I-5 wrote:https://eand.co/is-this-world-war-iii-eed6d0e2dec1
According to this article, we are a little over a third of the way into the next world war (hint: it didn’t start with Ukraine). No matter which side of the aisle you’re on, it’s worrisome. And it explains what Putin is trying to do. Hopefully he fails, but it’s chilling nonetheless. I just ask that you read the article first before responding. Thanks.
RiverDog wrote:In case you haven't noticed, the right has been just as outraged, if not more outraged, at the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the left has. If anything, it's united the country to a common cause, a fact completely overlooked by the author of the article.
RiverDog wrote:In case you haven't noticed, the right has been just as outraged, if not more outraged, at the Russian invasion of Ukraine as the left has. If anything, it's united the country to a common cause, a fact completely overlooked by the author of the article.
I-5 wrote:However, the EXTREME right is different, and has absolutely been using Putin’s talking points as if read from a script. Example: Tucker at the very beginning of the invasion was rhetorically asking his viewers ‘what has Putin personally done to you that you should be against him?’, then just a few days ago he started spreading a russian disinformation piece about US backed biolabs in Ukraine producing bio weapons (there is zero evidence to back up those claims or they would have presented it). What’s funny is that I heard about this biolab claim more than a week ago, when a Ukrainian friend of mine sent me an article making the same claim - she had gotten it from a russian news source and thought it might be true until she started fact checking it. So when Tucker suddenly started touting the biolab lie, I noted he was just a few days delayed from when I heard about it.But it was the exact same bogus claim my Ukrainian friend had sent me much earlier - the only difference was in Russia, this claim was produced as one of the reasons Putin gave as justification for his military operation (its not called a war or invasion in Russia), to save Ukraine and the world by stopping these illegal US biolabs - and that he had already destroyed them.
RiverDog wrote:The extreme right doesn't account for the entire lot. Just 26% of Americans subscribe to Tucker Carlson's view that the Russia/Ukraine conflict is none of our business. There's been a huge swing in the past couple of weeks, one that I've detected on social media amongst friends of mine that are feverish Trump supporters.
Likewise, a plurality of Republicans now say “it’s in America’s best interests to stop Russia and help Ukraine” (44 percent), while fewer insist “the conflict is none of America’s business” (30 percent). Three weeks ago, Republicans were more likely to say the latter (41 percent) than the former (39 percent). As a result, just a quarter of Americans (26 percent) now say the U.S. has no stake in the conflict — an argument that top Fox News opinion host Tucker Carlson was pushing until late last week.
RiverDog wrote:This is not going the way Putin wanted it. IMO they expected the issue to divide Americans, that roughly half would adapt Trump/Carlson's view that the Ukraine is none of our business when the exact opposite has happened.
RiverDog wrote:The extreme right doesn't account for the entire lot. Just 26% of Americans subscribe to Tucker Carlson's view that the Russia/Ukraine conflict is none of our business. There's been a huge swing in the past couple of weeks, one that I've detected on social media amongst friends of mine that are feverish Trump supporters.
Likewise, a plurality of Republicans now say “it’s in America’s best interests to stop Russia and help Ukraine” (44 percent), while fewer insist “the conflict is none of America’s business” (30 percent). Three weeks ago, Republicans were more likely to say the latter (41 percent) than the former (39 percent). As a result, just a quarter of Americans (26 percent) now say the U.S. has no stake in the conflict — an argument that top Fox News opinion host Tucker Carlson was pushing until late last week.
I-5 wrote:And nowhere did I even remotely claim or imply the extreme right accounts for the entire lot. That's not the point at all. The point is this: the extreme right is reading cue cards from Putin. When did that start happening and why?
I-5 wrote:I'm glad to hear though that you've detected a big swing amongst your friends who are Trump supporters. That's good.
RiverDog wrote:This is not going the way Putin wanted it. IMO they expected the issue to divide Americans, that roughly half would adapt Trump/Carlson's view that the Ukraine is none of our business when the exact opposite has happened.
I-5 wrote:I totally agree with this. Putin intended to weaken NATO, but ironically he has only strengthened it, quite unintentionally, however most of the credit for this has to go to the Ukrainians and their president Zelensky for absolutely standing their ground. Who would have guessed a couple weeks ago that Ukrainians themselves would take the spotlight and galvanize global support like they have? No one. Putin badly miscalculated on that. The point remains though that he has approximately 26% (give or take) of Americans STILL regurgitating his lies, which is a shockingly large number if you compare it to the cold war years, and he probably calculated that would be enough division to use as cover to invade Ukraine.
I still remember when Trump was trying to lobby the G7 to let Russia back in. Why would would a POTUS push for such a thing on his own?
RiverDog wrote:I assumed from this statement..."However, the EXTREME right is different, and has absolutely been using Putin’s talking points as if read from a script. Example: Tucker at the very beginning of the invasion was rhetorically asking his viewers ‘what has Putin personally done to you that you should be against him?" that you felt that the viewpoints represented by the extreme right is a significant factor in how conservatives in general view the issue, otherwise, why the mention? As far as taking their talking points from Putin, that's not how I see the far right. They are taking their talking points from Trump, in decreasing numbers.
RiverDog wrote:It's not necessarily a swing away from Trump, although it could manifest itself like that this November, but rather they are outraged by the Russians over their invasion of Ukraine. They are not agreeing with Trump/Carlson's POV on this particular subject. They do, however, blame Biden and liberals for the predicament that we find ourselves in, and to a certain degree, I agree with them.
RiverDog wrote:I agree about giving most of the credit to Zelensky, particularly when it comes to conservatives. Most conservatives are 2nd Amendment folks, very strong on defense, and being that they tend to be older, grew up in a time during the Cold War when Russia was our arch enemy, the "Evil Empire", so no one needs to create a villian for them. When Zelensky came out and said "I don't need a ride, I need ammunition", it was like a dog whistle to conservatives, like Clint Eastwood saying "Go ahead: Make my day!" In the eyes of a conservative, Zelensky is the modern day John Wayne defending the Alamo.
As far as Trump's obvious infatuation for the Russians, I have no idea where it gets its roots. But knowing Trump, it must have something to do with money or business interests if his.
I-5 wrote:Yes, I agree that the reason for conservatives backing Ukrainians are because it does align with their values on 2nd amendment, strong defense etc. As for the evil empire, I think both side of the aisle have always been wary of Russia...at least speaking for myself, I always have. But I think Obama may have misjudged the threat as I previously mentioned. Kudos to Romney. As for having no idea about Trump's infatuation, it's with Putin specifically, and of course it has to do with his interests, which defines him as an asset.
RiverDog wrote:Up until the past few weeks, I think that most conservatives viewed China as the larger threat, and with good reason. My take is that they felt that once the Soviet Union fell, that they were no longer in the same league as the US and China. It's been a rather remarkable conversion to see as many conservatives come out against Russia like they have.
RiverDog wrote:But as I said, there's a very strong dislike amongst conservatives with Biden over his handling of the crisis and with liberals in general for the high gas prices and inflation that has at least in part been a result of the invasion. I don't think you'll see the country rallying around the POTUS as usually is the case in a crisis like this. Biden's job approval rating remains in the toilet, hovering where it has been for the last 4 months.
I-5 wrote:Do you mean handling of the Ukraine invasion? What would they have him do besides sanctions? Go into Ukraine? I myself am on the fence about it, as much as I want US and NATO to go in...we're all aware that Putin could lose it. Or he could be bluffing. No one knows.
RiverDog wrote:I'm sure it varies, but many conservatives believe that the sanctions were too little, too late, that had he employed them earlier as Russia was massing their forces, that it might have made a difference. They also feel that we should be doing more to help the Ukrainians, like establishing a no fly zone. I don't necessarily agree with those concepts, especially the latter one as I do feel it could lead to an escalation.
They do blame Biden and the Dems for our being too dependent on foreign oil by opposing such measures as domestic oil production and the construction of the Keystone pipeline and a general unfriendliness to oil companies, putting the green power wagon in front of the gas and oil horses.
Bottom line is that the country is still very divided, that although there's a strong consensus about the guilt of Putin and the Russians, that it hasn't exactly united the country behind its leader. The F-Biden flags haven't disappeared.
RiverDog wrote:I'm sure it varies, but many conservatives believe that the sanctions were too little, too late, that had he employed them earlier as Russia was massing their forces, that it might have made a difference. They also feel that we should be doing more to help the Ukrainians, like establishing a no fly zone. I don't necessarily agree with those concepts, especially the latter one as I do feel it could lead to an escalation.
They do blame Biden and the Dems for our being too dependent on foreign oil by opposing such measures as domestic oil production and the construction of the Keystone pipeline and a general unfriendliness to oil companies, putting the green power wagon in front of the gas and oil horses.
Bottom line is that the country is still very divided, that although there's a strong consensus about the guilt of Putin and the Russians, that it hasn't exactly united the country behind its leader. The F-Biden flags haven't disappeared.
I-5 wrote:I think those arguments are pretty weak, because I don't recall any americans complaining about sanctions being too weak before Russia invaded - although I do remember Zelensky asking what are you waiting for? He was right. Do you recall who else was saying sanctions should be stronger before the invastion occurred?
I-5 wrote:I don't understand why Biden would be opposing more domestic oil production, so I would criticize him for that as well.
I-5 wrote:As far as division goes, I do give him credit for trying to reach out to all americans and not pushing the us-them language that other presidents have used in the past. I don't think Biden is the reason for the division, but I'm open to hearing details if you think he is. But yes, the country is still divided, and Putin is still benefitting from that.
RiverDog wrote:I feel badly for Biden because much of the angst he's receiving is undeserved. He's a lot like Jimmy Carter IMO, a victim of circumstances beyond his control and being painted with the same brush stroke as all Democrats are. But Biden is trying to have his cake and eat it, too, pleasing the left wing of his party while trying to reach out to Republicans. Unfortunately, the country is so divided that the 2nd coming of Christ couldn't make us come together. The gulf isn't going to be narrowed for quite some time. Reasonable people like the two of us are not the norm.
I-5 wrote:Haha asf, I know I can always count on your reactions. Mind you, everything you’re saying is also your perception, as opposed to objective reality. I’m surprised though that you point to crushing sanctions as an effective tool, since it sounded like you weren’t a big believed in them in another thread.
RiverDog wrote:I feel badly for Biden because much of the angst he's receiving is undeserved. He's a lot like Jimmy Carter IMO, a victim of circumstances beyond his control and being painted with the same brush stroke as all Democrats are. But Biden is trying to have his cake and eat it, too, pleasing the left wing of his party while trying to reach out to Republicans. Unfortunately, the country is so divided that the 2nd coming of Christ couldn't make us come together. The gulf isn't going to be narrowed for quite some time. Reasonable people like the two of us are not the norm.
I-5 wrote:This division we're talking about is the first part of the article I posted at the top. You may or may not agree, but the premise is that division was the vehicle to introducing instability that Russia wanted to see happen in the US. And it worked, and still continues to work. Otherwise, I do think Americans have more in common that not. Ukraine and Zelensky's bravery has temporarily restored a lot of our common beliefs, which seems to be a huge miscalculation by Putin.
Edit: you didn't comment on it, but Tucker and Tulsi are prime examples of russian assets, spewing the exact same garbage that Russia is using on its own citizens to justify attacking Ukraine. Why would would they spread these lies like the false biolab story?
I-5 wrote:I think those arguments are pretty weak, because I don't recall any americans complaining about sanctions being too weak before Russia invaded - although I do remember Zelensky asking what are you waiting for? He was right. Do you recall who else was saying sanctions should be stronger before the invastion occurred?
I don't understand why Biden would be opposing more domestic oil production, so I would criticize him for that as well.
As far as division goes, I do give him credit for trying to reach out to all americans and not pushing the us-them language that other presidents have used in the past. I don't think Biden is the reason for the division, but I'm open to hearing details if you think he is. But yes, the country is still divided, and Putin is still benefitting from that.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:As far as Ukraine goes, yeah, Putin miscalculated. He thought he could just kick down the door and everyone would either give up the fight or welcome him as a liberator. Turn out Ukrainians are proud of being Ukrainians and aren’t willing to be under the thumb of a dictator. And they are willing to fight for it. It’s been discussed in this thread already; Putin now needs to either win this thing, be given an out, or retreat and lose face. I’m hoping for the middle option. The first I don’t want at all and the 3rd I don’t see happening.
Aseahawkfan wrote:That's why I don't like sanctions. Doesn't hit who it is supposed to hit and makes life miserable for the regular people in a nation.
c_hawkbob wrote:Sanctions are hurting Russia plenty, and they are not "innocents" their decades of tacit approval of Putin's totalitarianism while they fully enjoying the increased benefits and advantages of the surface level benefits of western culture makes them at least implicitly complicit in what Putin is doing now. All these sanctions are doing is taking away those surface level trappings of western civilization and making them see the product of their complicity.
To be honest. I've hade more bourbon than normal this evening but I still think that all scans...
And this ain't WW3. WW2 1/2 at most. The second Putin gives the order to push the nuclear option he gets a bullet in the back of the head. His underlings fully understand that line may not be crossed under any circumstances.
c_hawkbob wrote:Sanctions are hurting Russia plenty, and they are not "innocents" their decades of tacit approval of Putin's totalitarianism while they fully enjoying the increased benefits and advantages of the surface level benefits of western culture makes them at least implicitly complicit in what Putin is doing now. All these sanctions are doing is taking away those surface level trappings of western civilization and making them see the product of their complicity.
To be honest. I've hade more bourbon than normal this evening but I still think that all scans...
And this ain't WW3. WW2 1/2 at most. The second Putin gives the order to push the nuclear option he gets a bullet in the back of the head. His underlings fully understand that line may not be crossed under any circumstances.
c_hawkbob wrote:And this ain't WW3. WW2 1/2 at most. The second Putin gives the order to push the nuclear option he gets a bullet in the back of the head. His underlings fully understand that line may not be crossed under any circumstances.
I-5 wrote:I'm encouraged that you're confident his underlings would never let him cross that line. I know they have a checks and balances protocal for nuclear codes like we do (they even have a 'nuclear football' briefcase called 'Cheget'), but with their autocratic system I'm just not sure how it really works. I hope you are right for all of our sakes.
The fact he has brought up nukes a couple times in the past 2 weeks is pretty telling that he is that desperate to win at all costs.
RiverDog wrote:
Let me guess: Wild Turkey?
RiverDog wrote:Let me guess: Wild Turkey?
c_hawkbob wrote:No, Woodford Reserve. Very nice.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:And if Putin does go for full conquest, he’d likely have another Afghanistan on his hands. The west will support Ukrainian guerrillas and the major difference would be a largely united citizen would be fighting instead of a fractured tribal populace a La the Mujahideen. Putin needs Ukraine to fold without occupation or he’ll get a decade of guerrilla war.
RiverDog wrote:Let me guess: Wild Turkey?
c_hawkbob wrote:No, Woodford Reserve. Very nice.
RiverDog wrote:For some reason, I thought that you were a Wild Turkey drinker.
One of the first acts that Biden did when he took office was to issue an executive order halting the construction of the Keystone pipeline
c_hawkbob wrote:So what? The Keystone pipeline 1: was a project still mostly unfinished and having zero effect on the price of oil and 2: is only a pipeline it would never have added a single drop of oil to the countries oil reserves. In fact, only about half of the oil flowing through that pipeline would wind up in the US anyway, it intended purpose was to help transport Canadian oil to Gulf Coast refineries that would be sell much (if not most) of it for export.
RiverDog wrote:Agreed about the sanctions hurting the innocent, but I'll add that it hurts innocents on both sides of the equation. They act to inflate prices and create shortages in the country imposing them as well as those in the targeted country. But short of military action, it's the only option available and may be the reason that Russia has come to the bargaining table.
I also agree with ASF, that sanctions are as much a psychological move as they are an economic countermeasure, so that people in this country get the sense that we're doing something, but in this case where they are so widespread and being done internationally, I do think that they will have an effect if this thing drags out into the summer.
Aseahawkfan wrote:If sanctions had a history of working, I'd support them. But they don't seem to work. I can't think of a time in history when they've worked.
RiverDog wrote:They worked when Reagan slapped them on South Africa to pressure them to give up their policy of Apartheid. However, South Africa was a democratic country and their leaders actually cared about the welfare of their people. Plus Apartheid was doomed to eventual failure anyway. The sanctions just moved things along more quickly. But I agree with you, in most cases, they don't work. We've had sanctions on Cuba in place for 60 years and they're able to duck them because if we won't do business with them, some other country will.
But these sanctions are different. First of all, many more countries are participating in the sanctions than in any previous that have been attempted. Additionally, there's more breadth to them as they include the private sector, from oil companies to fast food to tech companies, and they're sanctioning individuals that are close to Putin. These are not your garden variety sanctions. They're apples and oranges compared to any that have been used in the past 200 years.
Outside of that, I agree completely that there is no winner in them. But you have to think of them like one would in a labor strike. The company obviously loses sales, productivity, etc, and the workers never reclaim lost wages from being out on strike, so in one sense, nobody wins. But in the POV of the strikers, the long term effect is higher wages and benefits for future workers that would not have been attained had they not bit the bullet and made a sacrifice. That's how we have to look at sanctions.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Apartheid is an incredibly complex topic. It ended for a variety of reasons mostly having to do with the effort of South Africans themselves to end that evil practice. It lasted as with all these disgusting racial supremacy movements too long and did too much evil in the process.
Aseahawkfan wrote:We will see if these unprecedented sanctions crush Putin. So far he is not stopping and does not seem to care.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I have just read an article where China is negotiating with Saudi Arabia to purchase oil for Yuan. If that happens, Biden will go down as the president who lost America's place as the reserve currency and a major power position driving demand for United States dollars which keeps our currency strong. So you'll have high inflation, weak dollar demand, a world economy moving East, and a Russia looking to avoid sanctions by being able to accept payment in Yuan they can use to purchase goods and services from China further strengthening China's economic position and demand for their currency.
We'll see how this plays out. If Russia and China can force this paradigm shift, then Biden will have been outmaneuvered badly and be known as the president that led to the downfall of American economic supremacy. That won't be so good for America. People have no idea how much they benefit from having the dollar as a reserve currency and how important Saudi Arabia is to maintaining it. If that relationship is undermined it will be one of those quiet occurrences that most Americans don't realize is the moment the torch was passed from America to China for becoming the number one economic power in the world. If nations who America has sanctioned can build an entire alternate world economy based on the Yuan, America's ability to engage in economic warfare is greatly reduced.
RiverDog wrote:Interesting take. China is dependent on trade with the west as much if not more than Russia is so they might be cutting off their nose to spite their face, but I'll have to read up on it some to give a decent response.
The dollar's role as the undisputed reserve currency of the world allows the United States to impose unilateral sanctions against actions performed between other countries, for example the American fine against BNP Paribas for violations of U.S. sanctions that were not laws of France or the other countries involved in the transactions.[29] In 2014 China and Russia signed a 150 billion yuan central bank liquidity swap line agreement to get around European and American sanctions on their behaviors.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest