The United States(!) of A
Killery!haha....i thought she was Billery.
When Clinton won his first presidential term in 1993 i was in California.someone tagged graffiti on the beach dunny block wall.
."the president sucks and so does her husband!"
Still true to this very day.
Supafreak wrote:Go get em Tulsi . Didn’t killery accuse Tulsi of being a russian spy ? https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/1493522316952629248?s=21
stories like this are why I lose respect for our abc by the day
putting all the domestic bias and ignoring ommisions aside... is this not significant news?
if this was donald trump there would be back to back coverage, but a hilary clinton scandal, and not even a mention....
...very strange...
abc, just flat out failing to report news worthy developments
its a disgrace really, an absolute failure of our national broadcaster
and yes tulsi showing incredible bravery again
a clinton cancelling could be very costly
the ultimate price, ...you might say...
Listened to Tulsi Joe rogan podcast the other day, she seems really well balanced and complete with real life experience/military background, just seems she was with the wrong party.
sypkan wrote:Supafreak wrote:Go get em Tulsi . Didn’t killery accuse Tulsi of being a russian spy ? https://twitter.com/tulsigabbard/status/1493522316952629248?s=21
stories like this are why I lose respect for our abc by the day
putting all the domestic bias and ignoring ommisions aside... is this not significant news?
if this was donald trump there would be back to back coverage, but a hilary clinton scandal, and not even a mention....
...very strange...
abc, just flat out failing to report news worthy developments
its a disgrace really, an absolute failure of our national broadcaster
I have zero interest in ABC's news editorial, especially the TV part. I remember my father-in-law watching it in the mornings and I couldn't believe the propaganda, bias, and passive aggression coming from the reporters. Horrendous.
On the other hand, I fully respect their regional reporting and kids programs. They cover a lot of stuff that is simply not of interest to other media houses as there is no profitability. I also like Triple J coming out with new music and promoting young musicians but when they start talking to each other in the studio...Dear lord, I have to switch it off straight away.
So I'm not one of these radical guys who wants to defund them. They have a place. But the news side of it...Jeez, they really need to do something about it.
Interesting to see this Russia-Ukraine stuff go down and USA sticking their noses in things.
Would this be happening if Trump was still in power???
Imagine the screaming, the hysteria, if Trump had done something similar.
There's a thread 'Trump and the risk of war' collecting cobwebs in the Politico section, I come back to it every now and again to bump it and make it look as ridiculous as it is.
Trump was the exception to the rule.
The Ides of March approach.
I strongly suspected that Trump not toeing the traditional hawkish line in foreign policy was one of the (many) reasons he was hunted from all angles.
Don’t see it myself, the opposite in fact, it was because of the man-baby trump years Russia and China have become more embolden.
In other Trump news all you Trump boosters seem to ignore, his accountants have dumped him claiming none of his financials going back 20 years can be relied on and Ivanka ,Junior and Trump have all been issued subpoenas by the NYAG for documents and depositions they tried and failed to ignore. Donald bullshitted the world about his wealth which is fine, but he also bullshitted his lenders which has resulted in civil and criminal cases being built. He will be broke and in jail if they succeed.
But yeah, let's all speculate on what a big difference he would make in Ukraine, maybe if his insurrection had worked and he was still President, Ukrainian unicorns would be flying over Kiev dropping fairy floss, who knows?
adam12 wrote:In other Trump news all you Trump boosters seem to ignore, his accountants have dumped him claiming none of his financials going back 20 years can be relied on and Ivanka ,Junior and Trump have all been issued subpoenas by the NYAG for documents and depositions they tried and failed to ignore. Donald bullshitted the world about his wealth which is fine, but he also bullshitted his lenders which has resulted in civil and criminal cases being built. He will be broke and in jail if they succeed.
But yeah, let's all speculate on what a big difference he would make in Ukraine, maybe if his insurrection had worked and he was still President, Ukrainian unicorns would be flying over Kiev dropping fairy floss, who knows?
Do ya reckon killery might end up as his cell mate ?
Supa "Do ya reckon killery might end up as his cell mate ?"
If she has defrauded her lenders, yes.
If she is guilty of a crime, yes.
Why raise her? I wasn't talking about her. False equivalency, look it up.
adam12 wrote:Supa "Do ya reckon killery might end up as his cell mate ?"
If she has defrauded her lenders, yes.
If she is guilty of a crime, yes.
Why raise her? I wasn't talking about her. False equivalency, look it up.
Why raise her ? Have you heard of the durham report ? Just reckon these two sharing a cell would have plenty to talk about . https://thehill.com/homenews/news/594608-hillary-clinton-on-durham-repor...
velocityjohnno wrote:There's a thread 'Trump and the risk of war' collecting cobwebs in the Politico section, I come back to it every now and again to bump it and make it look as ridiculous as it is.
Trump was the exception to the rule.
The Ides of March approach.
Yeah that thread didn't age very well.
Maybe Trump got lucky or maybe his out of the box approach not following the typical USA president script worked in some way, or maybe other countries just thought he was so unpredictable they didn't want to push things...Who knows?...maybe we will never know.
indo-dreaming wrote:velocityjohnno wrote:There's a thread 'Trump and the risk of war' collecting cobwebs in the Politico section, I come back to it every now and again to bump it and make it look as ridiculous as it is.
Trump was the exception to the rule.
The Ides of March approach.Yeah that thread didn't age very well.
Maybe Trump got lucky or maybe his out of the box approach not following the typical USA president script worked in some way, or maybe other countries just thought he was so unpredictable they didn't want to push things...Who knows?...maybe we will never know.
What set of circumstances and events do you think have triggered the current situation in Ukraine?
AndyM wrote:I strongly suspected that Trump not toeing the traditional hawkish line in foreign policy was one of the (many) reasons he was hunted from all angles.
Trump was hawkish. What makes you think he wasn’t? He just bullshitted about a lot of it.
Etarip what would be your take on what’s happening in Ukraine and why? I’m a bit confused about who’s trying to go to war with who.
I was also wondering about your view and possibly knowledge of the Ben Roberts-Smith case.
I don’t think the US is trying to go to war with Russia over Ukraine. Exactly the opposite. There’s nothing in it for them; an unwinnable proposition for a non-ally. It’s a calculated challenge to the US.
That said, it’s as much a test of NATO resolve as a direct test of the US itself. Putin has certainly succeeded in making himself and his ‘Europe’ issues the centre of global attention. Been interesting to watch the Germans convulsing over Nordstream2, the French making a play for relevance and Global Britain trying to flex its non-European muscle.
Russia holds all the cards right now, but I don’t know what they’re trying to achieve. Regime change? Occupation? Annexation of the Donbas?
It’s almost a Sudetenland kind of moment. Hard Power is back, and watch this space for more examples - potentially regionally.
Which brings me to a great quote that I heard last night regarding Trump’s 2020 Doha ‘Peace Deal’ with the Taliban (excluding, of course, the Afghan government):
“The most maladroit piece of diplomacy since Chamberlain’s ‘peace in our time’ deal in 1938” attributed to Bill Maley, but I can’t find it online anywhere.
BRS: what a nightmare. Nothing further to say on that front.
GuySmiley wrote:Don’t see it myself, the opposite in fact, it was because of the man-baby trump years Russia and China have become more embolden.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
AndyM wrote:GuySmiley wrote:Don’t see it myself, the opposite in fact, it was because of the man-baby trump years Russia and China have become more embolden.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
One of Trump’s legacies was a crippling undermining of the perception of US resolve to support allies and partners.
That, in particular, accelerated the development of ‘space’ for increasingly overt challenges to the established order. FWIW, I think Obamas equivocating (non) responses to Russia’s Crimean annexation, Chinese SCS militarisation and Syrian chemical weapons usage had set the trolley in motion.
etarip wrote:AndyM wrote:GuySmiley wrote:Don’t see it myself, the opposite in fact, it was because of the man-baby trump years Russia and China have become more embolden.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
One of Trump’s legacies was a crippling undermining of the perception of US resolve to support allies and partners.
That, in particular, accelerated the development of ‘space’ for increasingly overt challenges to the established order. FWIW, I think Obamas equivocating (non) responses to Russia’s Crimean annexation, Chinese SCS militarisation and Syrian chemical weapons usage had set the trolley in motion.
Good
AndyM wrote:GuySmiley wrote:Don’t see it myself, the opposite in fact, it was because of the man-baby trump years Russia and China have become more embolden.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
The primary job of a political leader is to unite a nation. In unity there is strength. Trump successfully used division as a blunt political tool for his own ends. A divided nation is a weaken nation in the world. One its enemies can take advantage of ......... and on that note how’s Morrison’s performance in the last 2 weeks going???
Putin: "After 2 weeks blowing all our ammo & fuel, tryin' to hit the Kindy we surrender!"
New secret weapon that flies thru all buildings to the far side of town then levels out 40m from Kindy.
Google maxes 0-10m to blow clear thru out the back at head height...(Not from 15km afar rebel zone!)
There's no crater in the Rugratz Rug?
https://globalnews.ca/news/8626902/russia-misleading-troop-withdrawal-uk...
Likely fired from that there hidey hole (Bunker) offers a tripod choice or shoulder offload.
Sand bunker height [0:20] is an absolutely perfect @ level match up.
Very hidden + empty Cul'de'sac for guaranteed pick up from real dead end of town.
If it was outta town you could ride in/out on a freight train with station near-by.( Again! It screams local )
None care for this rugged burb...hard to buy that rebels shelled far end backwater for World news?
In fact tbb read something similar from Putin me thinks! Said it's insane to fit this up!
More like Ukraine xmas pressies could blow off that facade & punch thru to taper off out that back hole.
Thick brick mass impact to shudder then slow to a lesser sized clear rear exit...(Local lad's show'n'tell)
Get a free Ukraine Attack Strategy to go with it... Russian defence is below
https://ria.ru/20211123/ukraina-1760426076.html?in=t
https://ria.ru/20211129/voyska-1761256376.html
https://www.newsncr.com/world/russia-ukraine-shelling-war-in-russia-ukra...
"Why the state Duma decided to recognise the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics." (Like Wot!)
Fuck that sounds boring tbb!...well yeah it does...won't argue that it sounds like dregz from the dregz!
Can't lie...tbb smuggled it from behind the Iron Web to then dump it at your door...but why is it ticking?
That's coz it's still fresh...dated today! Crew gets a head start filling yer board bags!
All makes for a great SBS mini series ...lots of subtitles to cover the Hot Russian babe's hairdos.
Wow! It's not really that boring at all...in fact it puts out way more than it should... Motherlode (Claim!)
This is a real nifty quick'n'easy read with free spelling mistakes that covers the whole deal A-Z. (score!)
https://russtrat.ru/comments_/18-fevralya-2022-1322-8876
GuySmiley wrote:AndyM wrote:GuySmiley wrote:Don’t see it myself, the opposite in fact, it was because of the man-baby trump years Russia and China have become more embolden.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
The primary job of a political leader is to unite a nation. In unity there is strength. Trump successfully used division as a blunt political tool for his own ends. A divided nation is a weaken nation in the world. One its enemies can take advantage of ......... and on that note how’s Morrison’s performance in the last 2 weeks going???
Unite a nation by being hawkish and rattling the sabre?
I still think that by going off script with regards to Russia and North Korea Trump ruffled a few feathers.
Everyone was expecting the same old pantomime.
AndyM wrote:GuySmiley wrote:AndyM wrote:GuySmiley wrote:Don’t see it myself, the opposite in fact, it was because of the man-baby trump years Russia and China have become more embolden.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
The primary job of a political leader is to unite a nation. In unity there is strength. Trump successfully used division as a blunt political tool for his own ends. A divided nation is a weaken nation in the world. One its enemies can take advantage of ......... and on that note how’s Morrison’s performance in the last 2 weeks going???
Unite a nation by being hawkish and rattling the sabre?
I still think that by going off script with regards to Russia and North Korea Trump ruffled a few feathers.
Everyone was expecting the same old pantomime.
It would help if Trump’s approach had delivered on anything meaningful. Name one thing?
I think his foreign policy ruffled feathers with the establishment (across the political spectrum) because it was chaotic, unconsidered and ineffective, delivering net advantage to the US’s competitors in almost every instance.
thanks Etarip.
I think things like the recent joint statement by China and Russia, the rhetoric coming out of these countries about democracy and the global order, and the recent renewal of NATO expansion, are enlightening.
One possible take on the situation could be:
China and Russia believe there are many forms of democracy which can achieve the central principle of participation in government by the people. They believe that they have their own successful democracies that work better than the (currently failing?) representative/electoral democracies of the US.
They believe that the US is simply trying to export its own (dysfunctional) form of democratic and economic systems to the world, and in doing so simply expand its influence, power, reach and control, in the name of "democracy" and "freedom" and "human rights". It's just all about expansion of global power and control by the west.
They also believe other things such as that the US and UK etc are flouting the global rules-based order by trying to infringe on the internal affairs of China and Russia, that the US is not respecting the democratic nature of the global rules-based order, that the US is trying to hamper China's efforts to raise the living standards and welfare of its people, that the US is not respecting the sovereignty of nations, etc.
Regarding Ukraine specifically, NATO recently resumed its expansion in Eastern Europe by bringing into its fold Montenegro in 2017 and North Macedonia in 2020:
China and Russia see this resumed NATO expansion as just continued expansion of power and control by the west, under the guise of "democracy", "human rights" and "freedom".
They now seem to have decided to no longer have a bar of it. The inclusion of Ukraine into NATO would be going too far for Russia and China to accept and Russia is willing to go to war to prevent it, since as you stated Russia holds all the cards on this one. More generally, China and Russia believe they now have the military and economic might to stand up to the US and the west more generally, and it looks like they are willing to exercise and flex it.
Interesting read on the pernicious expansion of NATO. The admission of former Yugoslav states, North Macedonia (2 years ago) and Montenegro (5 years ago) with their combined population of 2.5million, both nestled between existing NATO members and considered solidly democratic nations, must really be setting China’s security antennae on edge!
I understand the argument but I don’t buy it.
Putin is on record as saying he doesn’t regard Ukraine as a country. He’s already annexed a significant portion of Ukraine and funded / supported separatists in another section.
Why should Russia (or any other country) dictate the political system of its neighbours by force?
Does Ukraine want to join NATO? Are they allowed to do that as a sovereign country?
Can a weaker country resist an attack from a stronger one without an alliance? Putin is kind of answering that question.
I grew up in former Yugoslavia in the middle of the genocidal war. If the US wasn't involved it would've been genocides x 10. The country I'm from (Croatia) couldn't wait to join NATO due to never-ending Serb (heavily backed by Russia) expansionist ideas. Our politicians bent over each other to get there and I'm very glad for it.
I’m glad you’re here flollo.
One of my high school mates was a refugee from Bosnia. Legend. Tough kid. His stories were harrowing.
yes really interesting and insightful flollo.
Etarip that's a pretty general philosophical question you posed.
If you want to know my actual opinion, well the reality is the global world order that has been in place since WW2 is now being legitimately threatened like it never has been. I think the situation in Ukraine is just part of this larger context.
We are lucky to be in Australia, a country that has been on the safe side of the ledger all this time. I like Australia exactly how it is and don't want that to change.
I fear the rise of China (and Russia) as much as anyone does. I also fear that the US has left it too late to try and contain China (and Russia) and thwart its rise, and that now this strategy may end up being counter productive in the long run.
I don't know China's intentions on the world stage as it rises to economic and military power, but I do fear them and have spent significant time over the past decade or so trying to understand them and get my own personal take on them that is unclouded by western commentary.
It's been noted on here that action should have been taken to protect the Uighur population in China. Now those very same people are criticising Biden for stepping into the breach over Ukraine.
Bit inconsistent for mine.
Hey gsco, yes it is a general question, but it is also quite relevant to the current situation in the Ukraine. It’s not often that the philosophical becomes practical. That’s what is happening - Putin is using coercion to try and achieve his aims, and if that doesn’t work he’s highly likely / almost certain to use force. My view; he’s underestimated Ukrainian and western unity and resolve, and really backed himself into a corner. He’ll go soon, grab something like the Donbas to justify the whole exercise and claim victory.
Russia and China’s interests are aligned to a point. They both want to see US power curtailed and the end of the unipolar system. China wants regional hegemony and global parity with the US. That’s achievable on the current trajectory.
I don’t know what Russia wants or what’s sustainable for them. In raw terms they’re not that strong economically or politically. But they’re far more inclined to use hard power to achieve their goals and extend their influence. If only to frustrate US intentions.
I heard an interesting metaphor recently. We focus a lot on Russia, but in the broader scheme of things they’re really hooligans with capacity for violence and an impulsive nature. In comparison, the CCP is far more like the mafia; insidious, organised and pervasive but harder to pin down. They’re also focused on running the whole town, top to bottom.
“ It would help if Trump’s approach had delivered on anything meaningful. Name one thing?”
I do think his deviating from the usual performance regarding Russia and also North Korea was noteworthy.
At the same time I agree with you.
This seemed to be more chaotic rather than any sort of considered policy.
The man was an incompetent stooge and a narcissist but he was not the existential threat he was made out to be.
People have a short memory. I lived through this exact scenario myself in the 90s. Putin's strategy brings back memories.
I tried finding an article in English that draws parallels between what Putin is doing now and what Milosevic did in Serbia during the 90s. The one below is from 2014 when all this started and it's spot on. Worth a read.
https://newrepublic.com/article/118260/putin-behaving-ukraine-milosevic-...
Etarip one wild theory I had relates to what stu just said about why is the US suddenly so involved, and also to your comments:
etarip wrote:My view; he’s underestimated Ukrainian and western unity and resolve, and really backed himself into a corner.
China wants regional hegemony and global parity with the US. That’s achievable on the current trajectory.
In comparison, the CCP is far more like the mafia; insidious, organised and pervasive but harder to pin down. They’re also focused on running the whole town, top to bottom.
Maybe the US is trying to bait Russia into Ukraine, and then western resolve will be ignited.
The overall objective of this is to test China to see what it does - to see if it intervenes due to western intervention - possibly for a couple reasons:
One, simply to see if China has expansionist military aspirations or at least is more willing to flex some of its military might on the world stage.
Two, to actually see if they can get China fully engaged in order to have a pretext (the new cool word) to going all out on China.
It seems that it's a situation of "now or never" with China. Either the US decimates China's rise or it simply leaves China be and accepts that there is soon a new global player of equal power but whose intentions are unknown and will only be revealed in hindsight. That's possibly a risk.
It seems that waiting even only another 5 or 10 years to have a military go at China will be too late and we'll be left with dealing with China for real.
@gsco that's interesting, good point.
But also one could argue that early involvement minimises casualties. Situations like these can result in genocide as they have many times in the past. Every time the accusations to the US were that they did 'too little too late' (I'm repurposing this fancy slogan) to stop the atrocities.
With COVID everyone wants to 'go early and go hard'. With the international conflict, everyone wants to 'let it play out to see what happens'.
Difference - COVID hits home, international conflict doesn't (for now).
The US hasn’t come to this suddenly. It’s been going for 5-10 years at least. Public interest is only piqued because this time it’s not about ‘little green men’ and cyber attacks but movement of 130000 + troops on 3 sides of Ukraine.
The US hasn’t moved any troops into Ukraine at all. They’re not ‘all-in’ at all. They’re also consciously not moving anything between theatres. I don’t follow your logic because I can’t see what the US is doing to provoke a Russian response now. There was no imminent proposal for Ukraine to join NATO. If they’d moved troops in then maybe that theory would hold weight.
China and Russia have gone all in together on the Ukraine issue as far as messaging goes. That’s not a US / Western invention. It’s a useful test case for China, but they’re not invested in the actual outcome, just in what western resolve is.
There’s also a danger in reducing this to a binary US vs Russia issue. There’s as much, if not more, at stake for Western and Central Europe. Putins actions are aimed at them as much as the US.
etarip wrote:It’s been going for 5-10 years at least.
Well, exactly. I'm just wondering if one could easily view things as:
NATO has begun expanding its geographical influence again recently by taking onboard more countries, and it has also been expanding its military capabilities into surrounding NATO countries for the past 5-10 years now. These are among the main things Putin is complaining about.
Is it possible that in this sense the US and NATO has been baiting Putin for the past 5-10 years and even setting up for the possibility of military confrontation as a result of this baiting?
Also, is the US saying they won't go into Ukraine just further bait since it implies Russia may be able to go into Ukraine unopposed by direct US/NATO forces?
Also, I'm wondering who started the recent firing and is the main continuing antagonist - pro-Russian separatists or Ukraine itself?
So is it possibly the perfect bait for as you said a crazy person like Putin to react impulsively and take it hook line and sinker, exactly like he seems to be?
USA wants:
- contain, weaken and ultimately break up Russia - puppet state or failed state would be just peachy.
- keep Germany and europe away from dependence on Russian oil and gas which would start to drift Europe away from the USA being the "occupier" dominator of Europe economically, politically and via the US dollar.
- sell expensive US gas to Germany
A west leaning Ukraine and NATO expansion creates pressure to achieve the above. The USA sees a Russian Ukraine and the gas pipeline to Europe as a big deal.
Russia wants:
- to sell oil and gas
- not become a puppet of the west of be broken into a failed state status
- more russians - bigger population
- water supply to the Crimea
- secure borders
- to push back against 30 years or even 100 years of the west trying to stuff it up (there is good evidence that the communism revolution was fostered by the west to stuff up Russia and leave it as a huge but weak customer for Western businesses to sell to)
Putin and Russian objectives are 30 years in the making. They are serious and deeply held.
USA and the UK plans to keep Russia weak are 100 years in the making and deeply held.
Ukraine is in the middle.
A neutral Ukraine would have been the best path for peace. But the USA does not want peace if it means Russia can sell lots of gas and over time become integrated into Europe and have the USA lose its power in that sphere.
The concept of true peace between major powers seems a logical goal to us as average punters. But at a geopolitical level the view is that if you are not winning you are losing.
Like rival Mafia families fighting over Territory and money sources - there is always friction and a belief that if you ease up, the rivals will progressively cut your lunch.
For big players, Control of key sttategic territories is good. Chaos is a second best outcome they can live with if it stops rivals developing (middle east).
I used to wonder at how badly US policies in the middle east went and how stupid they must be until I realised that chaos is a "good" outcome - weak rivals, easy business pickings..
I think that’s a long bow.
While I understand the security challenges that NATO expansion presents to Russia, it’s hardly been at pace nor has it targeted Russian allies. I don’t see why, given that Ukraine is not part of NATO, and hasn’t even requested to be part of it, that Putin’s gambit is justified. There’s been 2 ‘new’ countries admitted into NATO in the past 15 years. Total population of those countries: 2.5million, and neither of those two countries is contiguous to Russia nor their satellite / buffer states. The facts on the ground don’t support the theory at all.
Russia will likely achieve its military aims, whatever they are, with the forces they have in place (short of total occupation). Ukraine accepts this. Why would Ukraine provoke Russia? They’ve already lost a significant amount of territory and been fighting Russian-sponsored separatism for almost 10 years.
So you’re saying that the US are setting up Ukraine as a tethered goat. That’s nifty. Again, I don’t think that’s in the US interest at all. They’ve got a large military but it’s balanced between theatres. They don’t want anything that draws additional resources away from where they’re vulnerable - in Asia.
If anything, I’d assess that this Russian-manufactured crisis is partly designed to do just that.
In other news. Spewing about Ethan…
@etarip & gsco , can you see China making a move on Taiwan anytime soon now that the focus is largely on the Ukraine ?
Supafreak wrote:@etarip & gsco , can you see China making a move on Taiwan anytime soon now that the focus is largely on the Ukraine ?
I don’t know if that’s in China’s interest right now. I believe that China is also more focused on a coercive / compellence strategy.
Here’s an interesting piece on the issue that frames the US interests in each country’s fate and alignment. It’s presented from a US centric perspective, but I think the central message - it’s complicated, not binary - is the key takeaway.
https://warontherocks.com/2022/01/taiwan-is-not-ukraine-stop-linking-the...
AndyM wrote:“ It would help if Trump’s approach had delivered on anything meaningful. Name one thing?”
I do think his deviating from the usual performance regarding Russia and also North Korea was noteworthy.
The man was an incompetent stooge and a narcissist but he was not the existential threat he was made out to be.
yep
"I do think his deviating from the usual performance regarding Russia and also North Korea was noteworthy. "
and yep, and people also seem to have already totally forgotten the middle east, terrorism, and perhaps most importantly, syria...
what a mess that all was...
trump stepping back and allowing russia take a lead seemed to work... somewhat... not ideal... but clearly the US was not in a position to sort anything out there, they'd created the mess...
I remember david kilcullen saying back before trump got elected, something along the lines... '...well, to be honest, it's hard to believe trump could do any worse than the 'experts' and their conventional wisdom - after 20 years of failed policies...'
and I believe that proved to be true...
I also remember middle east leaders saying, that at least they know where they stand with trump - despte hus 'islamaphobia'... their criticism was based around obama, who they said says all the right things, then does the exact opposite...
I think it was clear to most people, after decades of indiscretions, that america was bogged down and stifled by the dogma of experts that had manifested into some wayward concepts of 'accepted truths' and 'evidence'...
most people who have experienced university can see there is a lot of 'objective truths' that are actually much closer to long held dogmatic belief, rather than any semblance of objectivity... i imagine military uni is much the same...
what trump brought was a pair of fresh eyes, simplistic yes, but fresh eyes that can cut through. the establishment didn't like him calling bullshit, but it is pretty clear, to a lot of observers, that there were piles and piles of it...
"At the same time I agree with you.
This seemed to be more chaotic rather than any sort of considered policy. "
but yes, this was his way... unfortunately... he's good at calling bullshit, but totally questionable at strategy... totally...
however, we must remember russia and north korea were literally on the verge of war if hilary got in.... ffs she'd even called it with russia...
so trump bought time at a minimum... valuble time... i forget which significant war time leader said it, but it goes like this... 'another day talking, is another day without bombs, which is a good thing...'
it is most interesting to watch it all unfold atm, as etarip says, with the german northstream thing being most interesting, ...and damning... the germans seriously take some questionable posotions when economy is involved, they did the same with china 2 years ago...
and it is so hard to understand putin's plan / motivations...
with a heap of experts just weeks ago denying he had any intentions at all of invasion. but now, he clearly has intentions for something... and I reckon its as simple as what dude on abc said yesterday, he senses weakness, he knows biden is mentally struggling, and sees opportunity. he knows biden is is not his equal and want's to capitalise on that...
yep the trolley was already well in motion, but biden offers opportunity
the guy is a danger, and needs replacing now!
be it by his party or externally
Supa I see there’s now all kinds of speculation that China will get these wild ideas and now “do a Russia” and try to “take” Taiwan.
But like that article etarip just linked, Taiwan is a very different circumstance with different things at stake.
At the moment I don’t see that China intends to “take” Taiwan by force, unless Taiwan takes concrete steps and actively seeks more independence and/or the US takes concrete steps to exert more influence in order to control its interests in Taiwan (US has much more substantial interests there than in Ukraine).
The real concern in the world at the moment isn’t China’s actions towards Taiwan or Xinjiang etc - these are just distractions that China is happy for the west to keep its attention fixated on.
The concern is China’s long term objectives and ideas about how it intends to use its power and influence on the planet, especially in terms of its respect for our western style liberal democracies and free way of life. Does China have ideas about undermining or eroding this?
Russia sees a NATO dominated Ukraine and prevention of gas sales to Europe as a longer term existential threat. Steps to contain, weaken and maybe once Putin goes, help Russia break up.
It is a big deal to them.
The USA sees a strong secure Russia and, importantly, Germany depending on Russian gas and becoming more east leaning in trade relationships as the start of a shift in orientation of the whole of Europe away from the USA. A break up of empire.
It is a big deal to them.
The who, how and what of recent and future events is and will be murky. We see but the shadows and hints of the real events and propaganda from both sides.
But both powers are deeply motivated and involved in move and counter move.
Ultimately , however, China has greater scope to project its power than Russia due to its economic strength.
Russia is more likely to reach a point of security and sit there- selling gas non stop - make lots of money, feel safe and satisfy the ego by being regarded as a serious player in world affairs.
China? Not so sure where or if they stop.
Enjoying the tone and content of this discussion right now.
And go Baron!
This guy explains it all well. Some years ago but totally relevant today.
Machiavelli rules still - just the PR is slicker these days.
Frog, liking your viewpoints, and lots of ideas to research deeper.
frog wrote:Ultimately , however, China has greater scope to project its power than Russia due to its economic strength.
Russia is more likely to reach a point of security and sit there- selling gas non stop - make lots of money, feel safe and satisfy the ego by being regarded as a serious player in world affairs.
China? Not so sure where or if they stop.
Yes this is an important point.
China's GDP per capita is about USD10,500 and US's GDP per capita is about USD60,000:
China has every intention of significantly catching up as much as it can to the US, and this is entirely possible at its current growth rates.
But that would make China's economy absolutely massive relative to the US. That's one very big and powerful China.
So China has significant scope just keep on going and getting more and more powerful.
The whole nation is indeed hard at work to achieve this. Actually it has been the nation's goal for about 150 years.
gsco wrote:Frog, liking your viewpoints, and lots of ideas to research deeper.
frog wrote:Ultimately , however, China has greater scope to project its power than Russia due to its economic strength.
Russia is more likely to reach a point of security and sit there- selling gas non stop - make lots of money, feel safe and satisfy the ego by being regarded as a serious player in world affairs.
China? Not so sure where or if they stop.
Yes this is an important point.
China's GDP per capita is about USD10,500 and US's GDP per capita is about USD60,000:
China has every intention of significantly catching up as much as it can to the US, and this is entirely possible at its current growth rates.
But that would make China's economy absolutely massive relative to the US. That's one very big and powerful China.
So China has significant scope just keep on going and getting more and more powerful.
The whole nation is indeed hard at work to achieve this. Actually it has been the nation's goal for about 150 years.
not looking for an argument, or to undermine your point...
but the first thing that jumps out to me when I read this is, the gross gross inequality that makes up those china figures
tbh, they are quite impressive, but that 10k per head is distributed amongst a lot of lot of heads.... with one big head here and there, with a lot lot more than 10k...
the figure still represents power, and amazing improvements in lifestyles etc... but having spent considerable time in indo, where there is similar gross gross non distribution of wealth, i think one can see what a problematic situation they are building / have built amongst all that 'good'
and i believe it creates great challeges for stability, sustainability, happiness (contentedness) ...and frankly, it fudges the figures of reality... making it difficult to compare oranges with oranges...
at the same time, this could well be the future, as it seems many in the west have now bought into this gross stratification of society, as they accept the inevitability of concepts such as 'digital feudalism', 'UBI', and the great reset etc....
there may well be an inevitability to all of this... but it is a pretty ugly acceptance from my perspective...
and tbh, seems, not neccesary... if the world's leaders focussed more on energy security (equality), a sustainable population number, and more equal distribution... rather than boosting markets, seemingly only to want to lock it all down... so the plebs can, '...own nothing, and you will be happy...' ...i think the world would be a better place....
very 1970s and idealistic, yes I know...
but the alternative looks terrifying...
and kinda un-sustainable / stable
Im sure we can all live happily like the jetsons, ....if we solve the energy 'problem'...
Septic Tanks are going to Septic Tank