Active Users:630 Time:22/12/2024 03:44:13 PM
You sound so naive there Tom Send a noteboard - 16/07/2024 06:57:38 PM

As mentioned in the title, I agree in their two cases joining was primarily about the political benefits instead of the military ones - though since you're so eager to talk about coup attempts, I'm surprised you failed to mention the one Russian agents attempted in Montenegro to try and derail their accession to NATO. I have a feeling that the Montenegrins' love for Russia today is not what it was ten years ago anymore.

At least a dozen Russian friends are doing business and living in Montenegro and a friend who visited a few weeks ago contrasted once again how welcoming they are to Russian business and Russians as compared to EU members.
You'll have to forgive me for finding that a rather thin basis to base my belief on. I have certainly seen that Russia at the time found it reason enough to loudly complain about US support for Chechen terrorism, but that doesn't mean said complaints weren't bullshit.

There is quite a bit to it, but not in English. I don't expect to convince you.
And yet Putin clearly thought he'd easily win the war against Ukraine and take Kiev [corrected your typographical error] within a few months - nor did the West expect Ukraine to keep Russia out of this much territory for this long, either.

That's not exactly a fair presentation of the situation. Putin invaded more as a show of force designed to force a fast treaty, which you can see in how intensively Russia was negotiating with Ukraine in February-March 2022. When Russia pulled its troops from around Kiev based on a preliminary agreement, Boris Johnson flew to Kiev and convinced Zelensky to fight to the last Ukrainian instead. In a fair world, he would be hanged on the Maidan for the needless deaths he caused.

I want to stress: Russia could have held on to the territory around Kiev had it wanted to and the war would have looked very different one year in. Other than the poorly defended areas near Kharkov in Fall 2022, Russia has not been ejected forcibly from any territory in Ukraine that it took in February-March 2022.


Yet still wouldn't have had any reasons to invade Russia. And the only reason why NATO would have invested such resources into it, would have been to defend against Russian aggression.

You might as well have said, "Senators and Presidents don't have people killed, Michael". NATO is about projecting US power and control. Yugoslavia in 1999 was an attack on the flimsiest of pretexts. Libya was even worse. NATO certainly would be happy to fabricate a "humanitarian crisis" on Russia's borders as a pretext to start dictating terms or precipitating the collapse of Russia as a unified state. This has been the goal of the war party since 1991: repeat the USSR fragmentation again and again until Russia is a series of small states that cannot counter US power.
As you've noted elsewhere, before 2022 and even more so before 2014, the Europeans weren't exactly very enthusiastic about increasing their defense spending - and while the US is always keen to do so, the US really wanted and did try to make its much-discussed pivot to Asia, to spend its resources containing the new threat of China rather than the old one of the Soviet Union. If they partially stepped back from that and refocused more resources in Europe again, it's because Russia was threatening enough to make them do so.

No, no and no. The US talked about a pivot, but the military industrial complex wanted to sell weapons to countries that can pay, and there just aren't enough countries in Asia that can do that. Japan is hamstrung by its constitution, South Korea makes a lot of its own equipment due to historical circumstances, Taiwan can only buy so much both due to size and also due to the political implications of the sales, and there aren't any other countries worth speaking of.

To the contrary, the US can sell lots and lots of weapons to Europe, especially if Europeans got serious about defense. But how to do that? Oh, I know: let's poke the bear.


Political correctness is the pettiest form of casuistry.

ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius

Ummaka qinnassa nīk!

*MySmiley*
Reply to message
When the NYT Editorial Board calls for the incumbent President to step down... - 29/06/2024 02:51:38 PM 430 Views
Yeah, pretty crazy stuff... - 30/06/2024 12:53:46 AM 93 Views
Not competent to run for president - 30/06/2024 03:46:13 AM 80 Views
Was Biden ever really competent, though? - 30/06/2024 01:33:00 PM 101 Views
Re: Was Biden ever really competent, though? - 01/07/2024 04:48:04 PM 77 Views
the slip - 30/06/2024 11:06:40 PM 89 Views
Now the Biden campaign is calling the people who are sounding these alarms 'bedwetters' - 01/07/2024 05:16:12 PM 81 Views
That term has been used for months if not years, they didn't just make it up... - 01/07/2024 11:52:54 PM 85 Views
How can you say this with a straight face? - 04/07/2024 03:24:48 PM 93 Views
Very easily, I assure you - though there's a difference between 'did' (past) and 'would' (future) - 04/07/2024 07:23:44 PM 89 Views
Re: Very easily, I assure you - 08/07/2024 05:35:19 PM 76 Views
I'm not fool enough to think I can go toe to toe with you on the Russian-American relationship. - 08/07/2024 09:33:57 PM 75 Views
Security doesn't exist in a vacuum - 09/07/2024 02:42:36 AM 95 Views
Sure, but Russia is a threat to others far more than others threaten it. - 10/07/2024 09:45:58 PM 75 Views
That's actually empirically not true - 11/07/2024 02:35:23 PM 79 Views
You're right that I was thinking of Eastern Europe re: NATO, not Central Asia or the Caucasus. - 12/07/2024 04:07:43 PM 75 Views
Let's not fool ourselves about Montenegro and Macedonia - 15/07/2024 03:41:14 PM 84 Views
A smarter NATO - 16/07/2024 11:35:46 AM 78 Views
I agree with most of this. - 16/07/2024 06:14:07 PM 66 Views
I don't think there's any issue to Ukraine joining the EU - 16/07/2024 06:42:27 PM 71 Views
I agree with this 100% - 16/07/2024 06:41:20 PM 74 Views
Sure, for those two it was clearly more the political factors. For others not, it varied. - 16/07/2024 06:02:47 PM 67 Views
You sound so naive there - 16/07/2024 06:57:38 PM 71 Views
It was a bad debate, but I can't imagine a lot of people are actually swayed by it. - 07/07/2024 01:56:44 AM 81 Views
I'm centrist enough to consider voting Red over voting Blue this year due to - 08/07/2024 10:51:46 AM 78 Views
I've voted Libertarian for President the last two times - 08/07/2024 02:55:35 PM 77 Views
You make a good point about the popular vote. - 08/07/2024 03:01:42 PM 79 Views
Re: You make a good point about the popular vote. - 08/07/2024 03:26:20 PM 77 Views
This is the part that bothers me as well. - 08/07/2024 03:46:15 PM 78 Views
Re: This is the part that bothers me as well. - 08/07/2024 04:00:14 PM 73 Views
Re: I've voted Libertarian for President the last two times - 08/07/2024 03:23:12 PM 67 Views
Your analogy is pretty poor honestly. - 08/07/2024 04:54:45 PM 84 Views
You also are trying to redefine how the score is kept - 08/07/2024 05:44:02 PM 73 Views
Sure, that's how it has always been - doesn't mean it's fair or that the popular vote is irrelevant. - 08/07/2024 08:06:01 PM 77 Views
If popular votes were paramount then Rassemblement National - 08/07/2024 08:29:13 PM 77 Views
FPTP sucks in general, yes, whether in the US, in France, or elsewhere. - 08/07/2024 09:53:57 PM 76 Views
Re: FPTP sucks in general, yes, whether in the US, in France, or elsewhere. - 08/07/2024 10:34:12 PM 76 Views
To be clear I didn't say it should be eliminated entirely, but as for what would happen if it was... - 08/07/2024 10:50:57 PM 72 Views
You're wrong. - 09/07/2024 01:19:30 AM 77 Views
You're still looking at it from the current two-party system framework. - 09/07/2024 07:17:39 AM 71 Views
Re: You're still looking at it from the current two-party system framework. - 09/07/2024 01:45:33 PM 76 Views
It doesn't necessarily require amending the constitution. - 10/07/2024 03:03:19 AM 77 Views
Re: It doesn't necessarily require amending the constitution. - 10/07/2024 04:13:02 PM 68 Views
I meant California - 08/07/2024 08:43:35 PM 76 Views
I'm concerned about a lot of things. - 09/07/2024 04:41:03 AM 79 Views
From a left of center/liberalish substack author about the Republican national platform - 09/07/2024 11:15:00 AM 74 Views
It's an interesting read. - 09/07/2024 09:46:47 PM 73 Views
Trump is a Trumpist. Republicans are Republicans. - 10/07/2024 11:09:05 AM 77 Views
I think a significant wing of the party has become Trumpist. - 10/07/2024 02:23:45 PM 73 Views
The most interesting thing to me, so far, about this debate - 08/07/2024 10:54:50 AM 78 Views
Re: The most interesting thing to me, so far, about this debate - 08/07/2024 02:58:44 PM 74 Views
Re: The most interesting thing to me, so far, about this debate - 08/07/2024 03:20:14 PM 81 Views

Reply to Message