9/11 story has anything to do with bin Laden, our earlier involvement in fighting the Soviets via proxy taught him how to bring empires down. I sometimes wonder if the Russians or even the Chinese returned the favor to the Islamists in the region as a means for revenge.
#39. To: FormerLurker, Cynicom, Katniss, Ada, Obnoxicated, Hmmmmm, X-15 (#9)
FL:
D) Russia did not TAKE Vladivostok,
At a link from his source: Treaty of Aigun From 1850 to 1864, China was heavily fighting the Taiping Rebellion, and Governor-General of the Far East Nikolay Muraviev camped tens of thousands of troops on the borders of Mongolia and Manchuria, preparing to make legal Russian de facto control over the Amur from past settlement. Muraviev seized the opportunity when it was clear that China was losing the Second Opium War, and threatened China with a war on a second front. The Qing Dynasty agreed to enter negotiations with Russia.
Russia and China end 300 year old border dispute
End article.
Where 2 huge countrys meet
The dispute, however, dates back much longer, to the time in the early 17th century when the first Russian settlers reached the sparsely-populated regions north of the Amur river. ![[ image: There
have been border clashes for 300 years]](http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/images/_29263_border1.jpg)
There have been border clashes for 300 years
But China has never acknowledged the legitimacy of the "unequal treaty" of Aigun. And disputes continued until the fighting of 1969. That was ended after talks between prime ministers Zhou Enlai and Kosygin in that same year. ![[ image: Troops still patrol the area]](http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/images/_29263_border3.jpg)
Troops still patrol the area
Both sides are hailing the new "understanding" as the effective end of their border dispute. But it's only been made possible by the introduction of the idea of "joint exploitation" of a number of islands in the Amur, Ussuri and Argun rivers. The details of how this is to be done, contained in a separate agreement, are not yet clear. ![[ image: Jiang Zemin and Boris Yeltsin shake on the deal]](http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/images/_29263_shake150.jpg)
Jiang Zemin and Boris Yeltsin shake on the deal
#40. To: FormerLurker, christine (#29)
So which alphabet soup agency are YOU affiliated with? You appear to have a Paperclip bond there somewhere.
#41. To: Deasy (#39)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#42. To: Deasy (#40)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#43. To: Hmmmmm (#36)
(Edited)
I especially enjoy it when he takes diametrically opposed positions on the same thread.
It's "wisdom" like his that got us here.
#44. To: Deasy (#37)
(Edited)
These are not considered to be 'nuclear weapons' and I doubt that they're under any NPTs yet. They're so effective that I doubt we'll be giving them up soon. A beam weapon of some sort could take their place but that's unlikely anytime soon.
But we agree: China isn't likely to attack Russia if NATO tries to push the Russians out of the Crimean or northeastern Ukraine. According to military theory, NATO would require 10x or better superiority in forces, which they can't deliver. To attack Russia near its core would be suicidal. This whole charade is disgusting considering how many troops Europe and America would lose to gain a few hundred square miles of territory.
#45. To: FormerLurker (#42)
You are beginning to follow a familiar modus operendi.
#46. To: Deasy (#38)
Yes, entering Afghanistan was a fool's errand, and if the 9/11 story has anything to do with bin Laden, our earlier involvement in fighting the Soviets via proxy taught him how to bring empires down.
This is the problem: they really are smart.
Oddly enough both PNAC and the Zbig schools appear to be happy to work with Islamists.
#47. To: Katniss (#44)
Ironically, that will be a decade or more too late to do anything about it. And remember, everyone "voted" for it. LOL
#48. To: Deasy (#47)
#49. To: Katniss (#46)
They certainly lack morality and wisdom, but then so does the vast majority of the population of the US at large.
#50. To: Katniss (#48)
As such, we reap what we've sown and deserve.
#51. To: Deasy (#49)
I believe that morality is a relative thing.
Like I said earlier, if you and I were running foreign policy, we would speak softly at home only to our domestic citizenry consulting them about their domestic security preferences such as borders and industrial safety, and almost never speak internationally unless there were both a secular domestic benefit and a consensus from the foreign countries requesting our help.
#52. To: Deasy (#50)
#53. To: Katniss (#51)
Without the Golden Rule morality is dead
#54. To: Ada (#0)
Leading papers of the Anglosphere are now promoting American plans to escalate the fight against Russia and its Ukraine intervention.
#55. To: Deasy, Katniss (#47)
I remember some sentiments along the lines that Obama would "make peace." I don't know if that's how he got voted in, but the media played up his ambitions to ease the world's tensions. But like you I don't think Americans really want peace.
-Alex Kurtagic
#56. To: Deasy (#53)
Most of true Christianity being "practiced" today is not firmly rooted in the New Testament. Anything at all having to do with Israel as a nation can categorically be pitched as anti-Scriptural. This includes a new temple, Christ ruling on earth in any such temple, etc. I can't even begin to tell you how many people that have a "christian fish" on the back of their cars drive like inconsiderate jackasses. Tons! That isn't the way things worked, and you can bet that a brand of Christianity that you don't personally follow had something to do with it.
#57. To: Deasy (#40)
Oi! I'll bet you listen to Skrewdriver, too. The SPLC does not approve!! :) I wear jack boots and a black leather trench coat everywhere I go. I'm your worst NAZI nightmare come true :)
-Alex Kurtagic
#58. To: X-15 (#55)
As you imply at the end of that, both were merely taking orders from their Zio masters. Should we really blame them? Or should we be blaming the populace for being the ship-of-fools vehicle that's required to pull this entire charade off for well over a century? The diversions put before the masses are working all too well. Shades of 'Dollar Bill' Clinton's much-heralded "peace dividend": that fucker ended up bombing Christians in favor of invading Muslims in SE Europe and managed to whack a Chinese embassy. The Halfrican is even more incompetent on the intl. stage and the whole world laughs at him when they aren't shaking their fists at his hamfisted approach to waging illegal wars on behalf of his Zionist masters.
#59. To: Katniss (#43)
Who would bray support from the sidelines as his minions boots stomped the life out of somebody somewhere. His perspective is from a lifetime on the dole. His thesis that global nuclear war is impossible and the US has a right or duty to interfere (KILL) worldwide while espousing anti-government sentiments is perplexing if not just plain foolish. Everyone here has a right to their opinion. Those opinions may stand the test of time or change based on facts, personal experiences, or ones moral obligations (or they may not). We have the right to be in error, ill-informed, misguided, or (questionably) nuts. Unfortunately (or fortunately) having formed an opinion and publishing it for all to see exposes us to the adulation of all around us or having to defend it. We do not have the right to impose our opinion as fact, make up our own facts, claim special status based on age, beauty, unspecifiable sources, or divine right. Any pretense of Cyni's civility fades when not shown the proper deference to his age, wisdom, inner beauty, and selfless public service. He's a decent civil person however which is more than I'll say for 90+% of most message board posters.
“Anti-semitism is a disease–you catch it from Jews”–Edgar J. Steele
“The jew cries out in pain, as he strikes you.”–Polish proverb
“I would like to express my heartfelt apologies for the unfortunate and tasteless quotes I published in my tag lines. I am very sorry and ashamed. I never wanted to offend anyone, or to encroach human rights."- Hmmmmm
#60. To: Katniss, 4 (#58)
How can we blame a populace so totally mind fucked that they're more interested in the sexual transformation of Bruce Jenner than the true state of the nation? It's like being angry at Nurse Ratched's patients when they dribble their soup. Or should we be blaming the populace for being the ship-of-fools vehicle that's required to pull this entire charade off for well over a century?
#61. To: X-15, Katniss (#55)
I remember. It was a complicated situation. NATO should have worked with the Russians instead of fighting them. NATO if it had been cooperative with the other world power could have avoided many of the dead Croatians too. The way I see it, Kosovo could have been resolved without all the blood-letting as well. I wonder how much CIA instability was fomented there? I knew a Yugoslavian before the split happened and I was told everyone got along OK under Tito. Shades of 'Dollar Bill' Clinton's much-heralded "peace dividend": that fucker ended up bombing Christians in favor of invading Muslims in SE Europe and managed to whack a Chinese embassy.
#62. To: Hmmmmm (#59)
We don't? Egads!!! What the hell do you expect from the lot of us? What are we to do stripped naked of special status? I feel very vulnerable (and not special) without my divine right..sniff, sniff. We do not have the right to impose our opinion as fact, make up our own facts, claim special status based on age, beauty, unspecifiable sources, or divine right.
" If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11
"Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
#63. To: Jethro Tull (#60)
That right there is simply poetic...Simile of the day award goes to...drum roll...Jethro!! Bravo!! I may have to borrow that one from time to time and since you did not copyright that gold nugget I shall have no remorse for my blatant plagiarism. : ) It's like being angry at Nurse Ratched's patients when they dribble their soup.
" If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11
"Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
#64. To: abraxas (#62)
Heh! Heh, heh heh heh. you said naked. What are we to do stripped naked of special status?
“Anti-semitism is a disease–you catch it from Jews”–Edgar J. Steele
“The jew cries out in pain, as he strikes you.”–Polish proverb
“I would like to express my heartfelt apologies for the unfortunate and tasteless quotes I published in my tag lines. I am very sorry and ashamed. I never wanted to offend anyone, or to encroach human rights."- Hmmmmm
#65. To: abraxas (#63)
:) All yours A.
#66. To: Jethro Tull (#60)
Well that was kinda my point. How can we blame a populace so totally mind fucked that they're more interested in the sexual transformation of Bruce Jenner than the true state of the nation? It's like being angry at Nurse Ratched's patients when they dribble their soup.
#67. To: X-15 (#57)
On occasion. I've been blaming the SPLC and the ADL and the local synagogues for riling up our darker neighbors across the land. St. Louis Jewry provided refuges for anti-Wilson protestors in their places of 'worship.' The media is owned and managed by Jews so I blame the coast to coast protests on the Jew media. But unlike the B'nai B'rith, I wouldn't censor anything they say or do. I would amplify their words and trumpet them across the white areas of America. To me it's a sad tragedy that our darker neighbors are blamed for what the kikes are doing to all of us. Oi! I'll bet you listen to Skrewdriver, too. The SPLC does not approve!!
#68. To: Katniss, Jethro Tull, abraxas (#66) (Edited)
But Nurse Ratched's patients love her, swear allegiance to her, and even sell their children to her minions. They claim that her way has always been the best way. She has a 'medicinal' cocktail custom-tailored to each major faction of patients. She has most of the breakout movement on surveillance and via her minions, feeds them a steady diet of disinformation; they congratulate one another on claims that the hospital is about to go broke. Some are led to believe that if they could only alert their fellow hospital inpatients to one more piece of evidence that her treatments are detrimental, they would assist them in the big breakout. Others dream of the day when the senior hospital management will return and put everything into divine order. It's not just that the inpatients are drooling. The majority are satisfied with their regimens and bristle if one questions how wrong it's all been. It's like being angry at Nurse Ratched's patients when they dribble their soup.
#69. To: Pinguinite, Cynicom (#54)
Doesn't seem to explain much to me. There must be some huge reason why Ukraine is so important to the US right now, and it's something huge that is being hidden from the public.
#70. To: Deasy (#69)
The industrial centers of western Europe and those of the Far East are twin poles of great potential representing vast resources and teeming populations hungry for prosperity. There's a transcontinental high voltage attraction there, akin to that which knit North American together in the 19th & 20th centuries. It's a drive that can be slowed, dampened, interfered with but not brought to a dead halt. The great beneficiary of development in the 21st century is the Great Land Power. Just as Germany benefits from being in the center of Europe, Russia gains most from being at the heart of Eurasia. The geo-primacy of the Traditional Sea Powers is challenged by such continental integration in terms of infrastructure and economic relationships. We know that the men who run the Cities (London, DC, NY) will not abide development that is not underneath their thumbs. They'll seek to interpose themselves between Russia those its markets. Then it's tit for tat. The West, for example, can make it difficult to pipe gas through Ukraine. Russia will then attempt to run gas through Bulgaria and Romania. That route will be made difficult to complete due to Western sanctions. Russia next moves the pipelines further south through Turkey to Greece and Italy while simultaneously shipping gas around its somewhat hostile Baltic neighbors to the north to reach markets in Scandinavia and Germany. Some Americans have proposed shipping gas across the Atlantic from East Coast ports, but compressing that stuff, transporting it across the ocean and offloading it in Rotterdam or wherever is hugely expensive. There's a half a trillion in investment required just on the European end to handle the LNG coming off the tankers. I believe the guys talking this project up are lost in a pipe dream. Then there's the military dimension. (Ouch.) 
"If ignorance is truly bliss, then why do so many Americans need Prozac?" - Dave McGowan
#71. To: Pinguinite (#54)
The jewish claim of a "right of retutn" to Ukraine could be one explanation.
#72. To: Hmmmmm, Cynicom (#59)
I understand Cyni's pov here. If we don't step up, you'll have the russians, or even worse, the red chinese calling the shots. Choose your poison.
#73. To: Obnoxicated (#72)
Obs... The Russians have backed down, if the truce holds. What did Putin get in return? Ukraine will NOT join NATO. There is a lesson to be learned here. Just as in the 1930s when Hitler was bluffing and blustering, Western Europe went into collapse in fear. If it were not for the US, they would have bought Putin off with the Ukraine. Putins next push will most likely be in the Baltic, trying to undermine their governments in the same way.
#74. To: Cynicom (#73) (Edited)
Putins next push will most likely be in the Baltic, trying to undermine their governments in the same way. Oh gee whiz I must have missed this gem of yours. Let's see. The US State Department over the course of a decade funded various groups of neo-nazis and fascists such as Right Sector and Svoboda, calling them "pro-democracy groups". Last year it escalated into a violent insurrection against the legitimately elected Ukraine government, which the US fully supported and cheered on, with Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt handing out cookies to Maiden Square "protestors". Shortly thereafter mobs of these "protestors" burst into government buildings beating officials with baseball bats and other weapons, with Molotov cocktails being hurled at police outside. This is what the US called "democracy". Then they turn around all of a sudden and say that all of this is somehow Russia's doing. Just like what YOU are claiming here. Just how exactly is this the fault of the Russian government, or President Putin for that matter? It is NATO that is "pushing" across the Baltic, taking former Soviet republics and imposing their will upon them, under threat of "democratic change". There is a lesson to be learned here. Just as in the 1930s when Hitler was bluffing and blustering, Western Europe went into collapse in fear. If it were not for the US, they would have bought Putin off with the Ukraine.
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#75. To: Cynicom (#73)
Are you familiar with this emblem Cyni? 
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest