Grozny before:
Grozny today:
Posted on 07/23/2022 1:34:59 PM PDT by JonPreston
Here's how it's going to go down. Mark this post.
Russia will rebuild the parts that were formerly Ukraine that they now occupy.
To get the sanctions lifted, they'll offer a paltry amount of reparations, maybe a couple hundred million or so but not much, to fix some of the stuff in Western Ukraine that they destroyed.
The rest of the rebuilding, hundreds of billions of dollars worth, will be provided by the U.S. taxpayer in the form of lucrative government contracts that will enable unlimited opportunity for graft.
1. Ukraine is a sovereign nation, and the right of sovereign nations to decide their own destinies must be respected!
2. Russia already borders other NATO states (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Norway, and Turkey) - some of whom pack much more of a punch than Ukraine. Ukraine is only the latest of a number of sovereign nations who have exercised their right as sovereign nations to join the defensive military alliance of their choice.
3. Finland and Sweden have now also elected to join NATO - what is Russia going to do about that? Again declare "Special Military Actions," move their tanks in, rocket-bomb Finnish and Swedish cities, and grab territory?
As for “evil”, we need to clean our house first.
Tu Quoque Fallacy combined with Demand for Perfection Fallacy!
Don’t be obsessed with a mote in the eye of the Russians when we have a beam in ours. What we need is a revolution here. The woketards and “progressive” must be ruthlessly crushed, or the American experiment is over.
False Dilemma Fallacy! We can do both!
Regards,
Yeah, they did a really good job "rebuilding" Chechnia!
/mordant sarcasm
Regards,
Grozny before:
Grozny today:
Mexico has flourished very well since Cuban Missile crisis by avoiding any military pacts with enemies of United States.
Learn from actual events, and forget your cock-eyed liberal theories.
Ridiculous implication that Mexico ever had the slightest wish to join a military alliance against the U.S.!
Learn from actual events, and forget your cock-eyed liberal theories.
You are the one expounding ridiculous hypotheses about Canada or Mexico partnering up with Red China or Russia!
Regards,
While Ukraine, with their stupid push for NATO is getting their azz kicked, infra-structure destroyed, Ukrainians killed in huge numbers, families displaced, jobs scarce, and losing land area. Great genius Zelensky the homo-erotic dancer has brought this upon Ukraine by his push for NATO.
Sure: Blame the victim!
"I wouldn't have raped and then murdered her if she hadn't been wearing that seductive make-up! She was asking for it, I tell yuh!"
Disgusting!
Regards,
1. “Ukraine is a sovereign nation, and the right of sovereign nations to decide their own destinies must be respected!”
Apparently that alleged absolute principle only applies to Russia, not the US: Mexico, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Panama, North Africa, Yugoslavia, etc. By The Way, WHERE WAS THAT PRINCIPLE YOU INVOKE WHEN THE US/SOROS ENGINEERED THE COUP THAT DEPOSED THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE IN 2014 AND THAT BROUGHT NEONAZIS INTO THE GOVERNMENT AND THE UFA? What’s your grand theory of legitimacy that would force the Donbas to submit to the coup government (or other parts of Ukraine to submit for that matter)?
Further, the quid pro quo for German reunification and dismantling the USSR was no eastward NATO expansion:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early
We violated that promise, but Russia was too weak to do anything about it until 2014. After that, the RF prepared for NATO’s next move.
2.”Russia already borders other NATO states (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Norway, and Turkey) - some of whom pack much more of a punch than Ukraine. Ukraine is only the latest of a number of sovereign nations who have exercised their right as sovereign nations to join the defensive military alliance of their choice.”
Well, this one is easy: Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Norway pack no punch. Comparing them to Ukraine is ridiculous. Turkey has a larger army than the UFA, but since the coup the UFA has been thoroughly NATOized and, reasonable people before the war would have said that the UFA is arguably more formidable than the Turkish army. That’s beside the point, though. NATO missiles in Ukraine would be about 350 miles from Moscow and other important targets. Even with today’s NATO techology, Moscow could be hit from Ukraine with no effective warning. When the US finishes perfecting its hypersonic missiles, the flight time to Moscow could be under a minute.
3. “Finland and Sweden have now also elected to join NATO - what is Russia going to do about that? Again declare “Special Military Actions,” move their tanks in, rocket-bomb Finnish and Swedish cities, and grab territory?”
As for Sweden and Finland, stupid is as stupid does. What the RF will do will depend on whether their membership stays nominal. If those countries starting heavily militarizing, they may get the treatment WE would have given the Cubans if the Soviets hadn’t pulled the missiles.
Finally, there are no fallacies. I didn’t concede that the RF is equally “evil”. I was trying to get you to see that the US government has become evil, in fact more evil. Moreover, I don’t demand perfection. No human or any human institution is morally “perfect”, but there are degrees of better and worse. If one looks objectively at what our government has become (please review the examples), and is trying to become, it has moved far to the “more evil” side of the spectrum. This isn’t Reagan’s America or even Trump’s. Biden’s America is a totalitarian Gramscian Marxist state in the process of being born.
Finally, I pose no false dilemma. My position is that 1. the RF is doing what’s necessary to eliminate an existential threat and protect ethnic Russians in the Donbas. In fact, the suicidal sanctions stupidly imposed by the US and the EU, as well as the embarrassing defeat of NATO and its proxy Zelensky regime, may go a long way toward helping remove the “progressive” governments of the EU and their Gramscian policies, stop the WEF’s plans for a Great Reset, and drive the Democrats from power in the US, despite massive vote fraud. 2. We need to crush our domestic left. Trump’s plan to fire the Deep State is a beginning.
Do you understand? No dilemma - what happens with respect to 1 is not in our set of choices, while 2 is.
achilles2000: Apparently that alleged absolute principle only applies to Russia, not [...]
Again with the "Tu Quoque" Fallacy! Citing examples of other nations (allegedly) violating this principle does not lessen Russia's guilt, and certainly does not justify Russia seizing Ukrainian territory!
achilles2000: Further, the quid pro quo for German reunification and dismantling the USSR was no eastward NATO expansion [...] We violated that promise, but Russia was too weak to do [...]
Show me the treaty or accord signed by the U.S. president and ratified by the U.S. Congress in which that was agreed!
achilles2000: Finally, I pose no false dilemma. My position is that 1. the RF is doing what’s necessary to eliminate an existential threat and protect ethnic Russians in the Donbas. In fact, the suicidal sanctions stupidly imposed by the US and the EU, as well as the embarrassing defeat of NATO and its proxy Zelensky regime, may go a long way toward helping remove the “progressive” governments of the EU and their Gramscian policies, stop the WEF’s plans for a Great Reset, and drive the Democrats from power in the US, despite massive vote fraud.
You are essentially saying, "If the Russian invasion proves successful and Putin's Russia is able to hold on to the territory it has conquered, then this will so profoundly weaken the Western military alliance (NATO plus Japan plus Australia, etc.) and invalidate the Biden administration as to trigger a socio-political revolution in the U.S. and, somehow, strengthen conservative causes."
That is a very long bet - and a very risky one. You are saying that we must weaken the post-WWII geopolitical order - practically destroy its very foundations - and smilingly accept the redrawing of European borders by force of (Russian) arms in order to - maybe, somehow, someday - restore conservative values in America and burnish her world standing.
That's preposterous! Or worse: It's reckless insanity!
Regards,
So sorry! Forgot POLAND.
The NATO member Poland, of course, likewise has a land border with Russia.
Gee, Russia doesn't seem to border many countries with whom it enjoys friendly relations, does it?
I wonder why that might be?
Regards,
You consistently miss the point.
1. There is no such absolute principle that is observed internationally. For example, the Clinton administration claimed it had the right to do what it did in Yugoslavia/Serbia/Kosovo based on the principle of premptive self defense, which Clinton argued fell within, I believe, Article 51 of the UN Charter. I don’t think the facts suppoprted the Clinton administration claim, but it was accepted generally. If a criminal were about to shoot a baby or you, do you think you lack the right to use any force you have at hand to stop him, including shooting him because of some alleged moral principle mandating that one may NEVER initiate force against someone else? In any event, your resort to the “Tu Quoque” is incorrect. It only works if we agree on the principle, and, in case you haven’t noticed, I do not agree with you (nor do many, or perhaps all, international actors).
2. “Show me the treaty or accord signed by the U.S. president and ratified by the U.S. Congress in which that was agreed!”
You should know that very few international commitments are signed by the President and ratified by Congress. International understandings take many forms, and they are considering “binding”. Of course the problem with any international understanding, including treaties, is that they cannot be enforced the way that domestic contracts and other undertakings can be enforced. So, Bush I and the leaders of the european countries identified in the declassified documents gave their solemn word, the Russians detrimentally relied on it, and the Clinton, Bush II, and Obama administrations, as well as the relevant European governments, repeatedly broke their word, even though the Russians had complied. I suppose you can say that that’s just too damn bad for the Russians, but if that’s your attitude, no one ever ought to do a handshake deal or enter into an oral agreement with you.
3. As for my take on the possible knock on consequences of the likely Russian kenetic victory and of our “genius” sanctions, you say “That is a very long bet - and a very risky one.” You seem to be confused. Nothing you or I write here will affect the outcomes. I am not making a “bet” in any relevant sense because my view of a likely future scenario involves no reward or penalty for me.
I will tell you, however, that the the Ukraine sanctions fiasco has toppled Johnson, and Draghi has seen what is coming and didn’t want to be around when the disaster hit, so he resigned. Scholtz is likely next. The WEF is trying to use Holland as a warm-up for the Great Reset, and Dutch farmers are in rebellion. Of course, the 2020 election was clearly stolen. So, what are Americans going to do if elections are just a meaningless ritual? I see that there’s an article posted here on FR about a TV station in Michigan reporting the results of the Republican primary, and those results show the RINO/Never-Trumpers won. The only problem is that the election hasn’t been held. I do think we are potentially living in revolutionary times, but we’ll just have to see. Maybe Americans and Europeans will supinely submit to the gathering totalitarianism of GloboHomo/New World Order/Great Reset.
Finally, you write: “You are saying that we must weaken the post-WWII geopolitical order - practically destroy its very foundations - and smilingly accept the redrawing of European borders by force of (Russian) arms in order to - maybe, somehow, someday - restore conservative values in America and burnish her world standing.”
I said no such thing. Profligate, warmongering, dishonest US and other “Western” governments have done a lot over the last decades to destroy the post WWII political and economic order. It has already happened. Apparently you haven’t been watching. Russia, China, and the Global South have broken away from that order, and the role of the (Petro) dollar as the major world reserve currency is very probably coming to an end. Even the Turks and the Saudis are considering joining the BRICs, and the Saudis are starting to settle significant oil trades in currencies other than the dollar and the Euro. If the dollar does lose its dominance as the world reserve currency, US living standards may drop by perhaps as much as a third because we won’t be able to just print money and buy stuff overseas anymore. We’ll see.
In any event, I am not advocating a course of action because that would be totally irrelevant to any real world outcome. What I am doing is commenting on what has happened and appears to be in the process of happening.
By the way, for someone so hung up on the concept of the absolute inviolability of sovereignty, you don’t care at all about the the US/Soros coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of a sovereign country and that set this catastrophe in motion.
Yes, you forgot Poland, but Poland only borders Kaliningrad.
It is a "bet" insofar as the course of action (or, from my point of view, of inaction) which you are advocating would represent a major departure from our previous policy, and would have a sizable impact upon the future course of history.
You, apparently, believe that accepting Russia's right to use force of arms to redraw the map of Europe and stopping all military aid to Ukraine would have a salubrious effect upon America's socio-political landscape and/or spiritual health (while I feel that it would be tantamount to throwing our core values overboard and would have an emasculating effect upon our world standing).
It is a "bet" insofar as you are entreating us FReepers to abandon our previous position (that Ukraine requires and deserves our staunch support) and "take your side" (i.e., accord Russia a veto when it comes to accepting new NATO members).
Events will eventually prove your stance either right or wrong. To that extent, it is a bet - maybe only a "Gentlemen's Bet," but a bet nonetheless.
However, if you insist upon claiming that our discussion here has absolutely no influence upon the real-world outcome of the present conflict, then we could agree to call it rather a "Thought Experiment."
Regards,
So, now you are down to various uses of the word “bet”. I made it clear that when I said “I bet...” I was using it in a commonly understood colloquial sense of “I think”, as in “I bet Alexander is going to town tomorrow.” One could as well write, “I think Alexander is going to town tomorrow.” In ordinary English they are semantically equivalent.
What is amply justified by the facts is that the Obama administration (with an assist from Soros) began this war by carrying out a coup against a peaceful, democratically elected government of the Ukraine that resulted in NeoNazis gaining significant power in the coup government and the UFA. It also set off a war in the Donbas. I would say that that act alone was an example of throwing “our core values overboard”, unless you are a Neocon. That act also contributed the continued diminution of our standing in the Global South.
You evidently believe that “Ukraine deserves our staunch support”, but what you are really saying is that the extraordinarily corrupt, fascistic Zelensky regime deserves our staunch support. The Zelensky version of the coup government is not “Ukraine”, and Zelensky doesn’t enjoy the popular support he had before the war.
I do accept the RF’s use of force, or the threat of force, to eliminate an existential threat. This is something that every nation would do if it is able. As I have pointed out, the US has certainly done so. With a NATOized Ukraine, the Russian military command and control centers are a 5 minute flight by today’s missiles, and perhaps about 50 seconds away when our hypersonics come on line. Being able to take out Russian command and control before it can react is rightly seen as an existential threat.
You seem to be anguished by the use of force to redraw lines in Europe. Were you similarly concerned when the Clinton administration involved us in doing exactly that in the Balkans? National boundaries change over time for all sorts of reasons and often in ways that include force. In the case of the Donbas, the coup government could have recognized that those areas did not want to be ruled by a government that overthrew by coup the government the people of the Donbas voted overwhelmingly for. The coup government could have recognized the Donbas republics and let them go peacefully, rather like the Czechs let the Slovaks go peacefully. Instead, the coup government has waged a vicious war against the men, women, and children of the Donbas for 8 bloody years and in February assembled massive UFA formations (including many NeoNazi units) to overrun the Donbas.
As for what I think would be “salubrious”: not staging a coup in 2014 would have been salubrious, not beginning the de facto integration of Ukraine into NATO post-coup would have been salubrious, not supporting the coup regimes’ war in the Donbas would have been salubrious, and accepting and acting on Minsk II would have been salubrious. As for the present, the US/NATO essentially are controlling the war now, and ending the war immediately and removing the self-defeating sanctions would be “salubrious”. Of course, we won’t do either because the Neocons, with their messianic narcissism, are controlling our foreign policy.
I do agree that this war will have major effect on the course of history. In fact it already has. Part of what I have written is speculation on the consequences. There may be some good that comes out of this disaster for the West if the people of the West finally stop being swindled by our tech media/MSM, which are now almost indistinguishable from the government, and purge the Deep State in all of its manifestations in the West. Do note that Trump is talking about that very thing in the US now. That is optimismic speculation. On the pessimistic side, perhaps people will continue to be taken in by the Neocon narrative and ultimately succumb to A WEF type agenda.
What is certain is that our foreign policy has increasinly alienated the Global South and has driven Russian closer to China, which is an extremely bad outcome of this war.
Whatever, neocon
Oh, bu-urn!
Regards,
I recall when we use to scoff at and laugh at the Left during Obama’s term always blaming Bush for something, anything.
The tide has turned.
Because someone is commenting on this Thread that means they don’t care about the election cheating?
Yet, here you are.
So, what have you done about the election cheating?
Besides posting on the internet………..
Neocon gonna neocon
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.