That 1.5 miles was ran in 2:24, to this day the world record at that length.
One of the most extraordinary creatures in God’s creation, he was.
When he decided it was time to make his move it was like a starship going into warp drive.
His “performance” in the Belmont is simply mind-boggling. And he was accelerating when he crossed the finish line!
Now at play in the Fields of the Lord — and beating all comers, I should think.
Loved you, Big Red. Love you still.
“He’s moving like some tremendous machine!”
I never follow horse racing at all. Yet, Secretariat is the one horse I could name if asked. And I suspect the one horse most people could recognize; except for maybe my millennial daughters. đ He became part of the culture and the times which is an extraordinary achievement for a race horse.
Is the announcer Heywood Hale Broun?
The Jockey did not use a whip either. That Horse just loved to run.
Had a nice long live after.
How much longer before they give “participation awards” to all the horses and forego assigning winners to prevent hurting the feelings of those horses that did not cross the finish line first.
Note that none of the horses are white; horse racing addressed the problem of “white privilege” long ago.
The only two race horses I ever remember are Secretariat and the incomparable Tea Biscuit (from the Abbot and Costello movie “It Ain’t Hay”). Tea Biscuit would have easily won the Saratoga Handicap, but unfortunately, Tea Biscuits’ jockey was Lou Costello.
Wow – thanks for posting. Secretariat is known the world over but revered like some sort of divine creation in Louisville, where I was born and raised. This is my first sports memory and it made a lifelong impression. Simply love the sport, and itâs that time of year! Not one but two Derby prep races today!
Heywood Hale Broun quoted Jack Nicklaus as saying relating that asâalone in his own living roomâhe watched on television as Secretariat barreled down the stretch, the great golfer also began weeping. Broun told him, âJack, donât you understand. All of your life, in your game, youâve been striving for perfection. At the end of the Belmont, you saw it.â
The GOAT. Nothing else needs to be said. I am proud that he was a Virginia bred horse.
Just read that Tim Considine died. Another person from my Childhood gone. God, I am getting old.
Every time I watch that Belmont footage, I get a huge lump in my throat. It’s just amazing. A record that stands to this day. An unbelievable creation of God’s.
Fifteen or so years ago, my daughter and I were admiring yet another dazzling tennis exhibition by Roger Federer when she asked me, “Dad, is he the best athlete you ever saw?” I told her no, that distinction actually belongs to a horse, and proceeded to show her Big Red’s performance at the ’73 Belmont Stakes. Still stirring to see.
The 1970s saw a cluster of great racers, none as poignant (or as gifted, many believe) as Ruffian, the peerless filly whose final, heartbreaking run I was unlucky enough to witness on television.
Just astounding. I get chills watching those videos and seeing how much better he was than any other horse. The quote Steve W referenced “He’s moving like a tremendous machine” is just classic–the announcer was clearly shocked and knew he was watching history that would never be repeated.
Mike K:
The Disney movie was great!
What a great horse. But it’s not just about speed and endurance. It’s also about a refusal to be beaten. The only other horse that comes to mind as a possible competitor to Secretariat was Man O’ War. Equally dominant. IF only those two could be placed in a match race, we might have seen a new record for that distance.
My dad was a railbird. One could learn all one needs to know about humans and humanity spending a day at the track.
In other news;
Justin Trudeau Delivers a Bizarre and Revealing Rant on âDemocracyâ
Trudeau: “we see a bit of a slippage in our democracies. Countries turning towards slightly more authoritarian leaders. Countries allowing increasing misinformation and disinformation to be shared on social media” [my emphasis]
“Countries turning towards slightly more authoritarian leaders”
Perhaps the irony escapes him. More likely he knows exactly what he’s doing.
I’m beginning to be alarmed. I’m not a horse person but this exact vid popped up in my YT feed a couple days ago.
“They” may have us all linked together and AI offers us all the same set of information….
Not the first time either
Two words: Phar Lap
Worthy of mention in the great Big Red horse category.
Do Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley want Americans to pay $7-8 a gallon for gas?
Gr: Do Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley want Americans to pay $7-8 a gallon for gas?
I would guess it’s not top of mind, though I’d rank Sen Hawley higher on the scale.
Mark Steyn notes that many of the westerners cheering Ukrainians dying on their feet have themselves been living on their knees for 2 years out of fear of Covid
Griffin:
I don’t know about Cruz, Rubio, or Hawley wanting 7 -8 dollar gasoline. But I do know that gasoline at those prices would be green for the water melon’s and the Democrats. Windmill- and solar-powered airplanes for Climate Change! We can do it!
JimNorCal:
Nothing to be especially alarmed about – except in the general sense that big websites track our preferences in order to suggest other things to view that are related, and also sometimes they push certain videos to almost everyone. In this case, it’s one or the other, as it usually is.
If, for example, you usually watch the videos in my open threads, they are the same videos I’m watching and the algorithm will tend to suggest the same new videos to both of us as well. Or else the Secretariat video is one they’re generally pushing, maybe because of the time of year.
Ukraine has started an international foreign legion for those who wish to fight for Ukraine against Russia. Those who want to join can get the information they need at the website “Fight for Ukraine” (https://fightforua.org/).
The GOP needs to distribute this to antifa. After all, antifa just means antifascist, doesn’t it? Two birds, one stone.
“The only two race horses I ever remember are Secretariat and the incomparable Tea Biscuit.”
I mean, yes, let’s have 15-20% (at least) real inflation in this country and create a massive recession/depression while Putin sells his oil to China, Pakistan, etc.
And if your answer is we should produce more oil ourselves I agree but that ain’t happening in the near term and even if Biden went all in on that it can’t happen fast enough to offset losing 20% of our imports.
Do any of these politicians actually care about the American people?
When you lose your job or can’t pay the bills is ‘standing with Ukraine’ going to get you through?
Big Red was some horse. Still amazing all these years later.
I watched all three of those races on live TV. (I am from Louisville.) In 1973, Secretariat broke the previous record for the Kentucky Derby which was set by Northern Dancer in 1964. What a lot of folks forget or never knew is that Sham, the horse that came in second behind Secretariat, *also* broke that record.
My brother, who collects all things Derby, has a photo-finish print of Secretariat’s Belmont run. It’s about 8 inches tall and 5 feet long. On one end is Secretariat. On the other end are all the rest of the horses.
The cancel mob has moved on from COVID and now are onto academics that aren’t all in on the narrative on Ukraine.
Napolian Chagnon was an anthropologist who studied the Yanonomo, a primitive tribe in the Amazon, starting in 1964. He discovered:
1) They were very violent; around 30% of men died of homicide.
2) The main cause of violence were fights over women and status, not resources.
3) Men who killed others tended to have more children.
This caused great controversy in anthro, since the standard assumption was that primitive people were peaceful, and if violence took place it was over resources.
It is my observation that a main reason for mutual combat between men today is status, we are wired the same way. I think this also extends to nations are war, which tend to fight wars rooted in ethnic pride.
Griffin:
About Ted Cruz and gas, see today’s roundup post.
JimNorCal,
I’ve definitely noticed YT ‘suggestions’ reflecting any video I watch. Plus, lots of leftist suggestions after I watch politically conservative commentary.
Griffin,
I just recently discovered Neil Oliver. I like his conciseness and unafraid commentary.
The cancel mob is ever diligent in unearthing violations against our ever evolving orthodoxy.
Thank you, neo, for bringing back some wonderful memories. I had a photograph once (lost it somehow in moves, I guess) of Turcotte looking over his shoulder at the Belmont field 25 lengths behind him. Takes oneâs mind off todays disasters, which is much needed.
I was an avid reader of Dick Francis books when he was alive and know absolutely nothing about horse racing except what he taught me. One thing he always said – in response to those who claimed racing was exploitative and cruel to the horses – is that if the horses didn’t want to run, and didn’t want to try to run at the front of the herd, there could be no racing: they have a competitive spirit, all on their own.
I am of course anthropomorphizing, but the way that horse ended every race going away sure seems like joy. And the jockey knew who he was and did what he – the horse – needed.
How have his progeny done?
In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna describes himself with a litany of metaphors of types of exalted excellence. The horse featured in this thread is an example of such a phenomenon. I have a large framed photo of the ’73 Belmont Stakes finish in my living room. https://www.americasbestracing.net/the-sport/2019-tremendous-machine-secretariat-the-belmont
On the right is the field trailing 31 lengths back, all of whom ran a respectable race. On the left of the photo is something for which words are inadequate. My mind becomes silent when I look at it.
Today, the US Embassy in Russia issued a “do not travel” advisory for Russia.
The full advisory is long and detailed, but the crux of the matter is this:
“U.S. citizens residing or traveling in Russia should depart immediately.”
He actually won the Belmont by 32 lengths not 25. And, as I noted in my post above, he was ACCELERATING when he crossed the finish line. He ran each quarter faster than the one before — and he broke the record for each quarter.
Secretariat’s jockey, Ronny Turcotte, said that Big Red would decide how he would run each race; Turcotte was just along for the ride. Trainer Lucien Laurin admitted that he never could figure out what made Big Red tick. Except that Red did NOT like to see other horses in front of him!
In the Derby and the Preakness he was in last place out of the gate and through the clubhouse turn — then he turned on the afterburners. Did he ever!
“And here comes Secretariat . . . he wants the lead and it’s RIGHT NOW he wants it!” exclaimed Chick Anderson.
That photo of Turcotte coming down the stretch at the Belmont, looking over his shoulder at the other horses some 30 lengths back, is iconic, awesome — one of the best sports photos of all time.
Jamie said “I am of course anthropomorphizing . . .”
Not really. Anyone who has ever had a relationship with horses knows that horses have complex emotions, distinct personalities, etc. They experience joy in the fulfillment of their being — e.g., in running. The same goes for all higher-order mammels. The study of animal cognition and intelligence is a burgeoning field of late, due in no small measure to advances in technology that allow us to “see” into the brains of animals. One noted researcher memorably asserted in this regard that scientist are increasingly discovering that, rather than anthropomorphizing animals too much, we aren’t anthropomorphizing them enough. But if you’re a dog owner — I have two border collies — you already know this, LOL!
Rufus said: One could learn all one needs to know about humans and humanity spending a day at the track.
One reason I never visit Saratoga during track season is because there are certain things about humanity that I have no wish to learn.
There are some things about the Russian invasion of Ukraine that are simple, but most of it confuses me. I’m confused in the sense that I’m utterly ignorant of Ukraine’s history with Russia, but I’m also confused about American interests and foreign policy.
Since I’m confused, it was somewhat comforting to read The Diplomad’s most recent post, entitled “Rooting for Putin? No, but …” (https://tinyurl.com/4yzr4y7f).
He starts with this line: “I feel conflicted, my thoughts jumbled, about the Ukraine crisis.” I couldn’t agree more, and was happy to read the rest of his post, even though I couldn’t agree with everything he wrote.
If you’re also confused, then this might be worth a read. If you’ve already made up your mind, then you might find fodder for argument.
Steve, I appreciate your comments here on the great Secretariat.
But unless I’m mistaken, it was the Kentucky Derby in which Big Red ran every fraction faster than the one before it. I’m pretty sure that’s the case, because Secretariat and Sham hooked up in a speed dual in the first half of the Belmont, and set fractions that had more than a few track-savvy observers fearing that Turcotte had blown the race by allowing his horse to exert so much energy early over such a distance.
And as you already know but maybe worth noting for others on the thread, it’s remarkable for any horse to run increasingly better fractions, much less in a Triple Crown race. When one sees a horse overtake others down the home stretch of a race, it’s seldom because that horse has sped up. It’s because it is not slowing down as much as the ones it passes.
Older: You’re right about Big Red running every fraction faster in the Derby not Belmont. Apologies. I was writing from memory which quite clearly is flawed. Thinking about Big Red gets me all excited and messes with my memory!
Poor Sham. “The greatest horse that never won.” In the Belmont he was, for a brief spell, running neck and neck with Big Red — even got a little in front of him. But then Big Red lit the afterburners and it was game over. I once heard someone say — was it Dick Schapp? — that the Belmont “broke Sham’s heart.” He was never the same after that race. A fine horse, and deserves to be remembered.
Cornflour,
The Dip know his stuff. So glad he’s back.
Secretariat. What an incredible creature! I was just a teen at the time but my Dad and I watched all the Triple Crown Races live. Never get tired of watching that Belmont Stakes win. What a beautiful thing.
Steve W:
When I was watching that video I was thinking “Poor Sham! He probably would have been remembered as a great horse but for Secretariat.”
@ Neo > âPoor Sham! He probably would have been remembered as a great horse but for Secretariat.â
That’s like what they say about Olympic silver medalists.
@ Jamie > “I was an avid reader of Dick Francis books when he was alive and know absolutely nothing about horse racing except what he taught me.”
Ditto. Love his books as much for the racing inside-look as the mysteries, and he was one of the greatest of who-dunnit-writers.
My first thought watching these videos was, I wonder what Francis thought about Secretariat?
The second was, I wonder what kind of a mayhem would have resulted if he had written a plotline that remarkable?
Accompanied by stunning photographs, here is the behind-the-scenes story of SecretariatâHorse of the Century. A coin toss determined ownership of the yet unborn foal that was to become the first Triple Crown winner in twenty-five years, breaking and still holding all three track records. The author, who was on personal terms with Secretariat’s owner, trainers, grooms, and jockey and who photographed “Big Red” throughout his career, gives us this enthralling intimate portrait – the triumphs and disasters – of Secretariat’s gallop to immortality.
Secretariat was the best-known and most beloved race horse of the twentieth century. In 1973 his legacy as the greatest horse of all time was permanently etched into the consciousness of the world when he won the Triple Crown. Raymond G. Woolfe Jr. tells the story of Secretariat from the coin toss that sent him to Helen Chenery to his burial at Claiborne Farm. Complete with a glossary of horse-racing terms, a breakdown of Secretariat’s bloodline, and a foreword by Ronald Turcotte, Secretariat’s jockey during his amazing 1973 campaign, this is the definitive volume for fans of the horse and the sport of horseracing.
Secretariat had hundreds of sons and daughters, and I know of no book or website that identifies them all. There’s also the possibility that some died before they were registered or named.
His most famous offspring were Risen Star, winner of the 1988 Preakness and Belmont Stakes, and Lady’s Secret, Horse of the Year in 1986. As a sire, his greatest fame came from his daughters, whose offspring included many successful runners who were even more successful stallions and broodmares in their own right.
@ JimNorCal > “Mark Steyn notes that many of the westerners cheering Ukrainians dying on their feet have themselves been living on their knees for 2 years out of fear of Covid”
NEO > I posted what was probably a way too long comment, and it didn’t go through, although there was no error message. Will break it up and try again, so there may be a repeat of the first section.
@ Cornflour > “The Diplomadâs most recent post”
I read several of his articles last night, and that one stuck in my mind also.
However, the most interesting thing to me, looking at several of them in close proximity, was the number of anomalies that are showing up in the situation.
There are too many things that shouldn’t have happened, and too many that should have but didn’t.
If the Dip is confused, imagine the rest of us!
I am riffing off The Diplomad for consistency, but could have referred to other pundits who made the same or similar points.
In the chronological order of his posts, and I will break up this very long comment.
In addition, I hear lots of easy-breezy talk about sanctions on Russia–sanctions which the Europeans will never impose given their dependence on high-cost Russian energy. You want a sanction that works? It’s called FRACKING. Before the illegitimate ones took over the White House, we had achieved energy independence AND had become a major exporter of cheap oil and natural gas.
I haven’t read ANY stories by people claiming they absolutely knew the Germans were going to dump the Nordstream 2 pipeline to support Ukraine.
WHY the abrupt change of direction, especially considering the rapidity with which Biden brought it back on board after Trump sanctioned it?
Hmm. Part 2a didn’t go through either. I’ll edit and try again. It’s not all that long.[second try]
Wordpress is suppressing me – this happened once before and was not nefarious.
But that was then….. (dons tin-foil-hat)
I will try again tomorrow.
Two words linked in perpetuity: “Biden” and “Disaster.”
Back in March 2014, I wrote a piece about Putin confronting what until then had proven the worst US administration in history, to wit, the Obama/Biden administration.
Let me quote my words–at some length, sorry–of wisdom from eight years ago, written on the occasion of Putin’s prior invasion of Ukraine:
….
You can read the rest, if you want, no mandate to do so. I, however, think that little piece holds up well; all you need do is substitute “Biden” for “Obama,” and “Blinken” for “Kerry,” and it looks very up-to-date.
So, as the wise man said, “history repeats as farce.” We have a [redacted] farce underway. Joe Biden, a bumbling dementia-rattled fool who holds the office of President illegitimately, hasn’t a chance when dealing with Putin, the world’s greatest poker player. He knows that Russia hasn’t been dealt the best hand, but sheer determination and astute analyses of his opponents makes him a winner. He also has my old sparring partner Lavrov as his foreign policy man: the best foreign minister on the planet, as he demonstrated recently with his cruel but deft handling of hapless British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, who competes with Blinken for the gold medal in the category of stupid foreign policy “experts.”
Putin’s reputation as the cold-blooded, clear-eyed master of at least 3D chess, and probably 5D, suddenly goes kaput. He makes an abrupt foray into Ukraine, allegedly without preparing his troops at all, tries to fight 3 or more fronts simultaneously, doesn’t have the logistics in place, and so we have the entire litany of foul-ups we’ve been reading about.
WHY have the two wiliest (and yes, compared to some other national leaders, smartest) bullets in the pistol turned out to be duds this time?
Neo – thanks for the rescue; I see from Cicero’s post on “Then and Now” that I was not the only one being arbitrarily trashed last night.
I’m guessing the phrase “b___ts in the p___l” triggered something at WordPress.
So Mummy Joe came out and announced some “sanctions” on Russia: half of them are already ostensibly in place, and the rest might have long-term effects which will do nothing for the Ukrainians who don’t have a long time to resist the Russians. We, furthermore, note that these “sanctions” require long-term commitment by the West to produce the desired effect of inflicting punishment on Russia. How many of you think that in three, four months, pick a time span, the Western countries will still hold fast to those sanctions? There will be cries to move on, recognize the new reality, or simply ignore the sanctions.
Ah yes, the sanctions that were either going to deter Putin, or were never going to do anything, depending on the day of the week and the speaker.
In the beginning, the restrictions were pretty blah. And then, suddenly — very suddenly, in fact — the entire panoply of western governmental, financial, and commercial establishments is sanctioning Russia. Including cat shows. This, from people and organizations that don’t have any history of support for Ukraine, or antipathy to Russia, outside of the Clinton Coup Conspiracy.
WHY the wide-spread, completely unexpected, possibly coordinated, lock-step abandonment of high-level expensive business contracts and other commercial relationships to support (ahem) a populist uprising for freedom?
The news shows are nonstop “coverage” of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The usual instant and pre-cooked “experts” suddenly appear and tells us everything about the military tactics, the political objectives, and even the mental state of Vlad Putin. Must be nice to be so very smart.
Not much, actually, makes sense. We know that Russia has invaded Ukraine this despite weeks of US and other Western policy gurus telling us that this or that sanction was aimed at stopping such an invasion from happening. Not much commentary on the fact that Putin’s war was made possible by the morons of the Green Universe who have gotten the West to degrade its energy independence, thereby, gifting Putin billions and billions of dollars to use to upgrade his military, and hold a swath of European countries hostage to Russian energy supplies. I hope the environmentalists, such as that moron John Kerry, hold fast to their hopes that Putin will work with us to reduce carbon emissions as they watch Ukrainian cities and oil depots burn from Russian missile strikes.
But that, plus the second one, are intriguing.
Yes, John “Let’s Go” Kerry has always exhibited breathtaking stupidity, cluelessness, and obsessive fixation on Climate Change.
But — really? Reducing carbon emissions is the most important tactical element in a war?
But, but — doesn’t shutting down the Nordstream 2 pipeline kinda sorta make sense, if you are an enviro-wacko? Especially if you are a German enviro-wacko, as all good Germans were up until a couple of days ago.
WHY did Germany (and other European countries) jump on that particular sanction like a duck on a June bug?
A lot of things don’t make sense. Why haven’t the Russians, “masters” at cyber warfare, cut off Ukraine’s connections to the outside world? I see Ukrainians walking around with iPhones freely making calls all over the world, and Western journalists “embedded” in Lviv and Kyiv freely broadcasting to that same world. Are the Russians that incompetent? Possible. Whatever the reason, Putin and his boys have lost the propaganda war bigly. We even see the usual tech giants moving in to suppress “Russian propaganda and misinformation.”
That does seem rather careless of the Russians, even granted that Musk’s Starlink is being beefed up in Ukraine to handle the suppression of the internet … that didn’t happen.
And these are the folks that supposedly ran such a great propaganda campaign they single-handedly elected Trump in 2016.
WHY didn’t Putin’s vaunted hackers have this one down cold on Day One?
WHY are the social media suddenly uninterested in doing business in Russia?
Why? Why? Why?
Even a blind squirrel finds a walnut occasionally.
Maybe they are just not as smart as they think they are and they pulled their heads out of their woke.
Occam’s Razor.
“We even see the usual tech giants moving in to suppress âRussian propaganda and misinformation.â”
Not to worry. They’ll be back roughing up American conservatives before long
AesopFan:
I don’t see why the explanations have to be as mysterious as all that.
For example, there’s the fog of war that makes it genuinely hard to know what’s happening in any war. And then – as is also typical in war – each side puts out propaganda for its side. There are also things that are kept secret by each side for strategic/tactical reasons.
And I can think of several reasons why the Russians might not have interfered much with Ukrainian internet coverage. Originally, the invasion was apparently kept secret from everyone but those closest to Putin. There was also originally the thought that the Russians were projecting the idea to Ukrainians that they were friends come to liberate them. They may have wanted the internet open for that reason. In addition:
Dmitri Alperovitch, co-founder of the cybersecurity company Crowdstrike (since departed) and head of the Silverado Policy Accelerator, told Defense One that he believes Russia has been reluctant to bring down the Ukrainian internet because Russian forces may be relying on local networks for their own communications.
Since the start of the invasion, Ukraine has worked to bolster internet resilience in the country.
Russia has also restrained its use of communications jamming and electronic warfare equipment, U.S. officials believe. When Russia invaded Crimea in 2014, they jammed cell phones and maintained near-radio silence while also coordinating well.
âWe have not seen what we believe the full scope of their electronic warfare capabilities brought to bear,â the senior defense official said. âI cannot give an assessment of why that would be. We do have indications that in some places they have used EW to their advantage, particularly in jamming at a local level.â…
âIf you look at how they launched their attacks, they clearly expected that to happen through a quick and pretty bloodless campaign,â Cohen said on Tuesday. ..
Kofman said Russiaâs war plan appeared to be built around a largely unopposed run to the capital and a premise of quick surrender. âTheyâve been skirting major cities, going for key road junctions/smaller towns,â he tweeted. âWhy did Moscow choose this course of action? A few theories: they didnât take Ukraine and its military seriously. They wanted to avoid attrition and devastation because of consequences for [political] goals in Ukraine, costs of casualties, and they want to hide the costs from the public.â
That was written on March 1.
Also, since the 2014 conflict, Russia’s abilities in that regard may have declined and Ukraine’s ability to fend it off may have increased. See this article from 2019 about that.
Bred in Caroline County, VA
Thanks for the responses – there is a lot more fog in wars as they happen in real time, which seems to “burn off” by the time historians get hold of them later (IF — and that if gets bigger daily — we can trust what historians say outside of bald facts).
Putin gave a couple of long speeches which were barley[sic] carried and were characterized as “insane” and “historically inaccurate.” That might be an accurate depiction, but those speeches are an important insight into how Putin and others around him see the world, and Russia’s relationship to it.
I have written about this before, some eight years ago:
…Taking advantage of the weakness and self-loathing of the Obama misadministration, Putin is out to neutralize Europe and make it into an economic resource for Russia, e.g., gas sales, investments, access to high tech, and to ease the US out of the picture. NATO is to be seen for what it increasingly has become, to wit, a joke.
…
In the Middle East, Putin is the savior of his Assad ally in Syria, and a behind-the-scenes force in getting the US and the West to give up on blocking Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
…
That seems to be happening again. And the repeat of that Obama-era tragedy is going to be, not farce, but a bigger tragedy, if the new Iran “deal” goes through.
WHY is Putin’s current minion helping negotiate that deal (aka capitulation), while we are sanctioning Russia at the exact same time, and why is “Biden” (we know it’s not really him in charge) allowing, nay facilitating, nay demanding that these negotiations happen?
I want Putin to have a major foreign policy reversal. I want the Ukrainians to triumph. My point is to make it irrelevant for the US. We should have the freedom of choice to decide what is in our interest not have Putin and others make it for us. We need to reestablish our energy and industrial independence. We need real leadership committed to Western values and strength.
Well, we don’t have it.
And the visible leaders are not, IMO, the ones running the show.
Certainly not Biden.
Possibly not the German and French and other European heads of government.
Maybe not even Putin himself.
At this point, I’m even cautious about cheering Zelenskyy, who is — remember — a professional actor.
PART 5
This post gives the most background for The Diplomad’s position (see his sidebar for career information), but that’s not really what caught my attention (see bolded statements; the rest is to explain Dip’s point of view).
I could not abide those in the West who wanted to go easy on the Soviets, much less those who betrayed the West for that hideous regime. When, however, the Soviet Union collapsed, my antipathy for that regime did not transition into hatred for Russia. … In other words, we could get along; yes, one had to deal with Russia with both eyes wide open, and watch for potential conflicts of interest, but those did not seem serious. For a time, I advocated to my poor glassy-eyed colleagues dissolving NATO; with the end of the Warsaw Pact, I saw NATO with no military purpose, as a needless provocation for Russia, and a liability for the USA. I certainly saw no reason to expand the size of NATO and extend its, I mean, OUR commitments.
…
The big opportunity to repair US-Russian relations came with the advent of Donald Trump to the White House. Trump was the American Putin when it came to foreign affairs. He placed America’s interests first and had no trouble calling out the phony nature of the NATO alliance. Trump insisted on re-establishing America’s energy independence, rebuilding its military-industrial base, and ending needless wars and adventures overseas. Putin knew that Trump was the kind of leader who would pull the trigger but would not be the first to put the gun on the table. The repairing of US-Russian relations, of course, was sabotaged by a relentless four-year campaign by the DNC to label Trump as Putin’s puppet–when, in fact, nothing could have been further from the truth. Many of the same people involved in creating and promoting that destructive lie now hold senior positions in the Biden administration, including National Security Advisor Sullivan and the fraud who holds the title of President, the former Senator from Delaware.
Let us not forget that the Biden family has gotten rich thanks, not only to the credit card companies of Delaware, but also to Ukraine and China.
This brings me to my reluctance to cheer unabashedly for Ukraine.
…
I find Zelensky, well, yes, he’s brave, but he also bears responsibility for leading his country irresponsibly. He did not rule as a democrat, and did little to fight the rampant corruption in Ukraine: Burisma, anyone? He proved inept in dealing with Russia and recognizing Ukraine’s limitations in a tough neighborhood.
He gives some good reasons for being cautious about rooting for Ukraine.
WHY are they not forming part of the mainstream & social media (aka the left wing) debate?
I think some right-wing pundits have been less reticent, but don’t have any details at hand.
More important, however, in the past few years, our ruling elites have lied to and manipulated us so much–e.g., climate change, Covid, Russia “Collusion,” Hunter Biden laptop, the 81 million Biden “voters”–that it now becomes difficult to separate fact from fiction. In sum: I don’t like, much less trust many if not most of the people now pulling for Ukraine and insisting I do so, too. I know that might sound childish or unfair, but I remain suspicious of the nearly unanimous reporting beaming at us from the networks, right and left, and from the billionaire techno giants. We even hear calls from otherwise once sane people for the murder of Putin–never heard such calls re the head of the USSR.
We certainly don’t hear the Russian side of the story; in fact, the same people who were lukewarm at best when it came to opposing the USSR, promoted the Trump-Putin collusion nonsense, and lied and hid the truth about the rigged 2020 elections, now busily try to ensure we can’t hear or read the Russian version of events.
…
I do not support the Russian invasion of Ukraine. A lot of innocent people are getting killed and hurt. The war should stop. I hope Russia has great difficulty; I hope China has backed the wrong horse.
I hope he is right.
I hope, some day, we find out WHY this invasion happened at all, and particularly why NOW, and WHY so many aspects of it are so strangely out of character.
I will have some other thoughts later this week, when I’ve had time to look into the other questions that pondering these mysteries has engendered, and have time to digest the responses and other comments here, and look at more of the stories going around the web.
The Defense One post that Neo linked gave some possible answers to some of my questions (still only possible, not definitive); left some still open; and raised a few new questions.
Of course, I don’t know anything about the DO organization, its credibility, background, or political orientation, and we have learned that the latter is now a hugely important factor in evaluating information from any source.
However, it looks like a good site to keep in touch with.
Neo’s other link, from 2019, also contained this bit:
In the early years of the conflict, communications security was extremely difficult for Ukranian forces. In 2015, Pavlenko said that Russia had been able to engage in mass sabotage of Russian-made radios that Ukraine was using at the time by triggering some sort of kill switch, which he described as a “virus,” remotely.
This raises questions about what sort of failsafe devices Russia may be hiding inside the military equipment is sells to partners around the world, which could allow them to disable key features remotely if those countries were to turn on them for any reason.
IIRC there was a flurry of debate a couple of years back regarding the DOD purchasing computers and communications equipment from China – and noting that wasn’t a really good idea.
BTW, if you are a weapons wonk, The War Zone may be your go-to site.
You can look there for technical details about the hardware, but here are two recent news stories from that site, although they seem to just be passing on tweets from various sources, which may or may not be credible.
@ AesopFan > “IIRC there was a flurry of debate a couple of years back regarding the DOD purchasing computers and communications equipment from China â and noting that wasnât a really good idea.”
âRussia and China will continue to be forces that will cause a lot of trouble in the Western world as agents of chaos, but in the end people are looking for freedom – so the situation will change for the better,â says cyber expert Morgan Wright, Chief Security Advisor at Israeli cyber unicorn SentinelOne
..
Wright also does not spare his own government when it comes to cyber conduct. He said the main reason it took so long for the U.S. administration to respond to Russia was that governments are infected with a deadly bureaucracy.
How are these delays manifested?
“I’ll give an example, we know that China has been planting ‘backdoors’, a port in a product that allows connection to it for the purpose of taking over or stealing information, in Huawei and ZTE products for a long time, more than ten years, and still it took the government many years to impose sanctions on these companies.â (Authorâs note: Huawei was boycotted by the Western world under American pressure only about three years ago).
The Kaspersky cyber company was also boycotted by the U.S. government a few years ago, but until then it was a recognized supplier of the U.S. government.
“It is easy to develop systems that detect certain scenarios and work as soon as the conditions are met. For example, when a government employee inserts his flash drive into a computer running Kaspersky’s antivirus software, the information was transmitted directly to servers in Russia. This is information that was revealed in court and appears in official documents.”
Well, at least it wasn’t a virus!
Martin Gurri’s post at City Journal proposes answers to some of my WHYs.
I’m cherry-picking that data, but RTWT.
The pretext for the conflictâa âneo-Naziâ regime in Kyiv conducting âgenocideâ against ethnic Russiansâseemed almost intentionally lame. No attempts were made to persuade or demoralize the public, either in Ukraine or in the Western democracies, ahead of what was to be the most egregious act of aggression in Europe in at least a generation.
…
Putinâs lack of interest in explaining or justifying himself suggests reliance on two strategic calculations. First, he expected a short war. If Kyiv could be taken and the Ukrainian government decapitated within days of the start of hostilities, there would be no need for an elaborate information campaign. Power and terror would do the persuading, with a minimum of damage.
Second, Putin held western leaders in the most profound contempt. Even if the war dragged on, he dismissed their willingness to become a serious factor in it.Joe Biden, Olaf Scholz, Boris Johnson, Emmanuel Macron, Justin Trudeau: individually and as a group, Putin assessed them as weak, distracted characters, devoid of will or tenacity, entangled in a world of short-term political gain and symbolic gestures. My guess is that he prepared for sanctions from this crowd, which he anticipated would be lifted once the news cycle moved on.
As I write, ten days into the conflict, we already know that Putinâs initial supposition was mistaken. This will not be a short war. The failure of Russian forces to advance as rapidly as their boss had hoped opened a blank space in need of a narrative: the information contest was suddenly imbued with tremendous potential to mobilize opinion and define the event. Since the Russians had abandoned this front without a fight, the Ukrainian side of the story was triumphant from Day One.
…
The pro-Ukraine tilt in the information war had consequences that almost certainly played no part in Putinâs original calculations. Failure to prepare opinion meant that the invasion, when it came, caused shock and revulsion in many nations, particularly those that bordered Russia. The hero worship of Zelensky and the Ukrainians meant that the information sphere had found a new object of monomaniacal obsession.
The war replaced the pandemicâwhich, in turn, had displaced Trumpâas the source of all fear and loathing. A conformist public closed ranks around this subject: Ukrainian flags became tokens of online virtue, while hundreds of thousands took part in solidarity protests around the world. Anyone with a deviant opinion deserved to be silenced. Facebook, Tik Tok, and Netflix ostentatiously blocked Russian channels. Elon Musk, conversely, moved Starlink terminals into Ukraine, preserving the flow of precious digital content out of the country.
The massively one-sided tide of opinion emboldened elected officials to impose much harsher sanctions on Russia than anyone could have predicted. These leaders might be as weak of will as Putin believed, but that meant that they could be pushed to extremes by the sweep of events, at least in the short term. Even Hungaryâs Viktor Orban, who had cultivated a friendship with Putin as leverage against the mandarins of the EU, refused to stand in the way of sanctions. Orban faces a general election in April.
If you don’t know the author: “Martin Gurri is a former CIA analyst and the author of The Revolt of the Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium.”
His analysis strikes me as highly probable.
(see my next comment on Putin’s lame claim of genocide in the Donbas region)
No need to rehash Putin’s speeches in the prologue to the war, allegedly justifying his invasion of Ukraine. However, the allegations of genocide are not sustainable outside his personal bubble.
Putinâs allegation of Ukrainians committing genocide against Russians is an example of how genocide claims are misused for political reasons. In this case, Putin is misappropriating the term to justify invading Ukraine.
Since the conflict in the Donbas region began eight years ago, more than 13,000 people have been killed, including over 3,000 civilians. Many more have been injured, with 1.5 million people displaced.
Independent reports confirm that pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian separatist forces have committed human rights violations, ranging from arbitrary detention to torture.
While concerning, these abuses have been limited. And the violence doesnât remotely resemble genocide, as defined by Lemkin and the U.N. convention.
Putin, meanwhile, has offered little proof to support his allegation â which he has repeated several times since 2015.
Russian ambassadors have circulated a document at the U.N. claiming Ukraine is âexterminating the civilian populationâ in Donbas. Russian representatives have also spoken of mass killings of people in eastern Ukraine who speak Russian.
But these Russian claims have been found by a number of observers to be baseless and even fabricated, serving only to justify a military intervention.
The links in the last sentence repeat its assertions (or vice versa) but don’t actually support them with evidence. I think this is more relevant:
Russia has made these kinds of false claims before. It sought to justify its invasion of Georgia in 2008 and annexation of Crimea in 2014 by framing them as humanitarian interventions.
If Russia truly believed genocide is taking place in Donbas, it could have made its case in a more formal and less violent way. Russia could have shared evidence with different U.N. bodies, including the U.N. Office on Genocide Prevention, and petitioned for an investigation.
Military intervention to prevent atrocity crimes â which include genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing â only gains a degree of legitimacy if clear evidence has been provided to the international community. Itâs also necessary to collaborate with other countries at the U.N. or other global or regional multilateral actors.
Russia has not done this.
Looking at the fundamental data, and using the straight-forward definition of “genocide” that is not only common sense but accords with the UN meaning, the population figures and the number of fatalities don’t support Russia’s claim.
Parts of Donbas are controlled by separatist groups in the course of the Russo-Ukrainian War: the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic. The word Donbas is a portmanteau formed from Donets Basin, an abbreviation of “Donets Coal Basin”…
This otherwise deep description of the population only gave percentages of this, that, and the other (Russian ethnics, Russian speakers, polls, etc.), and never a base figure for the whole population of the region.
This source gives the total for the Donets Region in 2001 as 4,825,600.
It is actually the largest region by population, by a good bit.
This very extensive treatment of hostilities from 2014 through 2021 lists civilian casualties as 3,393 civilians killed (349 in 2016â2021)[27]… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas
During the entire conflict period, from 14 April
2014 to 30 September 2021, OHCHR recorded
a total of 3,095 conflict-related civilian deaths
(1,841 men, 1,065 women, 102 boys, 50 girls,
and 37 adults whose sex is unknown). Taking
into account the 298 deaths on board
Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 on 17 July 2014,
the total death toll of the conflict on civilians
has reached at least 3,393. The number of
injured civilians is estimated to exceed 7,000.
Deaths of military combatants and displacement of refugees are not part of the definition (or common meaning) of genocide.
Assuming that the total population in 2014 was at least as large as in 2001, and probably larger, the ratio of fatalities to population is roughly 0.07%.
Every death is a tragedy, all of them were unnecessary results of Putin’s ego, lots of other bad things happened, but that’s not a genocidal number.
AF, thanks once again for a masterful series of posts and the collection of fascinating and important links, in particular those from Diplomad and from Gurri (regarding the latter, it was most apt; however in it, he linked to an earlier article of his, from Aug. 2021, which I found perceptive yet most disappointing in other ways. Still, very worthwhile….)
And yes, lots of questions, no doubt… Loads. Tons. Because, of course, NOTHING makes sense (at least on the surface)…until the usual patterns begin to emerge amidst the “snow” on the “screen”….
Keeping in mind that the strategy IS to confuse. To confuse the “enemy”—US, and America’s traditional allies—until “it’s too late” (cf. Nov. 2020). The tactics—creating crises, one after the other (and lying about the causes, nature and reasons for those crises, IOW, spreading confusion, frustration and distrust IN ALL REALMS—are all skewed to achieve this end.
And they are working: we are confused, we are hurt, we are frustrated, we are angry…until we realize that we are SUPPOSED to be confused, hurt, frustrated and angry; that’s the whole point of the “exercise”—THIS in order to protect/conceal, the massive, manifold and multi-dimensional coverup, which itself must be shielded so as to be maintained and sustained with further coverups. (Recalling that it was once popular to claim that “Trump was playing 3D chess” with his opponents, what we have now been witnessing is a massive, multi-dimensional coverup that the Democrats are “playing” with everyone. Massive deceit, massive covering up of that deceit, massive misdirection, subterfuge, prevarication, massive multidimensional distraction, etc.,—WRT to Trump, Covid, the 2020 election, China, the economy, inflation, the border, Russia…and now with Ukraine (with Iran, always in the background, if currently at the forefront; but Iran, too, is “merely” a step along the way to the goal, which includes, among other things the “TRANSFORMATION” of the Middle East—for which “Biden” NEEDS Putin).
And so, regarding these questions, I have no doubt(!)—I could be wrong on this, of course—that given what we know of “Biden” since he was “elected” President; given what we know of the Democrats from 2016 until 2020 and the nature of their constant attacks on AND consistent subversion of Trump and Trump’s administration; and given what we know of the Obama from 2009-2016—all of which (three things) are essentially iterations of the SAME THING—there can be no doubt (I’ll repeat with qualification that I could of course be “around the bend” here) that there is COLLUSION—the word so often used by the usual suspects (and yes, there’s a definite reason why this word reverberated around and through the DEMOCRATIC PARTY/MSCM ECHO CHAMBER) between “Biden” and Putin, particularly since “Biden”‘s goal is the demolition of the US, specifically and the West, generally (call it, if you wish, a “REALIGNMENT”—or call it “TRANSFORMATION”), and especially particularly(!?) because of what we’re just “finding out” about “Biden”‘s efforts to strengthen (or should that be “fortify”?) Iran, not that the latter should surprise anyone, mind you, if one understands exactly who “Biden” really is.
Ukraine is a “stepping stone”. In fact, the country should already have fallen. “Biden” tried to expedite its collapse by dangling most disingenuously the NATO question for Ukraine (an issue that could NOT have been actualized), by stating that a “partial invasion” of Ukraine was fine (till “he” was forced to walk it back) and then by offering to remove Zelensky from the scene (IOW “decapitating” the government “by peaceful means”—“altruistically!!”)…but the clown—the fool!—refused. And so Putin was forced to actually invade; the “humanitarian operation” became a war, his never-intended “blitz” bogged down, destruction ramped up… and “Biden” then had to repeat the “altruistic”—what’s a friend for?—offer a week and a half later.)
And so, things aren’t going as planned. With all the attendant death and destruction, chaos and suffering.
Whether this will be a mere blip on the screen—or a road-bump on the grand boulevard en route to “Biden”‘s planned TRANSFORMATION—remains to be seen.
The truth is that it doesn’t look good for Ukraine.
The truth is that it doesn’t look good for the world, as we know it.
One thing is certain: “Biden” is determined and “he” believes that nothing can stop “him”.
PS I forgot to note that the stats don’t tell how the civilians died, and some were almost certainly killed by the Russians or Donbas separatists, not just by Ukrainians, during the fighting.
As of today, children killed in Ukraine number 38 – and almost certainly by the Russians (I allow for some friendly fire accidents, but none have been reported that I know of).
@ Barry > “Whether this will be a mere blip on the screenâor a road-bump on the grand boulevard en route to âBidenââs planned TRANSFORMATIONâremains to be seen.”
If there isn’t any collusion, as you describe, then there are an awful lot of really interesting coincidences going on, including some you haven’t included.
“Post hoc, ergo propter hoc” is only a fallacy if there isn’t any evidence showing causation.
Yes, it does seem more than a bit off the wall, doesn’t it.
But my (personal?) problem is that I put NOTHING past “Biden”:
not “his” goals, nor “his” betrayals, nor “his” treachery, nor “his” powers of deception (and willingness to deploy it) nor “his” creativity employed to achieve those goals.
Nor “his” absolute ambition, “his” absolute ruthlessness or “his” absolute unscrupulousness…
Another problem? He’s ACTUALLY stated those goals…but we’re all so very busy—if blindly—trying to figure out what that huge, four-legged critter with floppy ears, a funny, shortish tail, a strange, long, flexible tube-type nose and two huge curved toothpicks really might be….
(And what “he” really means when “he” deigns to actually speak.)
@ Barry > I can no longer keep track of all the moving dots that seem to be connected.
AesopFan:
There are several problems I see with Gurri’s reasoning in that article (at least from the quotes you gave; I’ve not read the article itself). He writes:
The pretext for the conflictâa âneo-Naziâ regime in Kyiv conducting âgenocideâ against ethnic Russiansâseemed almost intentionally lame. No attempts were made to persuade or demoralize the public, either in Ukraine or in the Western democracies, ahead of what was to be the most egregious act of aggression in Europe in at least a generation.
This isn’t some sudden reason Putin cooked up quickly. He – and Russian media – have been saying this for years. This is their party line. I believe it’s not really meant to persuade the West, but rather the Russian people who have heard it many times and may even think it’s true. It’s sort of like the left’s January 6th “insurrection” and “white supremacist” argument in the US: familiar and apparently accepted by Putin’s supporters.
“Ukraine’s Nazis made me do it!” is not his only argument for the invasion, either, if one looks at his speeches right before the invasion. The other argument – which we’ve discussed at length here – is “Nuclear NATO made me do it!” That argument is for home consumption and for the West.
Gurri treats Putin’s problem as a messaging problem. It’s a war of dueling propagandas, and Ukraine’s propaganda got the jump on Putin’s propaganda, Gurri seems to be saying. But not only have Putin and Russia been putting out propaganda about this for years, but Russia’s problem vis a vis the Ukrainian story is that Russia really is the heavy here. Russia militarily invaded a country it says it has no ill will towards, to gain territory and influence it to do things it says it doesn’t want.
Gurri writes:
Failure to prepare opinion meant that the invasion, when it came, caused shock and revulsion in many nations, particularly those that bordered Russia.
Putin could have “prepared opinion” all he wanted and it would not have changed the fact that he invaded Ukraine in a hot war, after having prepared Russian troops for many months to do so, and lied about it. Not everything is a communication or spin problem. Sometimes the communication problem is because you have little that’s convincing to communicate.
Gurri also writes:
The war replaced the pandemicâwhich, in turn, had displaced Trumpâas the source of all fear and loathing. A conformist public closed ranks around this subject: Ukrainian flags became tokens of online virtue, while hundreds of thousands took part in solidarity protests around the world.
I think he’s talking about the over-the-top virtue-signaling of the left. I see very little of it on the right. And I doubt that those demonstrating in Russia, for example, are just virtue-signaling or “conformist.” They run real risks.
I think it’s possible to be too cynical, and to see everything as being about the “narrative.” The narrative is part of it, but in this case it’s not as influential as Gurri seems to be saying.
While I hate to spoil a good Ukraine post with horse racing, I remember an interview with jockey Ron Turcotte. Turcotte said that, in the Derby, he showed Secretariat the whip, but never whipped him.
In the Preakness, Turcotte drew the whip but never showed it to Secretariat and never used it.
In the Belmont Stakes, Turcotte never even drew his whip.
There was a plan among some of the other owners in the Belmont Stakes to wear down Secretariat by having one of the other horses bolt to the front early, believing that Secretariat would take the bait and lose, exhausted, at the end of the race.
The plan failed.
This caused great controversy in anthro, since the standard assumption was that primitive people were peaceful, and if violence took place it was over resources. It is my observation that a main reason for mutual combat between men today is status, we are wired the same way. I think this also extends to nations are war, which tend to fight wars rooted in ethnic pride.
A friend of mine pointed out the sampling problem in cultural anthropology: you’re looking at the societies with the lowest revealed inclination to technological adaptation and learning and generalizing to the rest of humanity.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
That 1.5 miles was ran in 2:24, to this day the world record at that length.
One of the most extraordinary creatures in God’s creation, he was.
When he decided it was time to make his move it was like a starship going into warp drive.
His “performance” in the Belmont is simply mind-boggling. And he was accelerating when he crossed the finish line!
Now at play in the Fields of the Lord — and beating all comers, I should think.
Loved you, Big Red. Love you still.
“He’s moving like some tremendous machine!”
I never follow horse racing at all. Yet, Secretariat is the one horse I could name if asked. And I suspect the one horse most people could recognize; except for maybe my millennial daughters. đ He became part of the culture and the times which is an extraordinary achievement for a race horse.
Is the announcer Heywood Hale Broun?
The Jockey did not use a whip either. That Horse just loved to run.
Had a nice long live after.
How much longer before they give “participation awards” to all the horses and forego assigning winners to prevent hurting the feelings of those horses that did not cross the finish line first.
Note that none of the horses are white; horse racing addressed the problem of “white privilege” long ago.
The only two race horses I ever remember are Secretariat and the incomparable Tea Biscuit (from the Abbot and Costello movie “It Ain’t Hay”). Tea Biscuit would have easily won the Saratoga Handicap, but unfortunately, Tea Biscuits’ jockey was Lou Costello.
The Disney movie was good. After Secretariat died he was found to have an enormous heart. It was more than twice the size of the average thoroughbred heart,
Chick Anderson was the announcer.
Wow – thanks for posting. Secretariat is known the world over but revered like some sort of divine creation in Louisville, where I was born and raised. This is my first sports memory and it made a lifelong impression. Simply love the sport, and itâs that time of year! Not one but two Derby prep races today!
Heywood Hale Broun quoted Jack Nicklaus as saying relating that asâalone in his own living roomâhe watched on television as Secretariat barreled down the stretch, the great golfer also began weeping. Broun told him, âJack, donât you understand. All of your life, in your game, youâve been striving for perfection. At the end of the Belmont, you saw it.â
The GOAT. Nothing else needs to be said. I am proud that he was a Virginia bred horse.
Just read that Tim Considine died. Another person from my Childhood gone. God, I am getting old.
Every time I watch that Belmont footage, I get a huge lump in my throat. It’s just amazing. A record that stands to this day. An unbelievable creation of God’s.
Fifteen or so years ago, my daughter and I were admiring yet another dazzling tennis exhibition by Roger Federer when she asked me, “Dad, is he the best athlete you ever saw?” I told her no, that distinction actually belongs to a horse, and proceeded to show her Big Red’s performance at the ’73 Belmont Stakes. Still stirring to see.
The 1970s saw a cluster of great racers, none as poignant (or as gifted, many believe) as Ruffian, the peerless filly whose final, heartbreaking run I was unlucky enough to witness on television.
Just astounding. I get chills watching those videos and seeing how much better he was than any other horse. The quote Steve W referenced “He’s moving like a tremendous machine” is just classic–the announcer was clearly shocked and knew he was watching history that would never be repeated.
Mike K:
The Disney movie was great!
What a great horse. But it’s not just about speed and endurance. It’s also about a refusal to be beaten. The only other horse that comes to mind as a possible competitor to Secretariat was Man O’ War. Equally dominant. IF only those two could be placed in a match race, we might have seen a new record for that distance.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Man-o-War
My dad was a railbird. One could learn all one needs to know about humans and humanity spending a day at the track.
In other news;
Justin Trudeau Delivers a Bizarre and Revealing Rant on âDemocracyâ
“Countries turning towards slightly more authoritarian leaders”
Perhaps the irony escapes him. More likely he knows exactly what he’s doing.
https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/03/05/justin-trudeau-delivers-a-bizarre-and-revealing-rant-on-democracy-n531997
Trudeau’s assertions are straight out of Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum’s playbook; https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/06/global-framework-regulate-harmful-online-content/
I’m beginning to be alarmed. I’m not a horse person but this exact vid popped up in my YT feed a couple days ago.
“They” may have us all linked together and AI offers us all the same set of information….
Not the first time either
Two words: Phar Lap
Worthy of mention in the great Big Red horse category.
Do Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley want Americans to pay $7-8 a gallon for gas?
Gr: Do Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley want Americans to pay $7-8 a gallon for gas?
I would guess it’s not top of mind, though I’d rank Sen Hawley higher on the scale.
Mark Steyn notes that many of the westerners cheering Ukrainians dying on their feet have themselves been living on their knees for 2 years out of fear of Covid
Griffin:
I don’t know about Cruz, Rubio, or Hawley wanting 7 -8 dollar gasoline. But I do know that gasoline at those prices would be green for the water melon’s and the Democrats. Windmill- and solar-powered airplanes for Climate Change! We can do it!
JimNorCal:
Nothing to be especially alarmed about – except in the general sense that big websites track our preferences in order to suggest other things to view that are related, and also sometimes they push certain videos to almost everyone. In this case, it’s one or the other, as it usually is.
If, for example, you usually watch the videos in my open threads, they are the same videos I’m watching and the algorithm will tend to suggest the same new videos to both of us as well. Or else the Secretariat video is one they’re generally pushing, maybe because of the time of year.
Ukraine has started an international foreign legion for those who wish to fight for Ukraine against Russia. Those who want to join can get the information they need at the website “Fight for Ukraine” (https://fightforua.org/).
The GOP needs to distribute this to antifa. After all, antifa just means antifascist, doesn’t it? Two birds, one stone.
“The only two race horses I ever remember are Secretariat and the incomparable Tea Biscuit.”
I remember Beetle Bomb– from Spike Jones’ parody of the William Tell Overture:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BavRrRNvz8g&ab_channel=jonax64
I mean, yes, let’s have 15-20% (at least) real inflation in this country and create a massive recession/depression while Putin sells his oil to China, Pakistan, etc.
And if your answer is we should produce more oil ourselves I agree but that ain’t happening in the near term and even if Biden went all in on that it can’t happen fast enough to offset losing 20% of our imports.
Do any of these politicians actually care about the American people?
When you lose your job or can’t pay the bills is ‘standing with Ukraine’ going to get you through?
Big Red was some horse. Still amazing all these years later.
Neil Oliver.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HYxdSei9ks
I watched all three of those races on live TV. (I am from Louisville.) In 1973, Secretariat broke the previous record for the Kentucky Derby which was set by Northern Dancer in 1964. What a lot of folks forget or never knew is that Sham, the horse that came in second behind Secretariat, *also* broke that record.
My brother, who collects all things Derby, has a photo-finish print of Secretariat’s Belmont run. It’s about 8 inches tall and 5 feet long. On one end is Secretariat. On the other end are all the rest of the horses.
The cancel mob has moved on from COVID and now are onto academics that aren’t all in on the narrative on Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1500192254887022593
25 lengths! Absolutely amazing.
Napolian Chagnon was an anthropologist who studied the Yanonomo, a primitive tribe in the Amazon, starting in 1964. He discovered:
1) They were very violent; around 30% of men died of homicide.
2) The main cause of violence were fights over women and status, not resources.
3) Men who killed others tended to have more children.
This caused great controversy in anthro, since the standard assumption was that primitive people were peaceful, and if violence took place it was over resources.
It is my observation that a main reason for mutual combat between men today is status, we are wired the same way. I think this also extends to nations are war, which tend to fight wars rooted in ethnic pride.
Griffin:
About Ted Cruz and gas, see today’s roundup post.
JimNorCal,
I’ve definitely noticed YT ‘suggestions’ reflecting any video I watch. Plus, lots of leftist suggestions after I watch politically conservative commentary.
Griffin,
I just recently discovered Neil Oliver. I like his conciseness and unafraid commentary.
The cancel mob is ever diligent in unearthing violations against our ever evolving orthodoxy.
Thank you, neo, for bringing back some wonderful memories. I had a photograph once (lost it somehow in moves, I guess) of Turcotte looking over his shoulder at the Belmont field 25 lengths behind him. Takes oneâs mind off todays disasters, which is much needed.
I was an avid reader of Dick Francis books when he was alive and know absolutely nothing about horse racing except what he taught me. One thing he always said – in response to those who claimed racing was exploitative and cruel to the horses – is that if the horses didn’t want to run, and didn’t want to try to run at the front of the herd, there could be no racing: they have a competitive spirit, all on their own.
I am of course anthropomorphizing, but the way that horse ended every race going away sure seems like joy. And the jockey knew who he was and did what he – the horse – needed.
How have his progeny done?
In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna describes himself with a litany of metaphors of types of exalted excellence. The horse featured in this thread is an example of such a phenomenon. I have a large framed photo of the ’73 Belmont Stakes finish in my living room.
https://www.americasbestracing.net/the-sport/2019-tremendous-machine-secretariat-the-belmont
On the right is the field trailing 31 lengths back, all of whom ran a respectable race. On the left of the photo is something for which words are inadequate. My mind becomes silent when I look at it.
Today, the US Embassy in Russia issued a “do not travel” advisory for Russia.
The full advisory is long and detailed, but the crux of the matter is this:
“U.S. citizens residing or traveling in Russia should depart immediately.”
https://ru.usembassy.gov/russia-level-4-do-not-travel/#.YiPZDLlEzL0.twitter
He actually won the Belmont by 32 lengths not 25. And, as I noted in my post above, he was ACCELERATING when he crossed the finish line. He ran each quarter faster than the one before — and he broke the record for each quarter.
Secretariat’s jockey, Ronny Turcotte, said that Big Red would decide how he would run each race; Turcotte was just along for the ride. Trainer Lucien Laurin admitted that he never could figure out what made Big Red tick. Except that Red did NOT like to see other horses in front of him!
In the Derby and the Preakness he was in last place out of the gate and through the clubhouse turn — then he turned on the afterburners. Did he ever!
“And here comes Secretariat . . . he wants the lead and it’s RIGHT NOW he wants it!” exclaimed Chick Anderson.
That photo of Turcotte coming down the stretch at the Belmont, looking over his shoulder at the other horses some 30 lengths back, is iconic, awesome — one of the best sports photos of all time.
Jamie said “I am of course anthropomorphizing . . .”
Not really. Anyone who has ever had a relationship with horses knows that horses have complex emotions, distinct personalities, etc. They experience joy in the fulfillment of their being — e.g., in running. The same goes for all higher-order mammels. The study of animal cognition and intelligence is a burgeoning field of late, due in no small measure to advances in technology that allow us to “see” into the brains of animals. One noted researcher memorably asserted in this regard that scientist are increasingly discovering that, rather than anthropomorphizing animals too much, we aren’t anthropomorphizing them enough. But if you’re a dog owner — I have two border collies — you already know this, LOL!
Rufus said:
One could learn all one needs to know about humans and humanity spending a day at the track.
One reason I never visit Saratoga during track season is because there are certain things about humanity that I have no wish to learn.
There are some things about the Russian invasion of Ukraine that are simple, but most of it confuses me. I’m confused in the sense that I’m utterly ignorant of Ukraine’s history with Russia, but I’m also confused about American interests and foreign policy.
Since I’m confused, it was somewhat comforting to read The Diplomad’s most recent post, entitled “Rooting for Putin? No, but …” (https://tinyurl.com/4yzr4y7f).
He starts with this line: “I feel conflicted, my thoughts jumbled, about the Ukraine crisis.” I couldn’t agree more, and was happy to read the rest of his post, even though I couldn’t agree with everything he wrote.
If you’re also confused, then this might be worth a read. If you’ve already made up your mind, then you might find fodder for argument.
Steve, I appreciate your comments here on the great Secretariat.
But unless I’m mistaken, it was the Kentucky Derby in which Big Red ran every fraction faster than the one before it. I’m pretty sure that’s the case, because Secretariat and Sham hooked up in a speed dual in the first half of the Belmont, and set fractions that had more than a few track-savvy observers fearing that Turcotte had blown the race by allowing his horse to exert so much energy early over such a distance.
And as you already know but maybe worth noting for others on the thread, it’s remarkable for any horse to run increasingly better fractions, much less in a Triple Crown race. When one sees a horse overtake others down the home stretch of a race, it’s seldom because that horse has sped up. It’s because it is not slowing down as much as the ones it passes.
Older: You’re right about Big Red running every fraction faster in the Derby not Belmont. Apologies. I was writing from memory which quite clearly is flawed. Thinking about Big Red gets me all excited and messes with my memory!
Poor Sham. “The greatest horse that never won.” In the Belmont he was, for a brief spell, running neck and neck with Big Red — even got a little in front of him. But then Big Red lit the afterburners and it was game over. I once heard someone say — was it Dick Schapp? — that the Belmont “broke Sham’s heart.” He was never the same after that race. A fine horse, and deserves to be remembered.
Cornflour,
The Dip know his stuff. So glad he’s back.
Secretariat. What an incredible creature! I was just a teen at the time but my Dad and I watched all the Triple Crown Races live. Never get tired of watching that Belmont Stakes win. What a beautiful thing.
Steve W:
When I was watching that video I was thinking “Poor Sham! He probably would have been remembered as a great horse but for Secretariat.”
@ Neo > âPoor Sham! He probably would have been remembered as a great horse but for Secretariat.â
That’s like what they say about Olympic silver medalists.
@ Jamie > “I was an avid reader of Dick Francis books when he was alive and know absolutely nothing about horse racing except what he taught me.”
Ditto. Love his books as much for the racing inside-look as the mysteries, and he was one of the greatest of who-dunnit-writers.
My first thought watching these videos was, I wonder what Francis thought about Secretariat?
The second was, I wonder what kind of a mayhem would have resulted if he had written a plotline that remarkable?
For the record, this is all I could find linking Francis & real horses in America.
It was an interesting true-crime mystery, however.
https://www.nytimes.com/1977/07/04/archives/cherchez-a-horsethief-who-reads.html
Add this to your book list. Superb cover photo.
https://www.amazon.com/Secretariat-Raymond-G-Woolfe/dp/1586670670
And the answer to Jamie’s question is …
https://www.quora.com/Who-are-Secretariats-foals?share=1
The top answer to this question gives more details on his progeny. https://www.quora.com/Was-Secretariat-perhaps-the-greatest-race-horse-to-have-ever-lived-a-stallion-or-a-gelding
More fun reads at Quora – there is a long list of them!
https://www.quora.com/Why-has-no-horse-ever-been-able-to-beat-the-Secretariats-1973-record-at-Belmont-Stakes
Fascinating look at another great runner and the use of DNA to analyze him .
https://www.quora.com/Why-was-Seabiscuit-so-fast
@ JimNorCal > “Mark Steyn notes that many of the westerners cheering Ukrainians dying on their feet have themselves been living on their knees for 2 years out of fear of Covid”
TWIP had something along those lines.
https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2022/02/Screen-Shot-2022-02-24-at-9.46.15-AM.png?w=1186&ssl=1
NEO > I posted what was probably a way too long comment, and it didn’t go through, although there was no error message. Will break it up and try again, so there may be a repeat of the first section.
@ Cornflour > “The Diplomadâs most recent post”
I read several of his articles last night, and that one stuck in my mind also.
However, the most interesting thing to me, looking at several of them in close proximity, was the number of anomalies that are showing up in the situation.
There are too many things that shouldn’t have happened, and too many that should have but didn’t.
If the Dip is confused, imagine the rest of us!
I am riffing off The Diplomad for consistency, but could have referred to other pundits who made the same or similar points.
In the chronological order of his posts, and I will break up this very long comment.
PART 1
https://thediplomad.blogspot.com/2022/02/vichy-canada.html
Feb 19
I haven’t read ANY stories by people claiming they absolutely knew the Germans were going to dump the Nordstream 2 pipeline to support Ukraine.
WHY the abrupt change of direction, especially considering the rapidity with which Biden brought it back on board after Trump sanctioned it?
Hmm. Part 2a didn’t go through either. I’ll edit and try again. It’s not all that long.[second try]
Wordpress is suppressing me – this happened once before and was not nefarious.
But that was then….. (dons tin-foil-hat)
I will try again tomorrow.
PART 2a
https://thediplomad.blogspot.com/2022/02/biden-disaster-biden-disaster-biden.html
Feb 24
Putin’s reputation as the cold-blooded, clear-eyed master of at least 3D chess, and probably 5D, suddenly goes kaput. He makes an abrupt foray into Ukraine, allegedly without preparing his troops at all, tries to fight 3 or more fronts simultaneously, doesn’t have the logistics in place, and so we have the entire litany of foul-ups we’ve been reading about.
WHY have the two wiliest (and yes, compared to some other national leaders, smartest) bullets in the pistol turned out to be duds this time?
Neo – thanks for the rescue; I see from Cicero’s post on “Then and Now” that I was not the only one being arbitrarily trashed last night.
I’m guessing the phrase “b___ts in the p___l” triggered something at WordPress.
Questions provoked by Diplomad’s posts continued.
PART 2b
https://thediplomad.blogspot.com/2022/02/biden-disaster-biden-disaster-biden.html
Feb 24 (continued)
Ah yes, the sanctions that were either going to deter Putin, or were never going to do anything, depending on the day of the week and the speaker.
In the beginning, the restrictions were pretty blah. And then, suddenly — very suddenly, in fact — the entire panoply of western governmental, financial, and commercial establishments is sanctioning Russia. Including cat shows. This, from people and organizations that don’t have any history of support for Ukraine, or antipathy to Russia, outside of the Clinton Coup Conspiracy.
WHY the wide-spread, completely unexpected, possibly coordinated, lock-step abandonment of high-level expensive business contracts and other commercial relationships to support (ahem) a populist uprising for freedom?
https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2022/02/IMG_5253.jpeg?w=946&ssl=1
PART 3
https://thediplomad.blogspot.com/2022/02/and-truth.html
Feb 27
Okay, that first bolding was mostly so I could insert this meme.
https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2022/03/image011.png?w=518&ssl=1
But that, plus the second one, are intriguing.
Yes, John “Let’s Go” Kerry has always exhibited breathtaking stupidity, cluelessness, and obsessive fixation on Climate Change.
But — really? Reducing carbon emissions is the most important tactical element in a war?
But, but — doesn’t shutting down the Nordstream 2 pipeline kinda sorta make sense, if you are an enviro-wacko? Especially if you are a German enviro-wacko, as all good Germans were up until a couple of days ago.
WHY did Germany (and other European countries) jump on that particular sanction like a duck on a June bug?
That does seem rather careless of the Russians, even granted that Musk’s Starlink is being beefed up in Ukraine to handle the suppression of the internet … that didn’t happen.
And these are the folks that supposedly ran such a great propaganda campaign they single-handedly elected Trump in 2016.
WHY didn’t Putin’s vaunted hackers have this one down cold on Day One?
WHY are the social media suddenly uninterested in doing business in Russia?
Why? Why? Why?
Even a blind squirrel finds a walnut occasionally.
Maybe they are just not as smart as they think they are and they pulled their heads out of their woke.
Occam’s Razor.
“We even see the usual tech giants moving in to suppress âRussian propaganda and misinformation.â”
Not to worry. They’ll be back roughing up American conservatives before long
AesopFan:
I don’t see why the explanations have to be as mysterious as all that.
For example, there’s the fog of war that makes it genuinely hard to know what’s happening in any war. And then – as is also typical in war – each side puts out propaganda for its side. There are also things that are kept secret by each side for strategic/tactical reasons.
And I can think of several reasons why the Russians might not have interfered much with Ukrainian internet coverage. Originally, the invasion was apparently kept secret from everyone but those closest to Putin. There was also originally the thought that the Russians were projecting the idea to Ukrainians that they were friends come to liberate them. They may have wanted the internet open for that reason. In addition:
That was written on March 1.
Also, since the 2014 conflict, Russia’s abilities in that regard may have declined and Ukraine’s ability to fend it off may have increased. See this article from 2019 about that.
Bred in Caroline County, VA
Thanks for the responses – there is a lot more fog in wars as they happen in real time, which seems to “burn off” by the time historians get hold of them later (IF — and that if gets bigger daily — we can trust what historians say outside of bald facts).
To continue —
PART 4
(same link as Part 3)
https://thediplomad.blogspot.com/2022/02/and-truth.html
Feb 27
That seems to be happening again. And the repeat of that Obama-era tragedy is going to be, not farce, but a bigger tragedy, if the new Iran “deal” goes through.
WHY is Putin’s current minion helping negotiate that deal (aka capitulation), while we are sanctioning Russia at the exact same time, and why is “Biden” (we know it’s not really him in charge) allowing, nay facilitating, nay demanding that these negotiations happen?
Well, we don’t have it.
And the visible leaders are not, IMO, the ones running the show.
Certainly not Biden.
Possibly not the German and French and other European heads of government.
Maybe not even Putin himself.
At this point, I’m even cautious about cheering Zelenskyy, who is — remember — a professional actor.
PART 5
This post gives the most background for The Diplomad’s position (see his sidebar for career information), but that’s not really what caught my attention (see bolded statements; the rest is to explain Dip’s point of view).
https://thediplomad.blogspot.com/2022/03/rooting-for-putin-no-but.html
March 4
He gives some good reasons for being cautious about rooting for Ukraine.
WHY are they not forming part of the mainstream & social media (aka the left wing) debate?
I think some right-wing pundits have been less reticent, but don’t have any details at hand.
I hope he is right.
I hope, some day, we find out WHY this invasion happened at all, and particularly why NOW, and WHY so many aspects of it are so strangely out of character.
I will have some other thoughts later this week, when I’ve had time to look into the other questions that pondering these mysteries has engendered, and have time to digest the responses and other comments here, and look at more of the stories going around the web.
The Defense One post that Neo linked gave some possible answers to some of my questions (still only possible, not definitive); left some still open; and raised a few new questions.
Of course, I don’t know anything about the DO organization, its credibility, background, or political orientation, and we have learned that the latter is now a hugely important factor in evaluating information from any source.
However, it looks like a good site to keep in touch with.
Neo’s other link, from 2019, also contained this bit:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/30741/ukrainian-officer-details-russian-electronic-warfare-tactics-including-radio-virus
IIRC there was a flurry of debate a couple of years back regarding the DOD purchasing computers and communications equipment from China – and noting that wasn’t a really good idea.
BTW, if you are a weapons wonk, The War Zone may be your go-to site.
You can look there for technical details about the hardware, but here are two recent news stories from that site, although they seem to just be passing on tweets from various sources, which may or may not be credible.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44576/russian-forces-now-occupy-europes-largest-nuclear-plant-in-ukraine
March 4 “The director of the IAEA says the situation is unprecedented and he wants to broker nuclear security talks between Russia and Ukraine at Chernobyl.”
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/44602/the-russian-air-force-just-had-a-terrible-day-over-ukraine
March 5 “Russia looks to have lost multiple combat jets, helicopters, and a drone in just the past day or so.”
@ AesopFan > “IIRC there was a flurry of debate a couple of years back regarding the DOD purchasing computers and communications equipment from China â and noting that wasnât a really good idea.”
Serendipitous find on the Powerline Picks:
https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/sk200ds1wc
March 4
Well, at least it wasn’t a virus!
Martin Gurri’s post at City Journal proposes answers to some of my WHYs.
I’m cherry-picking that data, but RTWT.
https://www.city-journal.org/war-and-persuasion
If you don’t know the author: “Martin Gurri is a former CIA analyst and the author of The Revolt of the Public and the Crisis of Authority in the New Millennium.”
His analysis strikes me as highly probable.
(see my next comment on Putin’s lame claim of genocide in the Donbas region)
No need to rehash Putin’s speeches in the prologue to the war, allegedly justifying his invasion of Ukraine. However, the allegations of genocide are not sustainable outside his personal bubble.
https://theconversation.com/putins-claims-that-ukraine-is-committing-genocide-are-baseless-but-not-unprecedented-177511
The links in the last sentence repeat its assertions (or vice versa) but don’t actually support them with evidence. I think this is more relevant:
Looking at the fundamental data, and using the straight-forward definition of “genocide” that is not only common sense but accords with the UN meaning, the population figures and the number of fatalities don’t support Russia’s claim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donbas
This otherwise deep description of the population only gave percentages of this, that, and the other (Russian ethnics, Russian speakers, polls, etc.), and never a base figure for the whole population of the region.
This source gives the total for the Donets Region in 2001 as 4,825,600.
It is actually the largest region by population, by a good bit.
https://web.archive.org/web/20111217151026/http://2001.ukrcensus.gov.ua/eng/results/general/nationality/
This very extensive treatment of hostilities from 2014 through 2021 lists civilian casualties as 3,393 civilians killed (349 in 2016â2021)[27]…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas
Reference [27] gives the figures in detail.
https://ukraine.un.org/sites/default/files/2021-10/Conflict-related%20civilian%20casualties%20as%20of%2030%20September%202021%20%28rev%208%20Oct%202021%29%20EN.pdf
OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS 2021-10-08
Deaths of military combatants and displacement of refugees are not part of the definition (or common meaning) of genocide.
Assuming that the total population in 2014 was at least as large as in 2001, and probably larger, the ratio of fatalities to population is roughly 0.07%.
Every death is a tragedy, all of them were unnecessary results of Putin’s ego, lots of other bad things happened, but that’s not a genocidal number.
AF, thanks once again for a masterful series of posts and the collection of fascinating and important links, in particular those from Diplomad and from Gurri (regarding the latter, it was most apt; however in it, he linked to an earlier article of his, from Aug. 2021, which I found perceptive yet most disappointing in other ways. Still, very worthwhile….)
And yes, lots of questions, no doubt… Loads. Tons. Because, of course, NOTHING makes sense (at least on the surface)…until the usual patterns begin to emerge amidst the “snow” on the “screen”….
Keeping in mind that the strategy IS to confuse. To confuse the “enemy”—US, and America’s traditional allies—until “it’s too late” (cf. Nov. 2020). The tactics—creating crises, one after the other (and lying about the causes, nature and reasons for those crises, IOW, spreading confusion, frustration and distrust IN ALL REALMS—are all skewed to achieve this end.
And they are working: we are confused, we are hurt, we are frustrated, we are angry…until we realize that we are SUPPOSED to be confused, hurt, frustrated and angry; that’s the whole point of the “exercise”—THIS in order to protect/conceal, the massive, manifold and multi-dimensional coverup, which itself must be shielded so as to be maintained and sustained with further coverups. (Recalling that it was once popular to claim that “Trump was playing 3D chess” with his opponents, what we have now been witnessing is a massive, multi-dimensional coverup that the Democrats are “playing” with everyone. Massive deceit, massive covering up of that deceit, massive misdirection, subterfuge, prevarication, massive multidimensional distraction, etc.,—WRT to Trump, Covid, the 2020 election, China, the economy, inflation, the border, Russia…and now with Ukraine (with Iran, always in the background, if currently at the forefront; but Iran, too, is “merely” a step along the way to the goal, which includes, among other things the “TRANSFORMATION” of the Middle East—for which “Biden” NEEDS Putin).
And so, regarding these questions, I have no doubt(!)—I could be wrong on this, of course—that given what we know of “Biden” since he was “elected” President; given what we know of the Democrats from 2016 until 2020 and the nature of their constant attacks on AND consistent subversion of Trump and Trump’s administration; and given what we know of the Obama from 2009-2016—all of which (three things) are essentially iterations of the SAME THING—there can be no doubt (I’ll repeat with qualification that I could of course be “around the bend” here) that there is COLLUSION—the word so often used by the usual suspects (and yes, there’s a definite reason why this word reverberated around and through the DEMOCRATIC PARTY/MSCM ECHO CHAMBER) between “Biden” and Putin, particularly since “Biden”‘s goal is the demolition of the US, specifically and the West, generally (call it, if you wish, a “REALIGNMENT”—or call it “TRANSFORMATION”), and especially particularly(!?) because of what we’re just “finding out” about “Biden”‘s efforts to strengthen (or should that be “fortify”?) Iran, not that the latter should surprise anyone, mind you, if one understands exactly who “Biden” really is.
Ukraine is a “stepping stone”. In fact, the country should already have fallen. “Biden” tried to expedite its collapse by dangling most disingenuously the NATO question for Ukraine (an issue that could NOT have been actualized), by stating that a “partial invasion” of Ukraine was fine (till “he” was forced to walk it back) and then by offering to remove Zelensky from the scene (IOW “decapitating” the government “by peaceful means”—“altruistically!!”)…but the clown—the fool!—refused. And so Putin was forced to actually invade; the “humanitarian operation” became a war, his never-intended “blitz” bogged down, destruction ramped up… and “Biden” then had to repeat the “altruistic”—what’s a friend for?—offer a week and a half later.)
And so, things aren’t going as planned. With all the attendant death and destruction, chaos and suffering.
Whether this will be a mere blip on the screen—or a road-bump on the grand boulevard en route to “Biden”‘s planned TRANSFORMATION—remains to be seen.
The truth is that it doesn’t look good for Ukraine.
The truth is that it doesn’t look good for the world, as we know it.
One thing is certain: “Biden” is determined and “he” believes that nothing can stop “him”.
PS I forgot to note that the stats don’t tell how the civilians died, and some were almost certainly killed by the Russians or Donbas separatists, not just by Ukrainians, during the fighting.
As of today, children killed in Ukraine number 38 – and almost certainly by the Russians (I allow for some friendly fire accidents, but none have been reported that I know of).
https://nypost.com/2022/03/06/ukraine-first-lady-olena-zelenska-begs-media-to-tell-terrible-truth-that-russians-are-killing-kids/
@ Barry > “Whether this will be a mere blip on the screenâor a road-bump on the grand boulevard en route to âBidenââs planned TRANSFORMATIONâremains to be seen.”
If there isn’t any collusion, as you describe, then there are an awful lot of really interesting coincidences going on, including some you haven’t included.
“Post hoc, ergo propter hoc” is only a fallacy if there isn’t any evidence showing causation.
Yes, it does seem more than a bit off the wall, doesn’t it.
But my (personal?) problem is that I put NOTHING past “Biden”:
not “his” goals, nor “his” betrayals, nor “his” treachery, nor “his” powers of deception (and willingness to deploy it) nor “his” creativity employed to achieve those goals.
Nor “his” absolute ambition, “his” absolute ruthlessness or “his” absolute unscrupulousness…
Another problem? He’s ACTUALLY stated those goals…but we’re all so very busy—if blindly—trying to figure out what that huge, four-legged critter with floppy ears, a funny, shortish tail, a strange, long, flexible tube-type nose and two huge curved toothpicks really might be….
(And what “he” really means when “he” deigns to actually speak.)
File under: Really(?)
Here’s an “interesting” one:
‘”Putin is using Iran for his cyber warfare”‘—
https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/sk200ds1wc
H/T Powerline blog.
(IOW, it raises several, um, questions….)
@ Barry > I can no longer keep track of all the moving dots that seem to be connected.
AesopFan:
There are several problems I see with Gurri’s reasoning in that article (at least from the quotes you gave; I’ve not read the article itself). He writes:
This isn’t some sudden reason Putin cooked up quickly. He – and Russian media – have been saying this for years. This is their party line. I believe it’s not really meant to persuade the West, but rather the Russian people who have heard it many times and may even think it’s true. It’s sort of like the left’s January 6th “insurrection” and “white supremacist” argument in the US: familiar and apparently accepted by Putin’s supporters.
“Ukraine’s Nazis made me do it!” is not his only argument for the invasion, either, if one looks at his speeches right before the invasion. The other argument – which we’ve discussed at length here – is “Nuclear NATO made me do it!” That argument is for home consumption and for the West.
Gurri treats Putin’s problem as a messaging problem. It’s a war of dueling propagandas, and Ukraine’s propaganda got the jump on Putin’s propaganda, Gurri seems to be saying. But not only have Putin and Russia been putting out propaganda about this for years, but Russia’s problem vis a vis the Ukrainian story is that Russia really is the heavy here. Russia militarily invaded a country it says it has no ill will towards, to gain territory and influence it to do things it says it doesn’t want.
Gurri writes:
Putin could have “prepared opinion” all he wanted and it would not have changed the fact that he invaded Ukraine in a hot war, after having prepared Russian troops for many months to do so, and lied about it. Not everything is a communication or spin problem. Sometimes the communication problem is because you have little that’s convincing to communicate.
Gurri also writes:
I think he’s talking about the over-the-top virtue-signaling of the left. I see very little of it on the right. And I doubt that those demonstrating in Russia, for example, are just virtue-signaling or “conformist.” They run real risks.
I think it’s possible to be too cynical, and to see everything as being about the “narrative.” The narrative is part of it, but in this case it’s not as influential as Gurri seems to be saying.
While I hate to spoil a good Ukraine post with horse racing, I remember an interview with jockey Ron Turcotte. Turcotte said that, in the Derby, he showed Secretariat the whip, but never whipped him.
In the Preakness, Turcotte drew the whip but never showed it to Secretariat and never used it.
In the Belmont Stakes, Turcotte never even drew his whip.
There was a plan among some of the other owners in the Belmont Stakes to wear down Secretariat by having one of the other horses bolt to the front early, believing that Secretariat would take the bait and lose, exhausted, at the end of the race.
The plan failed.
This caused great controversy in anthro, since the standard assumption was that primitive people were peaceful, and if violence took place it was over resources. It is my observation that a main reason for mutual combat between men today is status, we are wired the same way. I think this also extends to nations are war, which tend to fight wars rooted in ethnic pride.
A friend of mine pointed out the sampling problem in cultural anthropology: you’re looking at the societies with the lowest revealed inclination to technological adaptation and learning and generalizing to the rest of humanity.