Nobody interested in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?
Well I am wondering if the trade sanctions against Russia will actually do any good because Putin seems to have old school communism views and wants to rebuild the Soviet union.
But in communism, they don't believe in international trade and only want to trade within their own country. So if communists do not believe in international trade, will Putin actually care about trade sanctions therefore? It seems they are trying to threaten a communist, with a more democratic and capitalist ultimatum, and don't think that Putin is not the type be threatened by an ultimatum that does not coincide with his political views?
What Putin cares for is irrelevant - without international trade, he loses access to high-tech and materials for his weapons.
USSR and satellites had a lot of industry Russia has not.
They didn't build independence and self-sufficience China seems to be aiming at. Instead, they expected to make the West dependent on Russian fuels - but trade links turn out to be a double edged sword.
_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.
<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>
Another interesting wartime neologism:
чорнобаїти (chornobayity, from Chornobayivka) - to do the same thing again and again, and each time suffer as a result.
Also and idiom:
to start a tractor - to come up with an unexpected argument in a discussion.
_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.
<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... e-Age.html
Peter Hitchens on the ball as usual in his Sunday column
This is not a war between Ukraine and Russia. It is a war between the USA and Russia, in which both sides are cynically using Ukraine as a battering ram.
The people of Ukraine will gain nothing and lose much from being treated in this way. They fight and die or lose their homes and flee. We pour in more weapons and shout encouragement from a safe distance. Russia wrecks the joint.
What Ukraine actually needs is action to cure its festering, universal corruption. It would also benefit from the pushing to the margins of the ultra-nationalist fanatics who have far too much influence in its government and armed forces. The war will make these problems worse, not better.
As I once again find myself on the despised, hated and reviled side of the argument, I might as well do this properly. These are very cynical events indeed. I am sorry to say that there are people in the USA who will not be sad if this war drags on.
A ‘senior diplomat’ was quoted on Friday, by a commentator with ready access to the great and the good, as saying: ‘If you look at all the options, our strategic interest is probably best served in a long war, a quagmire that drains Putin militarily and economically so he cannot do this again.’
This is no doubt true. Since the American neo-conservative politician Paul Wolfowitz set out his ‘doctrine’ in 1992, Washington has wanted to crush any revival of Russian power. The flaw with this scheme is that it was, in fact, China that was the threat, not Russia. But there you are. Mr Wolfowitz, a keen backer of the disastrous Iraq war, is not as clever as he thinks he is.
It is this policy which explains the otherwise mad expansion of Nato, against the warnings of every qualified expert in the world. It also explains the taunting of Russia by President George W. Bush’s 2008 suggestion that Ukraine should actually join Nato.
This came just a year after Vladimir Putin, still more or less open to reason, said very clearly that he’d had enough and that Nato expansion should stop. Then, of course, came the events of 2014, in which the USA openly backed a mob putsch which overthrew Ukraine’s legitimate President Viktor Yanukovych. More responsible nations, including France, Germany and Poland, tried to broker a peaceful, lawful path.
But when Ukraine’s democratic opposition leaders told the Kiev mob about this deal in the early hours of February 21, one of the mob chieftains snarled that they did not want deals, that Yanukovych must go immediately, ending with this threat: ‘Unless this morning you come up with a statement demanding that he steps down, then we will take arms and go, I swear!’
The elected president soon afterwards fled for his life, probably wisely, and was formally removed in a shabby procedure that fell far short of lawful impeachment.
This putsch was the true beginning of the war now raging, the initial act of violence which triggered everything else.
Putin’s decision to respond to it with an invasion was not just a crime. It was a terrible mistake. I suspect there were some in various parts of the current US administration who had to conceal their glee when he did this idiotic thing.
It is an old tactic in high-stakes diplomacy to provoke your enemy into an unwise war, in the hope you will then destroy him.
Germany did it to France in 1870, luring Napoleon III into a defeat which ended France as a great power. Germany did it again in 1914, goading Russia into another stupid war, which destroyed its monarchy and its prosperity, and subjected Russians to 75 years of Communist ruin.
I do not think the USA expects to defeat Putin any time soon, though he could just collapse. I have less and less confidence in peace talks, which the USA is not even attending.
Meanwhile the people of Ukraine will suffer horribly, while the world gradually loses interest. Putin and the USA now have a stake in keeping the conflict going. If Putin pulls out, it will destroy him.
If the war stops, Washington will have lost an opportunity to bleed Russia white and to sanction its economy back into the Stone Age. Russia might break up under such pressure.
The elimination of Russia as a major country will then be achieved, though someone had better be careful about what happens to all its nuclear weapons if that comes to pass. Meanwhile the Chinese police state, the closest the world has yet come to Orwell’s 1984, grows in strength and power, biding its time.
I am reminded of Robert Southey’s poem about the Battle of Blenheim, which my late father (who had seen a bit of war) was fond of quoting. A child finds a skull on the long-ago battlefield and asks his grandfather what it is. The old man tries feebly to explain, but the poem ends: ‘But what good came of it at last?’ quoth little Peterkin. ‘Why that I cannot tell,’ said he, ‘but ’twas a famous victory.’
_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
But in communism, they don't believe in international trade and only want to trade within their own country. So if communists do not believe in international trade, will Putin actually care about trade sanctions therefore? It seems they are trying to threaten a communist, with a more democratic and capitalist ultimatum, and don't think that Putin is not the type be threatened by an ultimatum that does not coincide with his political views?
Communist ideology has nothing to do with being either for, or against, international trade. The North Koreans have a peculiar add-on to Communism called Juche (self reliance) that mandates isolation from the outside world. Maybe thats what you're thinking of.
The modern Russian Republic depends upon markets for its natural gas and oil to get cash- to buy manufactured goods from the west. Western Europe depends upon Russian natural gas. As with most trade sanctions both sides are hurt. So the question is which side will buckle first. Putin is definitely hurting. But the NATO nations of the west pay a price too.
...
I am sorry to say that there are people in the USA who will not be sad if this war drags on.
While I do not immediately know who they would be and do not know their specific goals and desires, it is not the least bit astonishing that such people would exist.
_________________
"There are a thousand things that can happen when you go light a rocket engine, and only one of them is good."
Tom Mueller of SpaceX, in Air and Space, Jan. 2011
But in communism, they don't believe in international trade and only want to trade within their own country. So if communists do not believe in international trade, will Putin actually care about trade sanctions therefore? It seems they are trying to threaten a communist, with a more democratic and capitalist ultimatum, and don't think that Putin is not the type be threatened by an ultimatum that does not coincide with his political views?
Communist ideology has nothing to do with being either for, or against, international trade. The North Koreans have a peculiar add-on to Communism called Juche (self reliance) that mandates isolation from the outside world. Maybe thats what you're thinking of.
The modern Russian Republic depends upon markets for its natural gas and oil to get cash- to buy manufactured goods from the west. Western Europe depends upon Russian natural gas. As with most trade sanctions both sides are hurt. So the question is which side will buckle first. Putin is definitely hurting. But the NATO nations of the west pay a price too.
Oh okay I see. I was thinking of the North Korean self-reliance way, yes.
but even if Putin is hurting, sanctions haven't worked in World War II for example so why would they think they would work now?
...
I am sorry to say that there are people in the USA who will not be sad if this war drags on.
t.
Oh absolutely. Biden is invading Ukraine, shelling cities, and murdering babies, and Biden, and all of us Americans, should be brought before the Hague, and should be hung for the crimes we are committing there.
A) you post Hitch spouting two pages of drivel in which talks, but fails to actually SAY anything, never makes any point...except to tell us all what we all already know- which is that every country's behavior involves its own self interest.
B) You fail to make any point yourself.
So..what IS your point?
Or...scratch that.
Let me make it easy for both you, and for your readers.
You obviously dont like the current course of action that the US and NATO are taking.
You obviously want the US and NATO to be doing some OTHER thing.
So...
What IS this other thing (this other course of action) that you want the west to take?
Do you want us to just do nothing and let Russia take over Ukraine? Do you want us to do the opposite and be aggressive and send in our own troops to the Ukriane? Neither of the above? Or what exactly?
It is an old tactic in high-stakes diplomacy to provoke your enemy into an unwise war, in the hope you will then destroy him.[/i]
This is peddling the story that (as an analogy) a security company (US/NATO) has provided guards to protect a property (Ukraine) in order to deliberately goad the disliked neighbours (Russia) to break in, with the aim of setting fire to the house with the neighbours inside.
What a load of rubbish.
Since the neighbours (Russia) had already annexed the back shed (Crimea), what was the Ukraine household supposed to do? Evacuate to the other neighbours' house (Poland) and let Putin take their property?
For some reason, Mr Hitchens wishes to turn the truth on its head.
Meh, it's a Daily Mail article and quoting that rag is about as meaningful as quoting The Beano.
_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.
Rest in peace to the dead, and a lifetime of nightmares to the perpetrators.
_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.
<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>
I originally liked how Biden said that NATO would respond in kind, if chemical weapons were used in Russia. He said it here at 10:55 into the clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEAbPLCyW58
I thought to myself, finally someone is saying they are willing to stand up to Putin in terms of more than just throwing some money at Ukraine. But then Biden completely lies later and says he never said that. At 0:30 seconds into the clip, he now says he never said that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI_6X1WW7H8
So Biden grows a pair and is ready to fight back, and now he totally lost that pair a couple of days later. What happened to him to cause him to just loose his b@$$s like that?
The problem with politics is, you're always under million kinds of pressure from both visible and hidden groups. To do something effectively, you need support of enough of these groups - so you try to balance and make compromises.
It's not just Biden, it's the very mechanics of political effectiveness. Kind of natural law.
_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.
<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>
It does feel uncomfortable to see the US President as being wish washy , in the same 24 hour period ,under most all circumstances … Does nothing to convey the impression of credibility . But does convey senility or influence pedaling
_________________
Diagnosed hfa
Loves velcro,
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Family conflict and shame |
15 Jun 2025, 1:02 pm |
Russia says the Soviet Union is not dead |
02 Jun 2025, 5:54 pm |