Roundup
(1) Kamala is the media’s sweetheart all of a sudden. Please see this. And also:
The way the US corporate media transformed Kamala Harris from a national embarrassment to a transformative pioneer overnight — without even pretending to care about anything that she thinks or believes — is a powerful testament to how potent the science of propaganda is: https://t.co/cOlJ9P7vnn
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) August 12, 2024
(2) What’s going on in Kursk? Darned if I know, but it seems embarrassing for Putin at the moment.
(3) Trump has returned to Twitter/X:
As of this writing, Trump’s account has put out five posts already, and they seem to be coming out every few hours. It’s also pretty obvious the former president isn’t the one doing the posting. Instead, the messages are well-curated and professionally presented. They aren’t in all caps. They aren’t rants about Brian Kemp and Joe Rogan. They are a complete shift in tone.
Seems like a good idea. Will it matter?
(4) The EU is threatening Musk:
Europe’s Digital Commissioner Thierry Breton reminded the world’s richest man of his legal obligation to stop the “amplification of harmful content.”
The EU in July charged X, which Musk bought in 2022, for failing to respect its social media laws. The platform faces multimillion euro fines.
“As the relevant content is accessible to EU users and being amplified also in our jurisdiction, we cannot exclude potential spillovers in the EU,” Breton said in a statement posted on X.
Breton added that “any negative effect of illegal content” could lead the EU to take further action against X, using “our full toolbox, including by adopting interim measures, should it be warranted to protect EU citizens from harm.”
Poor fragile EU citizens who need to be protected against whatever Trump will say. It’s not hard to see why these bureaucrats are so widely detested. As I wrote in a comment today, I believe that the left in Europe would love to use lawfare on Musk and arrest him a la what the left did to Trump. Whether they could succeed depends on whether they could extradite him. Perhaps a Harris administration would oblige.
(5) Such an interesting chart:
Graphic showing how Trump, Vance, Harris, and Tim Walz have spend their adult lives. Striking that the Democratic ticket has literally no private sector experience. pic.twitter.com/IntZb6eLKT
— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) August 12, 2024
Re: 1, 2, 3, It’s Trump against the WORLD!
After November 6, I hope Time has an illustration of Trump as Caesar, sword raised, standing astride the WORLD! on its cover.
Striking that the Democratic ticket has literally no private sector experience.
I concur. “Public service” may have its merits. The big difference between public sector and the private sector is that in the private sector, if you don’t bring in more money than you spend or cost, you are gone- either as an employee or as a company. That gives the private sector an edge, and a sense of humility, lacking in “public service,” at least if we are talking about unelected officials. Elected officials can lose their jobs.
Kamala Harris in the private sector? I can’t see her doing anything more than being a DEI bureaucrat, making life miserable for as many as her employer lets her oversee. (A horrible boss, I have read.) I don’t believe she had the brains to follow in the path of her professor parents. If she ran a business, I doubt it would last long.
Gotta love #5.
You’re retiring this fall, already eligible for Medicare and due for full Social Security. Have a gander at the Republican and Democratic politicians who have been on national tickets since you landed your first job.
==
There are 16 Democratic politicians to assess.
==
There have been two who once worked in the business world (Lloyd Bentsen and Jimmy Carter); they would not (given the complex of views they adhered to at the time) today be welcome in the Democratic Party.
==
There have been two (Carter and Walz) who had multiple enlistments in the military; one would not be welcome in the Democratic Party today. There were two (Bentsen and John Kerry) who were combat veterans; one would not be welcome today.
==
Jimmy Carter was the only one ever employed in engineering.
==
Twelve of them were lawyers. Of the lawyers, seven (Walter Mondale, Geraldine Ferraro, Michael Dukakis, Bilge Clinton, John Kerry, Barack Obama, Joseph Biden), had brief careers (median < 4 years) 'ere heading off to elected office. One (Harris) was a government lawyer the whole time. Two (John Edwards and Hellary) had scandal-ridden careers. Joseph Liberman and Tim Kaine were the only two who worked in private practice for any length of time without damage to their reputation. You'll recall that Lieberman was elected as a non-partisan candidate his last term as he was no longer welcome to Democratic primary voters in 2006.
==
Albert Gore was a newspaper reporter for six years (after abandoning one attempt at post-secondary schooling and failing at another) and Tim Walz was a schoolteacher for 20 years (having received no subject training of note but being employed as an academic high schoolteacher because we live in clown world). Both occupational segments are dominated by Democrats, and increasingly so. Gore's career since 2001 reveals something deeply disturbing about the relationship between politicians and big business; he also seems to have decayed morally during that time.
==
}}} That gives the private sector an edge, and a sense of humility, lacking in “public service,” at least if we are talking about unelected officials. Elected officials can lose their jobs.
It also gives actual “Results matter” experience all too often, lacking in non-private sectors. In public sectors, it’s a lot more “Spin matters”, not Results.
And yes, nominally, elected officials can lose their jobs, but the retention rate of politicians is far far too high given the number and extent of their abject failures.
Not enough people operate on the principle of
“Don’t know if they’ve done a good job? No, you don’t? OK: Vote them out.“
This works best because it stops the assholes in charge from building up a base of non-elected support that they can rely on to keep them in office despite their abject and relentless failures to accomplish anything of value.
————-
}}} Jimmy Carter was the only one ever employed in engineering.
Define “employed” — he did not have a private sector job in it, he was a specialist on a submarine, as I recall.
Carter was the most inept and incompetent PotUS for the entire 20th Century, easily edging out Harding, and, debatably, the most inept and incompetent PotUS ever.
Certainly he was the most inept and incompetent PotUS since before Grant, and until Obama and the Aged Fool.
You have 15 Republicans to assess:
==
Two (Richard Cheney and Paul Ryan) had miscellaneous employments before age 2?, then worked as political aides. Three had abbreviated legal careers (of whom one was an elected corporation counsel right out of law school). Four worked in sports-and-entertainment, one was career Navy, and five worked in the business world (albeit one for only a modest run of years and another in circumstances where political connections were consequential). Room for improvement.
RE: Kursk
In my ignorant opinion, the Ukraine incursion into Kursk may be good optics and be an embarrassment to Putin , but that’s it.
An “invasion” by 2000 soldiers is more of a raid – a big one – but a raid nevertheless, and when the Russians send in their many-many-many-more soldiers to repel the invaders, the invaders will be forced to yield. 2000 Ukrainian soldiers are just not enough to withstand a large and determined Russian counter attack, much less hold on to the 100 sq. miles overrun by the Ukrainians.
Russia has no compunction tossing into the conflict as many bodies as they can muster; they do not care one bit how many of their soldiers wind up dead. Ukraine does not have the unlimited number of men that the Russians can toss into the fray. Russia is more than willing to continue the conflict as a war of attrition.
In Minnesota Walz’s party, the DFL, is the political arm of the teachers union.
Define “employed” — he did not have a private sector job in it, he was a specialist on a submarine, as I recall.
==
Your objection to that is just what?
==
Carter was the most inept and incompetent PotUS for the entire 20th Century, easily edging out Harding, and, debatably, the most inept and incompetent PotUS ever.
==
Carter made some bad decisions, but his inclinations improved on the mode of the Democratic Party at the time. Mr. Carter’s monetary policy was unedifying, but so was that of Richard Nixon, and Carter had no truck with wage and price controls. The Johnson Administration’s complex of policy failures leaves Mr. Carter in the dust. The Hoover Administration’s monetary policy was not unedifying; it was catastrophic. Woodrow Wilson was also a contributor to a concatenation of bad outcomes. Andrew Johnson was absolutely the wrong man for the times in which he lived. Franklin Pierce was a drunk. Andrew Jackson was an engaging character to ponder, but he was responsible for some discretely wretched things.
==
x
Any Atlas Shrugged fans around here? I read it a long time ago and can’t remember the name of the ultra-weasley bureaucrat. But this is exactly what the Musk/EU thing reminds me of. Even the guy’s name – Thierry Breton – is perfect.
Art Deco:
I think the main reason for saying Carter was so bad involved Iran.
I think the main reason for saying Carter was so bad involved Iran.
==
Well, you and he can make your case.
IMHO, Andrew Johnson is easily the worst president ever, if nothing else for what he squandered. The most petty man you can imagine immediately following one of the greatest that humanity has produced. Carter, Biden, and in time, give it time, Obama, in the running for second worst.
Please check out Musk’s response to the EU bureaucrat… the Tom Cruise Tropic Thunder meme- perfect!
https://redstate.com/brandon_morse/2024/08/12/eu-warns-elon-musk-to-behave-ahead-of-his-donald-trump-interview-and-musk-was-not-having-it-n2178027
John Tyler, I agree with most of what you say. Russia is likely to repel this invasion and drive the Ukrainians out. And I don’t see how Ukraine can actually “win” this war if that means driving the Russians completely from the territory they have taken.
But I don’t go along entirely with “they [Russians] do not care one bit how many of their soldiers wind up dead”. Putin maybe doesn’t care but what about the soldiers and their families? This is an elective war, not like WWII where they had to fight to save Mother Russia from fierce German invaders.
No, we’re not going to see antiwar demonstrators in Moscow chanting “Give peace a chance”. And Putin’s rule seems safe regardless. But I don’t think this is what he signed up for when he reinvaded Ukraine in 2022. I suspect he was hoping for a swift victory, either quickly toppling the Ukraine government or at least putting enough pressure on them to force them to sue for a peace where Russia could call the shots. It’s been 2 1/2 years now with no end in sight. It may not be a quagmire but it’s at least a slog, a bloody one.
“make your case”
Trading the Shah for the mullahs was not our shrewdest foreign policy move of the last 60-70 years.
Wesley mouch of the dog eat dog bill
https://x.com/C__Herridge/status/1823027534780416382?
https://x.com/CurtisHouck/status/1823068701240758626?t=vz6kCILnMCKCyYl-GtyUpQ&s=19
There find one “Cleve Wootson” of the Washington Post in colloquy with the White House Press Secretary. Only marvel at this stupendous ball of dumb.
Mike Plaiss- Wesley Mouch I think.
Cleve wootson sounds like a character out of wodehouse or waugh take your pick
My idea is that the Ukrainians have gone into Kursk, and now Belgorod, to cause damage to the railroad supply lines and get out. They surely can’t be planning on holding the territory with only 2,000 troops or so.
And why is this pathetic EU bureaucrat having heart palpitations over an American interview with an American political candidate?
REPORT: Douglas Murray has been arrested in the UK.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLyV8K12X9o
Claims are that the Far Left has been driving Keir Stalin’s little Jack Boot to act! Murray’s “offence” comes from a John Anderson video interview in Australia some 9 months ago!
Carter had some positive accomplishments, notably deregulation of trucking and airlines. I can’t think of anything comparable that Biden or Obama achieved on the positive side of the ledger.
(CORRECTION — was this report about the Far Left hectoring the state to arrest him, like others persecuted and then prosecuted? Or is this a SHOUT OUT at the news? IDK.)
What’s happening in Kursk is that the Ukrainians have taken more territory in three days (625 sq. km) than the Russian summer offensive did across the entire front in three months (448 sq. km). All of this talk about the Russian military being this unstoppable machine is just that: empty talk.
Is this just a raid or a part of something bigger? I don’t know. The Ukrainians have been very tight-lipped about it all. But don’t be surprised if the Ukrainians dig in and make the Russians drive them out. The Russians have lost a lot of men and equipment in Kursk so far, and they’ll lose far more than that if they have to drive the Ukrainians out.
Obama doing the same to mubarak in 2010
1) In Nov. few will vote for Kamala, rather they will vote against Orange Man Bad and to continue the left’s delusional ‘policies’.
2) Upon what basis might any credence whatsoever be extended to NBC ‘reportage’?
4) “Secrecy is the keystone to all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy and censorship. When any government or church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, “This you may not read, this you must not know,” the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives.” Robert A Heinlein
Inflation, oil prices, Iran and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan doomed Carter’s presidency, which had been at best mediocre when all that happened. Johnson had the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. Much of his Great Society wasn’t good for the country, and in the end he was quite overwhelmed, but he didn’t appear as hapless and feckless as Carter did. The mantra of Biden as the most consequential president of our era is nonsense, but presidents who do get legislation through Congress — even harmful legislation — often don’t make as poor an impression as those who appear stymied by Congress and out of place in Washington, as Carter did.
I don’t watch the network news. How did they cover Kamala Harris before she became the nominee? I’m guessing they didn’t show all of her flubs and cackling. It was a commonplace among the media to think that Biden couldn’t be replaced because Harris was not ready or was a disaster, but did anyone really dare say that on the air? Was the behind the scenes view of Harris as incompetent and embarassing reflected in the on-air coverage? Maybe there isn’t as much of a change in the coverage of Harris as one might think.
}}} Your objection to that is just what?
Sorry, art, but the requirements and expectations CAN be matched, but they don’t HAVE to be.
Generally, a Real World engineer has to do something technically complex and do it flawlessly, lest something important fail.
A Navy specialist position which is technically an engineering position may be nothing more than watching lights and pushing “Scram!” if THIS one or THAT one suddenly turn red. And that, from what I’ve heard, was the actual extent of his “engineering” knowledge. More complex than that, but not true “engineering”. A very very well-trained monkey.
Again — there are certainly Navy positions which are serious engineering positions. But his was not, to the best of my knowledge, one of those.
}}} Carter made some bad decisions, but his inclinations improved on the mode of the Democratic Party at the time. Mr. Carter’s monetary policy was unedifying, but so was that of Richard Nixon, and Carter had no truck with wage and price controls. The Johnson Administration’s complex of policy failures leaves Mr. Carter in the dust. The Hoover Administration’s monetary policy was not unedifying; it was catastrophic. Woodrow Wilson was also a contributor to a concatenation of bad outcomes. Andrew Johnson was absolutely the wrong man for the times in which he lived. Franklin Pierce was a drunk. Andrew Jackson was an engaging character to ponder, but he was responsible for some discretely wretched things.
1 — Carter did not make a single correct, functionally astute decision his entire term in office. NOTHING he did was correctly done. Not a thing.
2 — Johnson did many things wrong, but he did get the Space program somewhat correct. So he’s got Carter beat on at least one thing.
3 — Hoover was constrained by bad options and bad advice. And it is well known that the real issues with the Depression did not happen as a result of his decisions, but by followup decisions by Roosevelt, who, by the way, also got horrible advice on at least that. The REAL Depression was triggered by the incorrect reaction to the bank collapses. And by the continued tightening of the money supply.
4 — Wilson did a lot of bad things, but they weren’t quite so obviously bad when he did them. And they were very much with the zeitgeist of the times.
5 — Pierce was a nobody who never really did anything. Not even bad.
6 — Andrew Johnson was someone well out of his league but he was a political choice, who only got thrust into the limelight and into power by Lincoln’s assassination.
7 — Andrew Jackson was a bad man, but no, he wasn’t a bad President. Many of his decisions were poor by modern standards, but were not unreasonable by standards in that era. And he had a good sense of not getting run over by his opposition, which cannot be said for a lot of other politicos of that era.
}}} Carter had some positive accomplishments, notably deregulation of trucking and airlines.
1975 was BEFORE Carter. 😉
The deregulation of the trucking industry was a part and parcel of a process which had been going on for the entire decade of the 1970s and starting under Nixon, and proceeding under Ford.
Airline deregulation was initiated under Ford, and generally followed from the overall ideas of deregulation prominent throughout the 1970s…
“Not fucking it up” is not really much of an accomplishment.
OK… for Carter, yes… yes it was. 😛
.
.
}}} I can’t think of anything comparable that Biden or Obama achieved on the positive side of the ledger.
LOLZ. I did say that Carter was the WORST until Obama and Biden.
I grant, my phrasing was slightly ambiguous there, caused by some reorganization which did not reflect the actual intent.
I think Carter was more inept than Obama by far, but I do not believe anything Carter did was actually maliciously intended. I think Obama did accomplish a few rare things… but it was greatly outweighed by his malice. Biden has achieved an excess of both malice AND incompetence.
.
.
}}} [Lyndon] Johnson had the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts
I would not classify those as anything of his — he was adamantly against them, but knew he had no chance of being successful in opposing them. Being a consummate politician, he did not bother to fight a fight he knew he would not win.
=====
I would also note Carter’s post-Presidential legacy, which is to “supervise elections”… and amazingly, he has yet to find any Banana Republic election process that supports this or that dictator staying in power to be flawed or doubtful. Amazing. Even when the dictator gets 100% of the vote — Jimmy Carter: “I find the results to be fair and not at all in dispute.”
He is loved by dictators everywhere, because they know he will “prove” their elections were fair and free.
:-/
It is maddening how well the Beatification of Kamala is working.
So far.
I can’t blame them for their Kamala Joyful Warrior Teleprompter strategy. It’s smart, it’s working, and it is their best shot.
But for how long?
The attack ads on her have started and will keep coming. Even in Pravda USA Harris can’t hide out forever. I’m sure she is getting the best cram coaching available for that reckoning.
The DNC is coming up and will be problematic with the Hamas Wing picking up the slack for the SDS/Weatherman riots at DNC Chicago 1968.
Not to mention that the Middle East could go nonlinear within the week. With Joe Biden and Kamala Harris at the helm… 🙁
__________________________________
A journalist asked [Prime Minister Harold Macmillan] to identify the greatest challenge to his administration, and he replied:
“Events, my dear boy, events.”
–https://quoteinvestigator.com/2020/08/31/events/
__________________________________
Hold fast, dear friends. We aren’t done yet.
Ref (2): Ukraine has put on a brilliant fight against the former feared Russian military. Never asked for anyone to send their boots – did ask for full air support at one time, but don’t recall them requesting it again. America needs a strong ally like Ukraine, and yet the Trump/Vance ticket would aid Russia if they are elected.
It will be difficult for me not to vote against Trump/Vance ticket in Nov. – especially if Florida become a close race.
Ukraine is using itself as a ‘Testing Ground’ for future wars – the value of such info/experience is priceless for America’s future—*IF* Ukraine is allowed to continue its fight.
Most people witnessed what Prigozhin and a portion of the Wagner army did – traveled many miles in about 36 hours and were within “125 miles” of Moscow before they turned back. Ukraine has a lot of unprotected Russian territory right there in front of them. They are much better at Maneuver Warfare than Russia is, and seem to be doing an excellent job with the small force/s they are using.
Intro:
Ukraine and the Problem of Restoring Maneuver in Contemporary War
76 page .pdf Paper:
UKRAINE AND THE PROBLEM OF RESTORING MANEUVER IN CONTEMPORARY WAR
Art Deco:
I made my case long ago in several posts about Carter and Iran. The handy search function on this blog would have gotten you there.
For example, this and this.
“Not fucking it up” is not really much of an accomplishment.
You’re obviously not going to give up on your claim that Carter did nothing positive. Carter’s presidency was a disaster, but on deregulation he did a lot more than not f*** it up. He appointed as head of the CAB an advocate for disbanding the CAB. How often has that ever happened? Sure deregulation had been discussed since 1971, but–unlike Biden, whose goal seemed to be just to reverse everything Trump did, good or bad–Carter continued that work and signed the Airline Deregulation Act in 1978.
Trucking deregulation was a similar story. Carter reapppointed Nixon’s head of the ICC, and that act was signed in 1980.
And since no one has mentioned it, I’ll add a third good decision by Carter: The appointment of Paul Volcker as Fed chair. Granted it was after a previous disaster, but it was still a good decision.
Re: Atlas Shrugged / Ayn Rand / Wesley Mouch
Hmm … in French “mouche” means housefly. Rand claimed to speak Russian, English and French, though only reading knowledge of German. Not too shabby.
Rand did not name her characters by idle, bland whim. She was adding a descriptive layer.
Howard Roark, John Galt, Hank Rearden, Dagny Taggart. Strong names. Whoa!
OTOH we have Wesley Mouch and my favorite, the art critic, Ellsworth Toohey. As in Ptui!
Rand painted with broad strokes, which seemed unfair to me once upon a time, but she wasn’t wrong.
Karmi: “It will be difficult for me not to vote against Trump/Vance ticket in Nov. – especially if Florida become a close race.”
Trump will release our oil and gas industry to produce enough to drive prices back below $40/barrel. That step alone will reduce Russia’s ability to make war on Ukraine.
Trump will insist that the Eruopean members of NATO provide as much aid to Ukraine as we are. What’s wrong with that?
Trump will undertake diplomatic efforts to create a durable and lasting peace. That will save many lives and avoid more destruction of valuable property. A bad thing?
But go ahead and vote for Kamala/Walz. A vote for endless war, IMO.
Don’t get me started on airline deregulation. I probably should have written a book about it, but it’s hard to explain to people how the airline business works.
It’s not like trucking. The airlines have to operate inside a government monopoly. The government controls the airways. The state and local governments own the airports. The government sets the standards for airworthiness, maintenance, and training. The airlines depend on government to get landing slots, route assignments, and enroute handling.
The airlines can control what they pay for aircraft, what they pay in wages, the cost of the extras (food and beverages), and their spare parts. Fuel costs are also at the mercy of government policies.
Every scheduled flight has a “break-even” cost. To attract enough passengers to make money on each flight is the goal. Some flights make a lot of money, and support those that don’t.
But the biggest variable of all is the weather. Two days of bad weather across the nation can result in losses for all the companies.
So, it’s not really a deregulated business except that they can compete on price. And the pricing structure is, as most people who fly very much know, variable. Two people can be sitting side by side on a flight. One may have paid $150 for their seat and the other may have paid $500. It’s called “yield management.” Or in other parlance – what the traffic will bear. And that’s what deregulation has wrought.
It’s a very difficult business to make consistent money in. How many airline stock billionaires are there? The airlines are “cyclical” businesses. And our airline system is not much better than it was way back when I was part of the business. We should recognize that airline deregulation has not been a huge success.
Trading the Shah for the mullahs was not our shrewdest foreign policy move of the last 60-70 years.
==
I don’t know how you got the idea that Carter could direct the political crisis in Iran according to his preferences.
The deregulation of the trucking industry was a part and parcel of a process which had been going on for the entire decade of the 1970s and starting under Nixon, and proceeding under Ford. Airline deregulation was initiated under Ford, and generally followed from the overall ideas of deregulation prominent throughout the 1970s…
==
No clue where you got this notion.
==
Sorry, art, but the requirements and expectations CAN be matched, but they don’t HAVE to be.
==
I mentioned in passing that Mr. Carter had a background in engineering and you’ve kvetched repeatedly about this without giving any indication that his day-to-day activities were something you know anything about.
==
1 — Carter did not make a single correct, functionally astute decision his entire term in office. NOTHING he did was correctly done. Not a thing.
==
No one who was sober would ever make such a remark.
==
3 — Hoover was constrained by bad options and bad advice. And it is well known that the real issues with the Depression did not happen as a result of his decisions, but by followup decisions by Roosevelt, who, by the way, also got horrible advice on at least that. The REAL Depression was triggered by the incorrect reaction to the bank collapses. And by the continued tightening of the money supply.
==
No, he wasn’t constrained. He just made the wrong decisions. Gross Domestic Product declined by 30% during Mr. Hoover’s term of office and began to expand quite rapidly in the spring of 1933 (at an annual rate of 9% per annum during the period running from mid-1933 to the end of 1936) when certain policy adjustments were made. I have no clue how in your addled head you got the idea that FDR was responsible for an economic implosion which took place over a 3.5 year period prior to his inauguration.
==
Wilson did a lot of bad things, but they weren’t quite so obviously bad when he did them. And they were very much with the zeitgeist of the times.
==
An awful lot of blood and treasure went into Mr. Wilson’s program in Europe and the benefit of that is debatable. ‘Collective security’ was not a notion which animated foreign policy in any country of note prior to Dr. Wilson’s attempt to institute it. The U.S. signed on to destructive measures in order to institute his schemes. The Administration also promoted the disestablishment of the German monarchies for whatever reason. On the home front, we got poorly conceived anti-trust ordinances, the beginnings of the federal grant-in-aid mess constraining state and local government, and the segregation of federal office buildings. Somehow in your mind the zeitgeist is responsible rather than the man who promoted them.
==
5 — Pierce was a nobody who never really did anything. Not even bad.
==
Pierce presided over the Bleeding Kansas disaster.
==
6 — Andrew Johnson was someone well out of his league but he was a political choice, who only got thrust into the limelight and into power by Lincoln’s assassination.
==
Did it occur to you to examine his preferences and policies?
==
Andrew Jackson was a bad man, but no, he wasn’t a bad President.
==
He was actually a rather engaging figure who did bad things in office. You have the reality reversed in your mind.
Andrew Jackson was a damned complicated man.
I suggest anyone interested read at least the wiki account of his early life.
@Art Deco
On the whole I largely agree. However, a few points:
The exact amount of it is debatable (made worse by intentional water muddying and smears by enemies or knaves both foreign and domestic, such as the German Government’s Foreign Ministry’s War Guilt Office and the domestic prog “War Profiteers are to blame for everything”), but some of it isn’t. The German Empire went from being a major threat fighting a lethal but undeclared and relatively onesided cold war with us in our backyard, sub pirate, and regime bent on destroying us at some point to being rolled back.
I wouldn’t say that, it was just never as universalist or utopian as his nonsense. But whether it was the Coalitions to try to wear down the Angevins, the Habsburgs, or the French or the Entente it fit.
Agreed there.
I have little good to say about Wilson but he didn’t outright support disestablishment of German Monarchies. He did however demand that Kaiser Wilhelm II give up his throne, though given the magnitude of the Kaiser’s atrocities and perfidy I do not at all fault him for that since it was shared by the other allies and frankly good policy. What they didn’t expect (though maybe they should have) was that there was no good replacement, and Max von Baden refused to accept Versailles. So in many ways the Germans – angry at the war and their governments – began disestablishing their own monarchists in earnest.
Compared to Wilson’s other follies abroad (such as supporting the Bolsheviks and shafting Italy) and at home, I find it relatively paltry.
”Trump will insist that the Eruopean members of NATO provide as much aid to Ukraine as we are.”
The European members of NATO are *already* providing as much aid to Ukraine as we are. Probably more. They don’t have the large stockpiles of weapons that we do, but what they have they’re giving in addition to building up their own defenses. And they’re providing a lot more cash.
Why does everybody think Europe is not doing anything?
”Trump will undertake diplomatic efforts to create a durable and lasting peace.”
The only durable and lasting peace is for the Russians to leave Ukraine. The war will not end until they do.
Trump will threaten Zelensky to try to force him to capitulate to Russia. It won’t work. What happens after that is anyone’s guess. Probably a continental war. Let’s hope we all live through it.
”But go ahead and vote for Kamala/Walz. A vote for endless war, IMO.”
Harris and Walz, for all their other faults, will almost certainly provide some weapons to Ukraine. A vote for Trump is a vote to force Ukraine to fight the Russians without American weapons, extending the war for years and costing hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians their lives.
That is a very bad thing.
J.J. & mkent:
J.J., mkent said it much better than I can. Had also read where Europe and NATO members were providing more than Trump & his MAGA faithful (NOTE: after some public tongue lashing by neo about some of my ‘Harsh’ descriptive wordings, humble me has removed “mob” as a descriptive of MAGA) were giving them credit for.
Russia’s M.O. has been to invade other countries for decades—look at their size, which wasn’t acquired by being neighborly. Basically, they move into one’s home, rape one’s wife and daughter/s, kills one sons and one. Then take everything of value…I couldn’t sit by and watch that happen to my neighbors.
I will add, w/o proof, that Trump may hold a vendetta on Ukraine for Zelensky not handing over evidence to convict Biden…a strong opinion of mine.
Yes, Karris/Walz are terrible, but my biggest issue is Ukraine and not an ounce of support for Russia. Russia is down, and we should be stomping them to death…
The only two trained engineers to win the White House were Herbert Hoover and Jimmy Carter. I love engineers, but that’s not exactly a ringing endorsement of engineers as president.
If I were to wax philosophical, I might suggest that engineers, in general, are especially prone to a mechanistic worldview in which everything operates in an orderly fashion and responds in predictable ways. Human systems are too complex to behave that way. Success requires one to rely a bit more on intuition.
It’s also interesting to point out that Jimmy Carter was a submarine officer at the time when Hyman Rickover still personally selected submarine officers. Rickover didn’t pick idiots.
Final point – the only president to have ever been awarded a US Patent was Lincoln – and he had no formal training in engineering or science. Perhaps he relied more on intuition?
No they arent we still are they should commit whar they need for what they think is a continental threat which it isnt but they invited 2 million saracen whose result is clear and the numbers grow
We have been proportionately that stupid
Carter who said we had ‘an irrational fear of communism’ hence vietnam nonetheless hired every major policy players sans mcnamamara brown vance komer et al then he went along with the black legend about the shah spread by mossadeghs peanut gallery in nicaragua he did much the same against somoza whose main fault imho was not being draconian enough against the samdinistas
David horowitz noted carters lead latin american figure robert pastor was following one of his sds tracts as policy
It’s not like trucking. The airlines have to operate inside a government monopoly. The government controls the airways. The state and local governments own the airports. The government sets the standards for airworthiness, maintenance, and training. The airlines depend on government to get landing slots, route assignments, and enroute handling. The airlines can control what they pay for aircraft, what they pay in wages, the cost of the extras (food and beverages), and their spare parts. Fuel costs are also at the mercy of government policies.
==
See Michael Kinsley’s complaints published ca. 1985, and other authors who wrote for The New Republic. Kinsley et al offered several policy amendments: (1) that take-off and landing slots be distributed via auction with no breaks for ‘general aviation’; (2) that anti-trust divestiture suits be initiated in certain loci (Minneapolis, for one). There was also the complaint that the culture of the extant unions was ill-adapted to a competitive environment; this could have been partially addressed by vesting collective bargaining rights in company unions which encompassed about 85% of the workforce of each airline.
==
(IMO, regulations should state a higher minimum legroom and require overbooking &c be addressed by holding an auction among passengers to clear seats and giving them cash on the spot).
Karmi – I’m continuing to have my own struggle with whether to vote for Donald Trump. My own dilemma has a lot to do with whether the right can survive four more years of Trump’s act and about what is the best way to avoid a true leftist radical taking total control of the federal government – which would lead to state-packing, court-packing, and every freedom-crushing leftist policy fever-dream becoming reality and remaining so for the rest of my life, at least. Think Minnesota 2023, where Dems turned a single-vote majority in the state Senate into every policy they had ever wanted. (Why am I so angry about Trump winning the nomination again? Because Trump becoming the Republican nominee in 2024 made this result much more likely – whether he wins or loses this year.)
Anyway, I just don’t get your position on Russia and Ukraine. It’s a matter of strategy, tactics even. Russia is an adversary and the issue is how to keep them from threatening our interests. For the US, decision comes down to whether it is more advantageous to continue funding the war or push things towards a negotiated close. So if Trump wins and pushes Ukraine to negotiate an end to the war, what is the harm?
(Frankly, I suspect that is what Zelensky had in mind by invading Kursk. I doubt Ukraine is going to hold Kursk. Maybe they’re trying to break Russian supply lines, but maybe they’re grabbing leverage for what is now the inevitable negotiated end of the war.)
With our own exploration putin cant run his war machine hamas could not mount al aqsa flood harris will make these disasters more and more frequent while crushing every liberty in a day go leisure suit escape from new york is not supposec to be
prescriptive
Its amusing in dark sensibility that kamala was perhaps the last tripswire putin crossed before this foolish invasion rest assured she will find a way to top that probably committing our men into the slaughter once more into the breech
David horowitz noted carters lead latin american figure robert pastor was following one of his sds tracts as policy
==
If you look at Pastor’s period writings you can see he was one fatuous character.
==
Reagan-era officials told Morton Kondracke many years ago that the Carter-era ‘human rights’ apparat was fixated on ‘international social work’ and did not actually promote institutional revision in Latin America or other places.
==
In re Iran, Carter’s critics maintain his most egregious error was sending Gen. Huyser in early 1979 to persuade the Iranian military chiefs to avoid mounting a military coup. What the alternative path would have looked like who knows.
Yes pastor is ignorant in many languages he was carters smithers at the center founded by bcci and japanese war criminal donations
In 77 carter cut off zia after he had bhutto killed but that created a host of other problems notably the ismail khan rebellion which prompted the soviet invasion and the response where they ended up relying on that same isi to pick the players
So walz refused to debate scott jensen they stole the election and you blame trump what color is the sky on your world
I ink it’s called tactical offensive/ strategic defensive. Take and reinforce a place which the enemy must retake. Use the advantages of fighting on the defensive to force the enemy to expend multiples of your costs. Emphasis on “must” retake.
See Verdun, First world war.
Theoretically, even if forced back, the Ukes may come out ahead in the ghastly accounting of war.
And Putin could use some embarrassment.
Wilson was a racist who segregated the dc schools empowered the klan through his friend robert dixon invaded haiti for reasons that didnt make sense let the slouching behemoth that threatens to engulf the republic loose compared to the kaiser he seemed the larger enemy
We did not go deeper into the quagmire because lodge blocked our entry into thd league and harding gave us some normalcy
Normalcy is the last thing we will get with this crew they hate everything about this country they want to burn it to the ground
Kamala and her eminence gris phillip gordon wants a forever war in the caucasus they also want the devouring of israel does that givd you pause it would be
Bauxite:
Normally I have no problem ‘Voting Against‘ the Democratic party, and have since 2002. Don’t care for the Republican party either. They lost me when they let GW Bush go out onto a limb and then cut it off behind him.
Will probably not vote for president, but will certainly vote GOP from there. Neither presidential candidate is a Leader…both absolutely terrible candidates. If Florida comes in play, I may vote against the Trump/Vance ticket…
We are receiving priceless information from Ukraine’s willingness to fight until their death. Ukraine has been under the Russian BOOT before, and don’t plan on ever being there again.
War tactics. War equipment. How Russia can and cannot fight—their weaknesses & strengths, etcetera etcetera etcetera etcetera etcetera is priceless.
Why some GOPers can’t see the *HIGH* returns/yield from such meager investments is beyond me.
History shows we will have boots on the ground in Europe again – *UNLESS* there are countries like Ukraine who are willing to fight w/o our troops doing the heavy lifting on the ground.
Would you want to negotiate with someone like Russia who has done the unspeakable to you and yours?
These recent moves into Russia are brilliant. Small fast attacks, which I suspect will start occurring all over the border areas—maybe even feints to Moscow and St. Pete. I don’t see them wanting to hold positions. Maneuver Warfare Ukrainian style. Force Russian citizens to flee. Destroy electrical grids, fuel and oil depots
and ammo storage and weapon building sites – get in closer to distant targets so that drones can hit them. Let the Ukrainians fight this war while we, EU, and NATO help supply and fund them…
with only 2,000 troops or so
Look at a map of the incursion and the current lines of attack, and ask yourself if that could be accomplished with only 2000 troops. If so, Russia might as well surrender already.
Atlas Shrugged was a big influence in my life. Not sure if this was answered elsewhere, but the character I believe you were referring to was Wesley Mouch.
”Take and reinforce a place which the enemy must retake. Use the advantages of fighting on the defensive to force the enemy to expend multiples of your costs.”
This. Take territory that’s relatively undefended. Dig in. Force the enemy to come to you. Then hit the convoys. And the staging areas. And the logistics hubs. Do this on a big enough scale, and Russia will have to move in forces from other sections of the front. Then hit *those* areas.
If you remember late 2022, Ukraine was very vocal about hitting Kherson with a counteroffensive. Russia moved troops from Kharkiv to Kherson to counter the counteroffensive, but Kherson was just a feint. Ukraine then hit Kharkiv with the real counteroffensive, taking back almost the entire oblast. Then Russia moved troops from Kherson to Kharkiv to counter that. So then Ukraine struck Kherson, taking back that city as well.
Don’t be surprised if something similar happens here. Ukraine recently stood up 14 new brigades. Reportedly only four are being used in Kursk.
As I recall the political battle last year over Ukraine, what the right was demanding was actual US border security in exchange for funding for Ukraine. Trump is nearly infinitely more likely to provide actual US immigration enforcement than Harris. The people who objected under Biden/Harris might be more open to continued funding and arming Ukraine once the primary objective of securing the US is underway.
There is also the matter of Israel, under assault by radical Islam. This threatens us also. What are the odds Harris would weasel out of US support for Israel? The administration is on the edge of doing this now.
@ Miguel cervantes on August 13, 2024 at 8:27 am said:
“No they arent we still are. …”
I wish I knew who you were responding to with this comment.
From my own experience, when we think we are replying directly under someone’s comment, there end up being up to a dozen others in between, so the connection is lost on subsequent readers.
Indicating the targets of your replies would go a long way to helping me decipher them, but otherwise I have no context for your sometimes cryptic references.
Other than that, I enjoy many of your notes and links.
The lack of support for Ukraine mainly comes from only a few GOP congressmen – who lack the numbers to stop helping Ukraine – even in the GOP controlled House. Trump & Vance are the main impediments to Ukraine’s future.
“US border security” issues have been going on for years (decades?). Trump had *FOUR* years to get the border issues under control—just another one of the many promises he broke. Trump couldn’t fix it then and he won’t be able to fix it if elected this time.
Richard+Aubrey & mkent mention one tactic Ukraine is probably using now:
Here’s this: Ukrainian army digs trenches for a long stay in Kursk: 5 brigades, more than 2 thousand soldiers…
Most reliable sources who support Ukraine don’t reveal where, how, and what Ukraine is doing, to avoid helping the fuking Russians. They are doing it in Russia tho!!!!!!!! 🙂
The Selma movie a few years back tried to make Johnson the heavy in the civil rights struggle, but he did favor the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. He certainly had to take pragmatic factors and the mood of Congress and the country into account, and activists would see him — or any president — as dragging his feet, but he did push those bills through Congress. I remember Johnson talking about his “heavy heart” (maybe when he announced he wouldn’t run again). I’ve since gotten quite cynical about politicians and their hearts, but I give Johnson his due on this.
Yes, engineering and the presidency require different mindsets. It is Pascal’s “esprit de géométrie” and “esprit de finesse,” and it helps explain why FDR, with all his faults, was better able to survive as president than Hoover. MBA’s also don’t have a great record in higher politics: George W. Bush and Mitt Romney (Harvard MBA/JD ’75).
Europe who gave away their energy advantage to russia which under defense minister von leyen had critically underfunded their military
They all laughed a Trump well they arent laughing now in fact they want to go back to their old ways
Theh want to ignore the Saracen at their throat maybe a few shahahas will do it meanwhile they are all in on the antihuman agenda transgenderism transnationalism paganism
“Trump had *FOUR* years to get the border issues under control—just another one of the many promises he broke. Trump couldn’t fix it then and he won’t be able to fix it if elected this time.” – Karmi
Why should anyone believe anything Karmi says?
“The only durable and lasting peace is for the Russians to leave Ukraine. The war will not end until they do.”
mkent
And WHEN that is going to happen?? That position, coupled with the Biden/Harris restrictions on the use of weapons, is a recipe for endless war in which Ukraine is the big loser.
Right now, because of Biden/Harris policies, the war is mostly destroying Ukrainian infrastructure. As long as oil prices stay above $40/barrel Putin will be able to continue to pound away at Ukraine. Yes, Putin is losing a lot of soldiers. Do you think he cares? His plan is to outlast Ukraine and NATO. The only way he can do that is for oil prices to stay high. Biden/Harris guarantee that with their climate change policies. To pauperize Russia is the primary way to stop this war.
After two and a half years of stalemate, it’s clear that by abiding by the restrictions the U.S. has put-on the use of our weapons, the war cannot be “won” by either side. That is a formula for more billion$ spent to feed more soldiers and infrastructure into the meat grinder.
And that’s what you’ll get with a Harris/Walz administration.
“What’s happening in Kursk is that the Ukrainians have taken more territory in three days (625 sq. km) than the Russian summer offensive did across the entire front in three months (448 sq. km). All of this talk about the Russian military being this unstoppable machine is just that: empty talk.” -mkent
That’s good to know. Since Russia is just a paper tiger, we can let the Europeans handle Europe while we provide aid for our ME and Asian allies.
One of the consequences of the Ukraine-Russia war and the sanctions has been to strengthen Iran’s relationship with Russia. They were more of a client state and have been elevated to a partner, as has China.
Can Russia be persuaded to decouple from Iran? It seems that Iran and Russia aren’t and shouldn’t be natural allies. The same goes for China and Russia. At one time, our diplomacy broke the link between the two countries as they have been natural rivals.
Why should anyone believe anything
KarmiTrump says? Donald Trump made a lot of immigration and border promises in 2016. How did he deliver?That article/page also mentions other broken promises:
• Coronavirus pandemic highlights President Trump’s broken health care promises
• Donald Trump campaigned in 2016 on remaking Michigan manufacturing. Did he deliver?
• Has President Trump delivered on 2016 steel, coal campaign promises for Pennsylvania? What the numbers say
• Trump promised massive middle-class tax cuts in 2016. He delivered cuts, not as much on the middle class part
• Candidate Trump decried the national debt in 2016 and promised to eliminate it. It’s only gotten bigger.
• At a campaign stop in 2016, candidate Trump promised help for ‘obsolete’ Ohio River bridge. Did he deliver?
• ‘They’re all coming back,’ President Trump promises Ohio crowd about jobs in 2017. Did he deliver?
• Two years after Trump put a shovel in the ground, Wisconsin is still waiting on Foxconn to come through
• Donald Trump made many promises in 2016 and early in his term. Which has he kept and what is he still working on?
• President Trump has kept his promise to remake the federal bench, including the Supreme Court (Thanks to McConnell)
Last in list was great, and I could overlook all the broken promises IF he would now promise to help Ukraine and not Russia.
Karmi, deflection isn’t an argument.
I posed a question. Why should anyone believe anything you say?
You used an amorphous claim that he “failed to get border issues under control”– but it’s not the issues that were out of control, but border crossings, which significantly declined during his term.
You made the claim. Give me the proof you’re claim is true.
Sorry Brian E, I don’t speak gibberish or gobbledygook. I linked to proof that Trump should not be believed on anything he says…
Trump interview has one billion views.
Karmi, my question was why anyone should believe you, not Trump.
Just lay out the case that Trump did not control the border issues.
Brian, border crossings exploded under Biden because of Trump. Surely you can see the logic there. Just as the record proves Trump will be much worse for Ukraine than the Democrats because Russia invaded Ukraine under Obama and Biden, again obviously Trump’s fault.
I did, here: Karmi on August 13, 2024 at 1:25 pm – the link in that link covers Trump’s “immigration and border promises in 2016,” and other promises he broke. Just skip the ones not dealing with the immigration and border issues…
Here’s some of it again:
• Coronavirus pandemic highlights President Trump’s broken health care promises
• Donald Trump campaigned in 2016 on remaking Michigan manufacturing. Did he deliver?
• Has President Trump delivered on 2016 steel, coal campaign promises for Pennsylvania? What the numbers say
• Trump promised massive middle-class tax cuts in 2016. He delivered cuts, not as much on the middle class part
• Candidate Trump decried the national debt in 2016 and promised to eliminate it. It’s only gotten bigger.
• At a campaign stop in 2016, candidate Trump promised help for ‘obsolete’ Ohio River bridge. Did he deliver?
• ‘They’re all coming back,’ President Trump promises Ohio crowd about jobs in 2017. Did he deliver?
• Two years after Trump put a shovel in the ground, Wisconsin is still waiting on Foxconn to come through
• Donald Trump made many promises in 2016 and early in his term. Which has he kept and what is he still working on?
HECK, Here’s the actual link AGAIN;
https://www.azcentral.com/in-depth/news/politics/immigration/2020/10/25/donald-trump-2016-immigration-border-promises-did-he-deliver/3723336001/
JJ, great comment today at 1:03 pm as well as 11:30 last night.
@J.J.
I would wager that nobody knows except God, in much the same way that nobody quite knew when the Soviets would leave Afghanistan until they did. And even then I think there is a significant chance the war would continue (albeit in much more finite and less damaging scale) even if Russia proper cut losses and evacuated, as their collaborators in the Donbas and Crimea decide to try and fight it out. There is genuine pro-Kremlin sentiment in Crimea and the Donbas, and while how much there is is something for debate, and others like myself and Brian E have disagreed on its scale or how important it is/was for the outbreak some of it and how much remain, some of it is there. And it is possible they’d continue fighting like the Afghan Communists did after the Soviet withdrawal and like Karadzic did in Bosnia after the break with Milosevic. But they almost certainly would not endure against a battle hardened Ukraine without the protection of the Russian military, and especially its air and naval forces.
Remind me: How have the repeated peace offerings and “settlements” helped the Georgian and Moldovan people? Especially the former. Moldova at least has the “benefit” of a Cold Peace continuously since its government was forced to yield to threats of Russian military bombardment of its capital, and so it unhappily co-exists with a Soviet vassal state occupied by its terrorist paramilitaries and a Russian Army. Georgia doesn’t even have that luxury. Ossetian and Abkhaz paramilitaries repeatedly raid the border and commit pretty egregious atrocities, periodically answered by Georgian paramilitaries, while the entire country lies under the threat of future invasion by Russia as a whole. Even a pro-Russian shift and appeasement have not helped.
I despise Biden and Harris and the rest of the leftist goon squad, and I have little love for the brain trust at Foggy Bottom. However, none of that changes what I mentioned before, which I think is the strongest argument against “Western support and encouragement for Ukraine leads to a forever war.” The abandonment of Georgia and Moldova I think underlines that it is the Kremlin’s aggression and aggrandizement that cause the forever war.
Moreover, at least Moldova and Georgia are not viewed as rightful Russian World Clay or their people as essentially Russian in their entirety by Kremlin ultranationalists and Neo-Soviets. That isn’t the case for Ukraine. Any kind of independent Ukraine will always be a target of war hawks in the Kremlin who will not be satisfied with whatever gains they made in this conflict, much like South Korea still lives under the threat of the North and like how Hanoi saw no reason to honor peace agreements at Paris or elsewhere beyond opportunity.
That was also the case under Trump/Pence and Obama/Biden Policies, though it took until Biden’s Imposition that Putin felt confident to launch an open invasion. Moreover, as Georgia attests I expect bloodshed, terrorism, and violence to continue even if the US cut support.
I expect he will be able to continue pounding even if they drop, but it will hurt even more than it already is. And even now the sanctions and the costs of getting around them or dealing with being bent over the table by Indian, Chinese, and other negotiators with a strong hand is hurting the Kremlin’s exchequer. The Ruble is basically a zombie, and only the delusional or downright insane have any confidence in its integrity after the kinds of make-the-Fed-look-like-it’s-run-by-Libertarian-Anarcho-Capitalists manipulations the Russian Government has had to pull in order to stabilize its value (at the cost of imposing things like price controls and capital flight checks; remember how we correctly identify those things going on in Venezuela and Cuba as a sign of the regime’s fundamental weakness and its poor economy; Russia is still more powerful and stable economically but it is getting there, and the war effort is not really helping long term viability).
Define “cares.”
Morally, ethically, spiritually, or so on? No. If Putin was the kind of man who had an inkling of human decency he would not have allowed the likes of Wagner to operate like they did.
But politically, practically, and in terms of troop retention? I do.
Why do I say that?
Several reasons. For starters, Russia does not have unlimited troops. Especially not with the demographic ghosts of no less than three massive world war scale bloodlettings, a lot of genocides, and so on stacked onto post-Soviet demographics. And he PARTICULARLY does not have troops he can legally or semi-legally push into battle against the Ukrainians outside of Russian soil. And he’s running low on those.
One of the precursors and reasons for the Wagner Mutiny was because of a conflict between Wagner and the Ministry of Defense over prison recruitment; while the numbers of recruits had been drying up before (in large part due to the atrocious treatment and heavy casualties), the MoD managed to ban Wagner from prisoner recruitment in order to cement its own monopoly over them. Moreover, the Kremlin has offered very generous signing bonuses for Contract Soldiers to fight in Ukraine, as well as a bunch of underhanded pressure and manipulations. And even that has largely fallen short in getting the necessary recruits, which is also why you’ve seen things like the imposition of the Russian equivalent of Stop-Loss and attempts to get clearly inadequate people into uniform (such as a pregnant Reservist who was told to head to Ukraine and a partially deaf soldier), on top of foreign mercs.
That tells me that Putin is running low on troops that he can send into Ukraine. And indeed one of the stronger counterarguments I can see against Ukraine doing this attack on Kursk (especially with non-Free Russia units) is that it would provide an opportunity for Putin to declare war openly and begin open mobilization and trigger the ability to send even normal conscripts to Ukraine (which at least some people in the chain of command have tried before).
Putin HAS to be at least somewhat mindful of casualties, because military age Russian Males – and ESPECIALLY ethnic Russian males – are a very finite quantity and there aren’t many more coming any time soon. He also has to be careful about pushing a lot of people from Russia’s urban cores in St. Petersburg and Moscow into the battlefield, precisely because unlike the average Siberian they are affluent, relatively connected, and close to the centers of power. The Soviet Union went down in Afghanistan from casualties far less than Russia alone has suffered in this war, ditto Russia in the First Chechen War. So Putin has to be at least somewhat mindful of that if he is even somewhat smart (and his actions, I think, show he is mindful of that).
Of course fighting age Ukrainians are also in finite supply, but they are easier to push into uniform and there are more willing volunteers from abroad. They also generally take fewer casualties.
Agreed.
I’m not sure I’d go that far, but it will likely be more of a grinding fight. In many ways this war started back in 2014, and I imagine it might go on for years to come. That’s a tragedy but I don’t think there is much that can be done beyond – like you said – making this as uncomfortable as possible for Russia to continue.
Fair, but I do think that soldiers and infrastructure will need to go to the meatgrinder in any case. And moreover, the Ukrainians in general are accepting of that, in part because they have seen the alternatives (indeed, they border one of them and have close contact with Georgia). But I do want to stack the deck as much as possible.
Turtler — think it’s about time to push Russia back to the east of the Ural Mountains yet? 😉
if memory served putin was put in place in Georgia, the politics of Abkhazia and the Ossetians are bewildering fwiw, it was only with Obama and Biden that the Khozayin, thought he could make a go of it, I thought it was a stupid plan the ones that Tuvan twit could come up, and General Gerasimov tried to make it sensible,
after the Nordstrum pipeline follies, yes I meant the typo, I wouldn’t put it past Putin to send some Spetznaz thats what they were designed for infiltratng one of our major pumping stations or refineries, any such calamity would serve the regime’s interests,remember the purposes that Obama used the regretable TransOcean explorer spill
‘never let a crisis go to waste’ in fact gestures like that probably encouraged Putin we were an unserious power, along with this early transgender fascination and the anti natalist agenda
I don’t know to what degree Dugin this odd Rasputin type Anarchist really has on Russian policy but revenge is a powerful motivator on his part,
this is the same administration that lets Cuban regime officials, tour MIA, sure they care about freedom liberty and all that, the ones who let Maduro pull of the last steal, Maduro is almost a caricature of himself, think Kevin James in a bumble bee shirt but Padrino or Cabello are anything but,
Found the video that Breton and the EU trained off of:
https://youtu.be/S0x3PszuYv4?si=raGUj3v9zHWvJ_iN
OMG, I attracted the attention of turtler. I’m flattered. 🙂
I can’t match your knowledge of the region, turtler. In fact, a lot of what you say sounds like it might be intel useful to NATO. Are you a spook?
My knowledge is limited, but I think I know this:
1. That Putin has an INSANE desire to recreate the USSR. It’s INSANE because Russia cannot in anyway defat NATO in a full-scale war. And that’s what he has to do to recreate the USSR.
2. I know that Russia, if it could become a democracy with a somewhat free market economy has the potential to be a wealthy country. Oil, gas, iron ore, rare earths, more timber than the rest of the world combined, and much, much more. They merely need to develop those resources and learn to trade peaceably with other countries. But no, Putin and others like him are fearful that someone might get richer than they are. So, they loot what they can and sell the plebes on the idea that Russia is in great danger from NATO. It’s a con, IMO. Or maybe Putin and his oligarch buddies actually believe it. What say you, turtler?
That their economy is in bad shape, I don’t doubt. Then, if we want the fighting to end, why not drive oil prices lower and really create some pain?
I’m a Vietnam vet. I’ve seen this rodeo before. We restricted our use of weapons and tactics to avoid being called war criminals. It didn’t do any good. We were called war criminals anyway. And we eventually betrayed the South Vietnamese because our leftist politicians (the forerunners of pols like Harris and Waz) didn’t really care if the Commies won. If the Ukraine war drags on, I see the same thing happening here. Billion$ wasted and Ukraine a vassal of Rsussia. If the war can be won by cutting the restrictions on the use of our weapons, let’s do it. Harris/Walz won’t do it.
Trump won’t say what he will do except that he will end the war. I don’t believe he intends to end it in a fashion that is bad for the U.S. and NATO. He also won’t telegraph his intentions. He wants to keep Russia guessing. People just have to decide whether he’s more credible than Harris/Walz. IMO, he is.
@J.J.
You are far too kind J.J., and thank you for the response. Apologies for the delay.
In this environment? I’d probably be drummed out by Mueller and co. But you are too kind, and in particular the info I have is all public (which of course means some of it is inaccurate). I am an observer in the OSINT community and general history and news trawler.
I’d largely agree, though I’m not sure what Putin wishes for in his dream of dreams, whether it is a recreated USSR (though I doubt he would turn it away), a new Russian Empire, or the like. On some level I think at least part of it is desiring to cling onto power in luxury for the rest of his limited days, and after him the Deluge. Probably a mixture of all of the above.
That said, I do think it is important to note that while it is insane, like many lucid forms of it it has a sort of dream logic. Russia is demographically and economically rotting. Stalin managed to make turn of century peasants and former peasants in an industrializing country “breed” like jaded French urbanites, and killed a lot of them while others like the Nazis did more. Ukraine has always been important to Russian polities and their interests, but Putin and others probably hope that if they can reabsorb Ukraine and crush its idea of nationhood, they can add more mass to the rotting corpse and maybe help rejuvenate it.
Agreed indeed.
To be fair they are working to develop many of those resources, especially when it benefits them. The bigger issue I see is they are not really competitive globally, with overly statist corrupt patronage machines and monopolies like Gazprom. I think a lot of that is due to how Russian society has been patronage based almost from the start (right on down to Vikings or post-Vikings ruling the area with trusted retinues of followers), but the Tsarist Era and especially the Soviet Union they widened that even further and turned society into a mixture of a military and bureaucracy, so there’s a lot of pressure to create “Make Work” in general and also to reward trusted inner circle members. That means that there’s a much higher tolerance for corruption and inefficiency so long as the palms get greased.
And of course while a logical, textbook-correct way to deal with “Make Work” would be to free up the market and allow people to strike out on their own, there’s a lot of terror in that (not helped by the aging demographics and the absolute botched and half-baked trauma of the 1990s, hence why “Liberal” is basically a curse word in Russia, and they apply it almost evenly to both classical liberals and Leftist Progs).
That too. It is made worse by memories of trauma from the 1990s, where oligarchs went wild.
I’d say a mixture of it. It’s worth noting that Putin and his inner circle are by and large not oligarchs, or at least not purebred ones; they’re creatures of the Soviet and post-Soviet Bureaucracy, the “Organs”. And they fought bitterly for control with the oligarchs over the course of the 1990s and 2000s, crushing some and coming to agreements with the rest. I do believe the anti-Western and statist bents are quite sincere and deep and others like Mark Steyn have pointed out, as is fear on how NATO expansion will impair their power. However, I do not think they are as alarmed with NATO expansion as they claim. Finland and Sweden called the Kremlin’s bluff on that matter. Moreover the war in Ukraine started as a result of a political crisis that originated in an EU Association Agreement (ie: Not going to become part of the EU but going to agree to terms there).
That said they do rob a lot and they do beat the gong of scapegoating and demonizing us.
I absolutely agree, that would be the pragmatic and moral choice. As well as help Americans.
Why we aren’t? Because the left is nowhere near as anti-Putin or Anti-Russia as they act and have appeased him for years, and because they are beholden to a mixture of pro-“Green” fanaticism and anti-Western bigotry, hence their gutting there.
Thank you for your service, and I largely agree.
That is a major risk. Though I believe a major reason for the limitation with weapons was not so much to avoid being called war criminals but to avoid the risk of a further communist escalation, avoid another Korea. Which I think is still a major problem. In addition to sacrificing people like you, I think it ignores that a key advantage is making the ENEMY fear escalation. This is one place I think Truman and Eisenhower mucked up.
But it is also why I have generally been supportive of allowing Ukraine more or less free targeting on Russian soil. The big practical issue I feel is about trying to avoid giving Putin more of an excuse to formally declare war, which might greatly hurt Ukraine and us (or greatly hurt him), but other than that weapons away.
Agreed indeed there.
Agreed there, and that is also why I support him. And frankly I still would even if he actually did abandon Ukraine utterly (which I do not believe for a second he would), because while I am greatly sympathetic to Ukraine I am an America Firster. That does not mean America Alone, but it does mean that if we go the rest of the free world and civilization as we know it probably goes with us.