|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 12:03:15 GMT -5
The fact that Ukraine is losing the war is not Russian propaganda. Even ISW/Understanding War admits it now. That is not what that paragraph says. No where in that paragraph does ISW say that "Ukraine is losing the war". No where. Way to misrepresent something in your effort to convince people that you don't spread disinformation
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 22, 2024 12:07:37 GMT -5
In no way have I ever supported or condoned the FBI informants' kidnapping plot. I like Gov. Whitmer but even if I didn't like her, I don't support kidnapping politicians. And yet, here you are equivocating for them again. It's not the 'FBI informants' kidnapping plot', it's the kidnapping plot. I hope they rot in jail because it could have been a blood bath.Shame on you Several suspects have been released because the evidence that they were entrapped was very convincing. I was very clear. I don't support political violence or kidnapping of politicians. My issue was specifically about the FBI's use of entrapment. If you don't want to discuss Entrapment, I'm not interested in discussing the matter with you further.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 12:13:48 GMT -5
Several suspects have been released because the evidence that they were entrapped was very convincing. I was very clear. I don't support political violence or kidnapping of politicians. My issue was specifically about the FBI's use of entrapment. If you don't want to discuss Entrapment, I'm not interested in discussing the matter with you further. You don't want to discuss it because you want to hold onto to your erroneous belief that there was no plot. There was. That a jury would find some people not guilty and other people of cooperating in a conspiracy does not negate the fact that the conspiracy took place or that it was incredibly dangerous. I hope they rot in jail.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 22, 2024 12:19:55 GMT -5
The problem is that we’re dealing with humans, not machines, who have made one mistake after another with regards to foreign policies since the Iraq war. A rethinking of the way America engages the rest of the world never really happened after Iraq. People seem to think doing the same things over and over will lead to positive results eventually despite the long trail of failed policies… The Russia-Ukraine war was totally predictable and avoidable. American diplomats warned for years that pushing Ukraine towards NATO membership would lead to Russia becoming more militaristic and anti-Western. Now that the diplomats who warned us about what’s happening in Russia today have been proven correct, people still are doubling down on stupid policies. The Russians view Ukrainians as their brothers and will never accept them joining NATO. Henry Kissinger, who I despised, was right about that as well as the current CIA director, William Burns. Our policies in Ukraine will never succeed so long as they’re detached from reality… Crimea when it happened was accepted because its the Russians only warm water port. Much the same way we did nothing as Hong Kong fell without a shot. Neither the status of Crimea nor Hong Kong are matters worth the US starting WW3 over. Do you agree or disagree? Because that's the issue. Our leaders may not like the things that China or Russia do but we have to choose our battles carefully because both countries are nuclear powers. And both are on the UN Security Council so there may be issues where collaboration with Russia or China are more important than confrontation over things that we disagree with them about. For example, Obama worked with Putin at times on the Iran nuclear deal and Syria in spite of the Crimea annexation. By the time the Russians entered the war in Syria, the focus was on countering ISIS, not overthrowing Assad. So the US indirectly worked with Russia on counterterrorism in Syria. Sometimes, one geopolitical concern is more important than another. Geopolitics isn't and doesn't have to be Zero-sum. And we have to choose our battles carefully because we can't possibly win them all. We didn't have a clue as to the determination of the Ukes which changed everything and created a huge opportunity. I did. Having followed the Ukrainian civil war for a few years prior to Russia's 2022 invasion, I knew the Russians would face stiff resistance and possibly an insurgency in Ukraine. There are parts of Ukraine where people mostly hate the Russians. But closer to the Russian borders in eastern Ukraine, there are Ukrainians who have more of a cultural and political affinity for Russia. But the Ukrainians who are more anti-Russian are in control of Ukraine's government so it didn't surprise me that Ukrainians stood up to the Russians once the invasion began. A better solution would be to rent out the ports to Russia which I suspect will be the end result. That's what Ukraine was doing prior to Putin's annexation of Crimea. My assumption is that Putin was concerned that the anti-Russian regime that took over Ukraine after the Maidan would not renew Russia's lease of the ports in Sevastopal or could allow NATO countries to dock naval ships in Crimea. So it's complicated and no matter what happens in Ukraine-proper, I don't see the Russians giving up control of Crimea without a fight.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 12:37:58 GMT -5
Neither the status of Crimea nor Hong Kong are matters worth the US starting WW3 over. Do you agree or disagree? Because that's the issue. No, it is not the issue. The United States is not threatening to start WW3 whereas Russian officials have routinely threatened the NATO alliance and have also made threats regarding the use of nuclear weapons
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 22, 2024 12:54:57 GMT -5
Neither the status of Crimea nor Hong Kong are matters worth the US starting WW3 over. Do you agree or disagree? Because that's the issue. No, it is not the issue. The United States is not threatening to start WW3 whereas Russian officials have routinely threatened the NATO alliance and have also made threats regarding the use of nuclear weapons I agree but there are pro-Ukraine clowns in the Press and social media (You've shared some of there posts or articles here) who think the US SHOULD start WW3 over Crimea. As for Russia's nuclear threats, I perceive those as warning shots meant to discourage NATO countries from entering the Ukraine war as combatants.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 13:01:52 GMT -5
No, it is not the issue. The United States is not threatening to start WW3 whereas Russian officials have routinely threatened the NATO alliance and have also made threats regarding the use of nuclear weapons I agree but there are pro-Ukraine clowns in the Press and social media (You've shared some of there posts or articles here) who think the US SHOULD start WW3 over Crimea. As for Russia's nuclear threats, I perceive those as warning shots meant to discourage NATO countries from entering the Ukraine war as combatants. Please link to the post from the 'pro-Ukraine clowns' who think we should start WW3 over Crimea Nuclear threats are irresponsible.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 22, 2024 13:27:26 GMT -5
I agree but there are pro-Ukraine clowns in the Press and social media (You've shared some of there posts or articles here) who think the US SHOULD start WW3 over Crimea. As for Russia's nuclear threats, I perceive those as warning shots meant to discourage NATO countries from entering the Ukraine war as combatants. Please link to the post from the 'pro-Ukraine clowns' who think we should start WW3 over Crimea Nuclear threats are irresponsible. I agree that nuclear threats are irresponsible but Russia has few cards to play against the West and let's be honest, some influential people and leaders in the West are talking recklessly as if they're no longer concerned about avoiding direct confrontation with Russia, a nuclear superpower. Example 1 - Timothy Snyder arguing that we should not have any limits on our levels of support for Ukraine and should dismiss Russia's nuclear threats as if nuclear deterrence and MAD didn't guide our foreign policies throughout the Cold War Nuclear war!Example 2 - Anne Applebaum also argued that the West should dismiss Russia's nuclear threats. Fear of Nuclear War Has Warped the West’s Ukraine StrategyBoth columns argue that the West shouldn't put restraints on our support for Ukraine out of fear of world war 3 or nuclear war. I strongly disagree with both pieces. Avoiding nuclear escalation or an expansion of the war in Ukraine should always be a top priority for our decision-makers.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 13:44:52 GMT -5
I agree that nuclear threats are irresponsible but typical
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 22, 2024 16:26:09 GMT -5
How the Ukraine aid deal got through the House: Most Republicans wanted more aid for Israel while a plurality wants less - www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-israel-gaza-poll-cbs-news/Most Democrats wanted more aid for Ukraine while a plurality wants less - apnews.com/article/poll-ukraine-aid-congress-b772c9736b92c0fbba477938b047da2fMike Johnson's compromises on Border funding made it possible to pass each foreign aid Bill as standalone legislation (something I said should've been done months ago instead of bundling all the foreign aid into a single Bill). Unfortunately for Ukraine, I don't think the aid we're sending will do much more than buy them some time.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 17:44:50 GMT -5
Unfortunately for Ukraine, I don't think the aid we're sending will do much more than buy them some time. You just can't help yourself, can you? Fortunately, I think you're going to end up with egg on your face, again.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 22, 2024 17:56:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 22, 2024 19:08:15 GMT -5
Why do you refuse to process new information? 1. As has been explained to you, literally 20 times, Ukraine does not conscript below the age of 27. They have just changed that law and lowered the age to 25 in order to mobilize more troops. 2. Use your head. Think hard. Why would Ukraine be having trouble on the battlefield right now? Could it be that the MAGA republicans held up everything from artillery shells to replacement parts for MONTHS? They literally pulled the rug out from Ukraine on the battlefield and yet here you are cynically trumpeting every Russian gain of a couple of hundred meters. Here's the actual reality... Russia is going to do everything it can to inflict damage and make gains in the near term future because they know that the ammunition, HIMARs, and ATACMS will soon be on the way, and they probably will have some short term success. Again, enjoy basking in the warm glow of Putin's sun because it is not going to last. The tide is starting to move back toward Ukraine.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 23, 2024 22:40:36 GMT -5
Passed the Senate 79-18
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 14:32:26 GMT -5
Not a fan of JD Vance but he's spot-on about why young Americans are skeptical about interventionist foreign policies
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Apr 24, 2024 14:44:07 GMT -5
Not a fan of JD Vance but he's spot-on about why young Americans are skeptical about interventionist foreign policies Difference is we don't have any US boots on the ground in Ukraine and we're helping them fight an invasion, not assisting in or invading another country ourselves. This has more Cold War or even WWII vibes to it than anything from 20 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 14:55:06 GMT -5
Not a fan of JD Vance but he's spot-on about why young Americans are skeptical about interventionist foreign policies Difference is we don't have any US boots on the ground in Ukraine and we're helping them fight an invasion, not assisting in or invading another country ourselves. This has more Cold War or even WWII vibes to it than anything from 20 years ago. I understand the differences but the rhetoric is almost the same which suggests that politicians are probably wrong or lying to us again if they're using the same playbook they used previously. I can't count all the different dictators people compared to Hitler before we went to war against them or funded their opposition (Manuel Noriega in Panama through Bashar Assad in Syria). But the Iraq war is fresher in the minds of Millennials than the Cold War and that's what comes to mind first when we hear those appeals. Polls show that Young adults on both sides of the aisle are far less enthusiastic about war (direct or proxy-wars) to "defend" or "spread" democracy than older generations of adults. So I think Vance is onto something and it signals the direction of the GOP going forward...
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 24, 2024 15:16:37 GMT -5
But the Iraq war is fresher in the minds of Millennials than the Cold War and that's what comes to mind first when we hear those appeals. Ukraine is not Iraq Meanwhile Another look at the bi-partisan consensus on helping Ukraine fend of Putin's genocidal invasion for territorial conquest The bolded parts speak to Biden's leadership style and the reason 'sleepy Joe' has been able to notch so many legislative victories in his first term.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 15:35:19 GMT -5
But the Iraq war is fresher in the minds of Millennials than the Cold War and that's what comes to mind first when we hear those appeals. Ukraine is not Iraq Meanwhile Another look at the bi-partisan consensus on helping Ukraine fend of Putin's genocidal invasion for territorial conquest Look at the ages of leading members of the Senate. With all due respect to older folks, those Senators represent the past, not the future. Younger members of Congress sound more like Vance and AOC than McConnell and Pelosi. Boomers may prefer to focus on the Cold War instead of the Iraq war and the War on Terror but Millennials remember the more recent wars and we've heard it all before. Old enough to remember when "democracy promotion" was one of the selling points of the Iraq war. Take heed to what I'm saying and you may better understand the direction politics are heading in this country.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 24, 2024 16:09:19 GMT -5
With all due respect to older folks, those Senators represent the past, not the future. Younger members of Congress sound more like Vance and AOC than McConnell and Pelosi. Boomers may prefer to focus on the Cold War instead of the Iraq war and the War on Terror but Millennials remember the more recent wars and we've heard it all before. Old enough to remember when "democracy promotion" was one of the selling points of the Iraq war. Take heed to what I'm saying and you may better understand the direction politics are heading in this country. 1. AOC voted yes on Ukraine funding 2. Several younger Senators from both parties supported Ukraine funding which is why it got 79 votes 3. Your ageism is noted and doesn't reflect the nature of the debate. Biden, who is 'old', is probably one of the most forward looking presidents we've had in terms of policy. 4. It strikes me that after the events of the past four days, you might be one having difficulty understanding the political direction of the country but when has being wrong ever stopped you from being condescending?
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 24, 2024 21:43:19 GMT -5
Not a fan of JD Vance but he's spot-on about why young Americans are skeptical about interventionist foreign policies Jon Stewart “Soulsplains” better than me 😂 He explains that the “democracy vs authoritarianism” thing is used to justify almost every foreign intervention but there’s usually ulterior motives. And he points out how the new Cold War stuff with Russia and China doesn’t make a lot of sense. Stewart gets it. Not sure why others pretend not to get what I’ve been saying…
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 24, 2024 22:39:14 GMT -5
Not a fan of JD Vance but he's spot-on about why young Americans are skeptical about interventionist foreign policies Jon Stewart “Soulsplains” better than me 😂 He explains that the “democracy vs authoritarianism” thing is used to justify almost every foreign intervention but there’s usually ulterior motives. And he points out how the new Cold War stuff with Russia and China doesn’t make a lot of sense. Stewart gets it. Not sure why others pretend not to get what I’ve been saying… Either imperialism is bad or it isn't. Either colonialism is bad or it isn't. In your case it has been that U.S. imperialism is rampant and bad but that Russian imperialism is somehow justified because of NATO or NAZIs or they're like brothers or some such bs. In fact, more often than not, you can't even bring yourself to admit that Russia is an imperialist power. We get what you're saying. We just think it is complete and utter bunk
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 24, 2024 22:49:16 GMT -5
Since 1939
Moscow invaded...
Poland 39 Estonia 39 Lithuania 39 Latvia 39 Finland 39
Hungary Czechoslovakia
Afghanistan 79
Moldova 1990
Georgia 2008 Ukraine 2014 Ukraine 2014 Ukraine 2022
The United States
Vietnam Grenada Panama Somalia (I guess) Iraq Afghanistan
|
|
|
Post by pickle20 on Apr 25, 2024 7:42:45 GMT -5
Difference is we don't have any US boots on the ground in Ukraine and we're helping them fight an invasion, not assisting in or invading another country ourselves. This has more Cold War or even WWII vibes to it than anything from 20 years ago. I understand the differences but the rhetoric is almost the same which suggests that politicians are probably wrong or lying to us again if they're using the same playbook they used previously. I can't count all the different dictators people compared to Hitler before we went to war against them or funded their opposition (Manuel Noriega in Panama through Bashar Assad in Syria). But the Iraq war is fresher in the minds of Millennials than the Cold War and that's what comes to mind first when we hear those appeals. Polls show that Young adults on both sides of the aisle are far less enthusiastic about war (direct or proxy-wars) to "defend" or "spread" democracy than older generations of adults. So I think Vance is onto something and it signals the direction of the GOP going forward... Still not buying it. Younger generations may increasingly call for peace in all conflicts but the GOP isn't going to change. They just don't want to go to war with Russia, who many of them see as an example of what they want America to be under their control. If given the chance to go to war with Iran and/or China, I think you'd see their speeches change drastically.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 25, 2024 8:08:34 GMT -5
I understand the differences but the rhetoric is almost the same which suggests that politicians are probably wrong or lying to us again if they're using the same playbook they used previously. I can't count all the different dictators people compared to Hitler before we went to war against them or funded their opposition (Manuel Noriega in Panama through Bashar Assad in Syria). But the Iraq war is fresher in the minds of Millennials than the Cold War and that's what comes to mind first when we hear those appeals. Polls show that Young adults on both sides of the aisle are far less enthusiastic about war (direct or proxy-wars) to "defend" or "spread" democracy than older generations of adults. So I think Vance is onto something and it signals the direction of the GOP going forward... Still not buying it. Younger generations may increasingly call for peace in all conflicts but the GOP isn't going to change. They just don't want to go to war with Russia, who many of them see as an example of what they want America to be under their control. If given the chance to go to war with Iran and/or China, I think you'd see their speeches change drastically. In the near-term, I agree, but there's a stark difference in rhetoric about military intervention when you compare stuff older Republicans say to what younger Republicans are saying about wars. So I wouldn't bet on things not changing within the GOP over the next decade or so. And on the Dem side, not sure if you noticed but younger Dems aren't as enthusiastic about war as the Nancy Pelosis and Joe Bidens of the party. There's a huge difference between how Boomers and GenX view America's role in the world versus how Millennials and younger generations view that sort of thing. And the root of it is all the lies and everything that has gone wrong in US foreign policies since the Iraq war. Younger people generally are more skeptical about war or using force to "defend democracy"'. The truth is, nothing threatens the health of democracies more than a war. Because war gives governments an excuse to be more authoritarian and crack down on political dissent. In contrast, democracy thrives in times of peace.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 25, 2024 11:49:29 GMT -5
Still not buying it. Younger generations may increasingly call for peace in all conflicts but the GOP isn't going to change. They just don't want to go to war with Russia, who many of them see as an example of what they want America to be under their control. If given the chance to go to war with Iran and/or China, I think you'd see their speeches change drastically. In the near-term, I agree, but there's a stark difference in rhetoric about military intervention when you compare stuff older Republicans say to what younger Republicans are saying about wars. So I wouldn't bet on things not changing within the GOP over the next decade or so. And on the Dem side, not sure if you noticed but younger Dems aren't as enthusiastic about war as the Nancy Pelosis and Joe Bidens of the party. There's a huge difference between how Boomers and GenX view America's role in the world versus how Millennials and younger generations view that sort of thing. And the root of it is all the lies and everything that has gone wrong in US foreign policies since the Iraq war. Younger people generally are more skeptical about war or using force to "defend democracy"'. The truth is, nothing threatens the health of democracies more than a war. Because war gives governments an excuse to be more authoritarian and crack down on political dissent. In contrast, democracy thrives in times of peace. This is all fine and good but... we're not at war. Furthermore, I found this to be very interesting... A lot of your analysis of 'young' people is based on what you're seeing on twitter and your own information eco-system and I think you're falling prey to your own confirmation bias. Yes, there is a group of very passionate people on elite college campuses making a lot of noise right now and they're doing an incredible job of garnering press attention but, are they representative of young people as a whole? You'll note that Ukraine didn't even make that list. It is always worth remembering that we're not normal. Most people, regardless of their age, don't spend this much time consumed by politics and most people don't even bother with twitter. So, drawing wide sweeping generalizations about generational change based on what you're seeing on social media or even John Stewart is a bit of a fool's errand.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 25, 2024 12:16:59 GMT -5
In the near-term, I agree, but there's a stark difference in rhetoric about military intervention when you compare stuff older Republicans say to what younger Republicans are saying about wars. So I wouldn't bet on things not changing within the GOP over the next decade or so. And on the Dem side, not sure if you noticed but younger Dems aren't as enthusiastic about war as the Nancy Pelosis and Joe Bidens of the party. There's a huge difference between how Boomers and GenX view America's role in the world versus how Millennials and younger generations view that sort of thing. And the root of it is all the lies and everything that has gone wrong in US foreign policies since the Iraq war. Younger people generally are more skeptical about war or using force to "defend democracy"'. The truth is, nothing threatens the health of democracies more than a war. Because war gives governments an excuse to be more authoritarian and crack down on political dissent. In contrast, democracy thrives in times of peace. This is all fine and good but... we're not at war. Furthermore, I found this to be very interesting... A lot of your analysis of 'young' people is based on what you're seeing on twitter and your own information eco-system and I think you're falling prey to your own confirmation bias. Yes, there is a group of very passionate people on elite college campuses making a lot of noise right now and they're doing an incredible job of garnering press attention but, are they representative of young people as a whole? You'll note that Ukraine didn't even make that list. It is always worth remembering that we're not normal. Most people, regardless of their age, don't spend this much time consumed by politics and most people don't even bother with twitter. College-educated young people tend to be more informed about the news and engaged in politics than non-college educated people. And we can't ignore these student activists because those types will be our leaders in the future. Countless elected politicians got their start in politics as activists. So the people we're seeing protesting on college campuses right now are among the most engaged in the news and politics of their age group. That could explain why the national media has covered the campus protests far more in-depth than the thousands of other pro-Palestine protests that have taken place since October. So, drawing wide sweeping generalizations about generational change based on what you're seeing on social media or even John Stewart is a bit of a fool's errand. Unfortunately for you, social media isn't my only source of information. I read a lot of boring academic research because, as you said, I'm not 'normal' Generational Divides in Attitudes toward the US Role in the World
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 25, 2024 12:46:57 GMT -5
You would think that a thread started about a lack of support for providing military aid to ukraine would fade into oblivion after such a sweeping and bi-partisan vote authorizing military aid to Ukraine but, I guess not.
|
|
|
Post by soulflower on Apr 25, 2024 13:29:05 GMT -5
You would think that a thread started about a lack of support for providing military aid to ukraine would fade into oblivion after such a sweeping and bi-partisan vote authorizing military aid to Ukraine but, I guess not. I had the same thought about your Ukraine counteroffensive topic. It happened and it was a disaster for Ukraine yet your thread is still going. We both know that there will be more requests for Congress to approve aid to Ukraine in the future. The $61 billion won't be the last aid package.
|
|
|
Post by JoyinMudville on Apr 25, 2024 16:54:05 GMT -5
You would think that a thread started about a lack of support for providing military aid to ukraine would fade into oblivion after such a sweeping and bi-partisan vote authorizing military aid to Ukraine but, I guess not. I had the same thought about your Ukraine counteroffensive topic. It happened and it was a disaster for Ukraine yet your thread is still going. We both know that there will be more requests for Congress to approve aid to Ukraine in the future. The $61 billion won't be the last aid package. I missed it. Has Ukraine stopped fighting? Sounds like more bitter tears from you. Hey, here's some nice video of them taking out S-400 radar systems in Crimea. They usually do that to blind Russia in preparation for another strike twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1783418372958584893And here's your go to wet blanket Julian Tell us, Soul, why can't Putin use all that vast military might to wipe this rag tag band of Ukrainians off the left bank of the Dnipro? Think about it this way. It would take the 82nd Airborne about 48 hours to wipe the Ukrainians off that little toe hold and yet they've been there for six or seven months and the Russians can't seem to do anything about it. Meanwhile they keep losing men and equipment there.
|
|