Ukraine updates

[Mr. Deez]

Yeah. I remember being called a Putin apologist for basically saying what the article says.

I didn't call you a Putin apologist for saying the war started in 2014. That's pretty obviously true.

 

[Chop]

Putin - mostly a really smart diplomat whose national interests are butting up (and against) ours. One major problem he now obviously has is that his military is nowhere near as strong as he (and just about everyone else) thought it was. Another problem is Russia's historical paranoia (some of which may be justified) and desire for a huge "buffer area" along its borders.

The problem is that nations like Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine, Romania, Finland, etc. want to determine their own destiny, and don't want to be mere Russian puppets. These are legitimate independent nations--the sort that would be recognized by the Treaty of Westphalia, and are recognized by the post-WW II United Nations.

Russia and China never really bought into the post-WWII framework of not being allowed to invade neighbor states, and other international laws and customs (which actually go all the way back to the Peace of Westphalia).

 

[Horn6721]

Yellen just announced we are giving Ukraine 10Billion more.

 

[Monahorns]

Excerpts from the article I posted which I was trying to communicate a year ago.

"The other thing I will say is that the war didn't start in February last year. The war started in 2014. And since 2014, NATO Allies have provided support to Ukraine, with training, with equipment, so the Ukrainian Armed Forces were much stronger in 2022, than they were in 2020, and 2014. And of course, that made a huge difference when President Putin decided to attack Ukraine," Stoltenberg said.

The point isn't just when the war started which actually can be placed back into 2004. The point is also that the ongoing war and buildup influenced Putin to attack in 2022 along with the failed negotiations in 2021. The very next paragraph is below.

And of course, a central reason for the war articulated by President Putin both in the lead-up to the invasion and after has consistently been that the West was waging an anti-Russia proxy war right at its doorstep, namely in the war-torn Donbass.

Further highlighting the facts of the last 24 years. These facts were completely forgotten and ignored until everyone knew it all along. Russia's outlook is fleshed out further in the next paragraph.

In the Russian view, the United States has the ability and willingness to unilaterally destroy or overthrow any government that does not do its bidding. The experience of Serbia (1999), Iraq (2003), Syria (2011), Libya (2011), and most recently Ukraine (2014) and the attempt in Belarus (2021) seem to support their perspective.

Those who are going on about Russia's "imperial ambitions" under "Communist dictator Vladimir Putin" have little knowledge about any of this, or why the Russians might feel legitimately threatened by having a US-sponsored and NATO-aligned regime for a neighbor.

 

[Monahorns]

Putin - mostly a really smart diplomat whose national interests are butting up (and against) ours. One major problem he now obviously has is that his military is nowhere near as strong as he (and just about everyone else) thought it was. Another problem is Russia's historical paranoia (some of which may be justified) and desire for a huge "buffer area" along its borders.

I consider this paragraph unequivocally true.

The problem is that nations like Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine, Romania, Finland, etc. want to determine their own destiny, and don't want to be mere Russian puppets. These are legitimate independent nations--the sort that would be recognized by the Treaty of Westphalia, and are recognized by the post-WW II United Nations.

This is all equally true. The issue is that not all the people in those countries all agree on how politically tied their country should be to others. Many (most?) are fearful of Russia because the history of the USSR. But some aren't. That issue is most pronounced in Ukraine. The other factor is, should the US treat other countries like puppets? I would say no. But we do know that the CIA funded, trained, and helped one group of Ukrainians overthrow a President a majority of Ukrainians voted for. So the issue isn't so straight forward. How about we abolish the CIA, cut the budget, and focus remaining budget items on building up America? We need it. Instead the US government is paying for Ukraine's pension program. At what point is it clear that Ukraine is the US's puppet? We kept them from negotiating peace at least once. Biden has corrupt economic ties to at least one Ukrainian oligarch. Who know what else the Hunter Biden files would expose.

Russia and China never really bought into the post-WWII framework of not being allowed to invade neighbor states, and other international laws and customs (which actually go all the way back to the Peace of Westphalia).

This is hilarious actually. How many states has the US military invaded in just the last 20 years? How many has China invaded?

Has anybody read up on the US government's interventions all over Central America, South America, and the Caribbean? The facts are all out there.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Excerpts from the article I posted which I was trying to communicate a year ago.



The point isn't just when the war started which actually can be placed back into 2004. The point is also that the ongoing war and buildup influenced Putin to attack in 2022 along with the failed negotiations in 2021. The very next paragraph is below.



Further highlighting the facts of the last 24 years. These facts were completely forgotten and ignored until everyone knew it all along. Russia's outlook is fleshed out further in the next paragraph.

I know what you've said, and I've called you a Putin apologist several times. It just wasn't for saying the war started in 2014. It's sorta like how OU sucks, but it's not because of the Indians.

 

[Chop]

I consider this paragraph unequivocally true.



This is all equally true. The issue is that not all the people in those countries all agree on how politically tied their country should be to others. Many (most?) are fearful of Russia because the history of the USSR. But some aren't. That issue is most pronounced in Ukraine. The other factor is, should the US treat other countries like puppets? I would say no. But we do know that the CIA funded, trained, and helped one group of Ukrainians overthrow a President a majority of Ukrainians voted for. So the issue isn't so straight forward. How about we abolish the CIA, cut the budget, and focus remaining budget items on building up America? We need it. Instead the US government is paying for Ukraine's pension program. At what point is it clear that Ukraine is the US's puppet? We kept them from negotiating peace at least once. Biden has corrupt economic ties to at least one Ukrainian oligarch. Who know what else the Hunter Biden files would expose.



This is hilarious actually. How many states has the US military invaded in just the last 20 years? How many has China invaded?

Has anybody read up on the US government's interventions all over Central America, South America, and the Caribbean? The facts are all out there.

In modern times, we haven’t invaded another country and annexed it. When we destroyed the Spanish Empire, we ended up freeing Cuba and ultimately the Philippines. And we’ve given Puerto Rico votes to become a state, or leave, or stay as is. They always choose to stay as is—which is actually a pretty sweet deal for them.

China has invaded Tibet and annexed it. Russia has invaded lots of neighbors and annexed them. And I’m not talking about the 1700s or 1800s. We’re talking about the last hundred years. Even in the Banana Wars between WW1 and WW2, which you vaguely reference, we never annexed Honduras, Columbia, El Salvador, or Guatemala—although we had the power to do so.

 

[Chop]

Then there’s Guam

It’s not a country, it’s a military base (or two or three) with some diving and snorkeling spots.

Never an actual state or country. A Spanish base, then an American base, then a Japanese base, then an American base again.

To be extra fair to the Guam residents, perhaps we should make Guam part of the State of Hawaii. Yes, there’s massive racism by the Polynesians against the Chamorros, but they can get over it. It’s not the 1800s anymore.

 

[Monahorns]

I know what you've said, and I've called you a Putin apologist several times. It just wasn't for saying the war started in 2014. It's sorta like how OU sucks, but it's not because of the Indians.

I posted the article to show that NATO officials admitted what I was saying in 2022. You used the title to dismiss that. I never said you called my something because of the title about the war starting in 2014. But as I showed with the excerpts, NATO themselves admit to the points I was making for which you did accuse me. Therefore, NATO are also Putin apologists according to your logic.

 

[Monahorns]

In modern times, we haven’t invaded another country and annexed it. When we destroyed the Spanish Empire, we ended up freeing Cuba and ultimately the Philippines. And we’ve given Puerto Rico votes to become a state, or leave, or stay as is. They always choose to stay as is—which is actually a pretty sweet deal for them.

Now you add the caveat "annex". The US regime doesn't annex. They control. It is the difference between what socialists do to the means of production and what fascists do to the mean of production. They are subtle differences that don't make of one.

China has invaded Tibet and annexed it. Russia has invaded lots of neighbors and annexed them. And I’m not talking about the 1700s or 1800s. We’re talking about the last hundred years. Even in the Banana Wars between WW1 and WW2, which you vaguely reference, we never annexed Honduras, Columbia, El Salvador, or Guatemala—although we had the power to do so.

Again I never argued about annexation so you win the argument against yourself. The point was the US had invaded and intervened military regularly over the last 20 years and even since WW2. No great power respects the borders of smaller, weaker states. Different great powers operate in different ways but they are all aggressive as historical facts prove clearly. The US didn't annex any of the countries you listed, fair enough, but they did invade and destroy private property on behalf of US corporate interests. The US corporations benefitted from the intervention through control of resources and controlling of markets.

Plus add Chile, Brazil, and Iran. The US overthrew democratically elected governments. I even like Pinochet. But facts is facts.

 

[Chop]

There is a proper balance between Interventionism and Isolationism. Neither extreme is good.

 

[Chop]

they did invade and destroy private property on behalf of US corporate interests

In the Banana Wars, the US military protected private property from theft/expropriation.

 

[Chop]

New Orleans regards "Sam the Banana Man" as a hero. His mansion is where Tulane's President lives.

 

[mchammer]

Then there’s Guam

It’s not a country, it’s a military base (or two or three) with some diving and snorkeling spots.

Never an actual state or country. A Spanish base, then an American base, then a Japanese base, then an American base again.

To be extra fair to the Guam residents, perhaps we should make Guam part of the State of Hawaii. Yes, there’s massive racism by the Polynesians against the Chamorros, but they can get over it. It’s not the 1800s anymore.

Hey Chop, you big dummy, you forgot the Northern Marianas. They were Spanish, German, Japanese (given to them after supporting the Allies in WW1), and then US after WW2.

 

[Monahorns]

There is a proper balance between Interventionism and Isolationism. Neither extreme is good.

That wasn't the point we were discussing. It was the fact that powerful countries don't respect the borders of other states when they don't want to.

 

[Monahorns]

In the Banana Wars, the US military protected private property from theft/expropriation.

Sometimes. Not all the time.

Maybe not considered the Banana Wars specifically but the US government has worked with foreign governments to expel natives around South America to take land from previous owners.

You can justify military protecting American private property outside of our borders. That's fine. But that isn't the full story.

 

[Chop]

In the Cold War, it was about stopping communism.

 

[Chop]

Hey Chop, you big dummy, you forgot the Northern Marianas. They were Spanish, German, Japanese (given to them after supporting the Allies in WW1), and then US after WW2.

Mostly uninhabited dive and snorkel spots and military installations. Saipan was the cite of one of the most vicious, infamous, and deadly (mostly for them) Banzai charges by the IJA, and some bad *** fighting by our Marine Corps. At some point in the battle the mentality of IJA officer corps time travelled about 1,000 years back in time to the past. (Maybe it coincided with when they ran out of ammo…?)

 

[Chop]

Sometimes. Not all the time.

Maybe not considered the Banana Wars specifically but the US government has worked with foreign governments to expel natives around South America to take land from previous owners.

You can justify military protecting American private property outside of our borders. That's fine. But that isn't the full story.

There was also an element of making sure loans made by big US banks were repaid in some of the Banana Wars, so I’ve heard…

Many criticized the Banana Wars as using the (public) US Military like a private army for mega American landowners and banks.

 

[Monahorns]

There was also an element of making sure loans made by big US banks were repaid in some of the Banana Wars, so I’ve heard…

I've read this was a big motivation for entering WW1. Col. House didn't want to lose his money.

Many criticized the Banana Wars as using the (public) US Military like a private army for mega American landowners and banks.

This type of action could be legitimate or not based on the details. US military ultimately exists to protect US citizens and their private property. If that property exists outside the US borders there could be legitimate reasons to provide protection.

 

[Monahorns]

Hersh breaks another story. Germany was lucky their winter was very mild this year. But next year this could still hurt them.

How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline

 

[mchammer]

NBC Reporter Goes To Crimea, Shocks Viewers By Telling The Truth | ZeroHedge

 

[mchammer]

 

[Facing Addiction]

But wait, there's more.....

 

[Horn6721]

Is this On Top of the 11 billion announced earlier this week?
WTF

 

[theiioftx]

Ukraine Asks Merrick Garland To Leave As They Already Have Enough Corrupt Government Officials

 

[Facing Addiction]

Thumbs up? Thumbs down? I'm inclined to agree with DeSantis. Seems like we have just signed a blank check that Ukraine keeps cashing.....

DeSantis rattles GOP establishment with Ukraine comments | Not the Bee

 

[Garmel]

DeSantis shows no signs of going Establishment which is fantastic.

 

[Monahorns]

If DeSantis shifts more towards Trump on foreign policy he will win. If not there will be a big chunk of Rs that won't vote for him.

By the way, anyone seeing what is going on in Bakhmut? Once that take over is complete Russia will be 100% in control of Donbas. They are already making head way to the next military strong hold of Ukraine. If that falls Russia will be over the Dnieper. Kiev may even be in jeopardy. The main thing keeping Russia back right now is mudding ground. I am not presenting this as good or bad. In light of it though negotiation is Ukraine's best bet. But not sure Russia is open to that now after 2 failed starts in 2022.

The sad truth that I want to end is that Ukraine is mostly sending very young 15-16 and very old 45+ to the front now because they are running out of prime age males. Life expectancy around Bakhmut is 4 hours. Anyway not sure how this will wind down now, but God help Ukraine. Would be great to hear China and the US to start calling loudly, seriously, and publicly for negotiation. China did some talking not sure how serious.

 

[mchammer]

@Mr. Deez Traveling through Frankfurt airport on way to Delhi and the airport is not hotter than hell (despite being cold outside, near 0 C). Normally it’s hot inside as you know. In fact, it’s actually cool and refreshing. I can only conclude that Germany has cut back the heat to the airport for this to occur. Hopefully this changes long term behavior.