Ukraine Protests

[volprof]

Pivot East...

You guys are on the wrong side of history.

Like the Doomsday bunch, if you say something enough, eventually you'll just happen to get it right.

 

[Burhead]

Pivot East...

You guys are on the wrong side of history.

Lol. Tyrants like Putin always fall, I'm confident I'm on the right side of history.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

They were anti-sanctions. Looks like they backed off that somewhat. Campaigning v. governing, I suppose.

Greek Anti-Austerity Party Edges Toward the Mainstream in Foreign Policy - Bloomberg

It made no sense for the Greeks to be forced into supporting Russian sanctions when Greece has been in a depression. They need commerce to survive and having the US and the central banks in other parts of Europe hold their feet to the fire on sanctions is wicked.

How am I the only one that sees this?

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Lol. Tyrants like Putin always fall, I'm confident I'm on the right side of history.

Putin may be the one man that is able to save us from WWIII. Pretty soon, more countries are going to align themselves with Russia and our interventionist and meddling foreign policy will hopefully be muzzled.

Then real money and real markets can return.

 

[Burhead]

Putin may be the one man that is able to save us from WWIII. Pretty soon, more countries are going to align themselves with Russia and our interventionist and meddling foreign policy will hopefully be muzzled.

Then real money and real markets can return.

Putin is the one putting us on the course towards World War III by using 20th century blatant land grabs of sovereign countries.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Putin is the one putting us on the course towards World War III by using 20th century blatant land grabs of sovereign countries.

Let us assume that we ignore the last 200 years and assume that Crimea was never part of Russia and lets ignore the fact that the people of Crimea had a referendum to join Russia.


How is that one "land grab" incident going to start WWIII?

 

[volprof]

Good god in heaven.

 

[Burhead]

Let us assume that we ignore the last 200 years and assume that Crimea was never part of Russia and lets ignore the fact that the people of Crimea had a referendum to join Russia.


How is that one "land grab" incident going to start WWIII?

It won't stop with Crimea, now he wants Donbas, next it will be special war in the Baltic states.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

It won't stop with Crimea, now he wants Donbas, next it will be special war in the Baltic states.

What should be done when a country invades another and then incrementally goes across a region overthrowing leaders and putting in rulers that are friendly to their cause?

What should the consequences be for such a country?

 

[volprof]

What should be done when a country invades another and then incrementally goes across a region overthrowing leaders and putting in rulers that are friendly to their cause?

What should the consequences be for such a country?

Ok, sneaky Ras, we get it.

The difference is that, unlike Russia, the US has not actually taking over any territory since the previous turn of the century. While we were handing the Phillipines back, the Russians were annexing the Baltics with their good friend at the time, Adolf.

Neocolonialism, you say? Perhaps. I don't necessarily disagree with that. But, if you're going to hold that against us, then please hold that against your buddies in China, seeing as to how they've profited even more from the invasion of Iraq than America has.

 

[Pacer92]

Ok, sneaky Ras, we get it.

The difference is that, unlike Russia, the US has not actually taking over any territory since the previous turn of the century. While we were handing the Phillipines back, the Russians were annexing the Baltics with their good friend at the time, Adolf.

Neocolonialism, you say? Perhaps. I don't necessarily disagree with that. But, if you're going to hold that against us, then please hold that against your buddies in China, seeing as to how they've profited even more from the invasion of Iraq than America has.

Sure we have! Just in the disguise of NATO.

 

[volprof]

Sure we have! Just in the disguise of NATO.

I didn't disagree, did I? But you and Ras better start holding your Chinese buddies a lot more accountable. They've came out like bandits from the Iraq War. Didn't even have to expend their own men either.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Sure we have! Just in the disguise of NATO.

Exactly. We have military assets in Poland and The Baltics. The ultimate plan is to extend that to Georgia and Ukraine.

How is Russia supposed to respond when they are clearly encircling them and antagonizing them?

 

[myrobbins7]

U.S. Army Europe will soon dispatch a survey team to eastern Europe to scout locations for tanks and other military hardware as part of a broader effort to bolster the U.S. military presence in a region rattled by Russia’s intervention in Ukraine, the Army’s top commander in Europe said Friday.

“We are doing surveys here in the next few weeks up in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria to see if there is a place where perhaps some of that equipment could be stored there,” USAREUR chief Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges said during an interview with Stars and Stripes. “Maybe it’s a company, maybe it’s a whole battalion, we don’t know yet until we do the survey.”

Army looking to store tanks, equipment in Eastern Europe - Stripes

WTH? They should be on our southern boarder.

 

[volprof]

U.S. Army Europe will soon dispatch a survey team to eastern Europe to scout locations for tanks and other military hardware as part of a broader effort to bolster the U.S. military presence in a region rattled by Russia’s intervention in Ukraine, the Army’s top commander in Europe said Friday.

“We are doing surveys here in the next few weeks up in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria to see if there is a place where perhaps some of that equipment could be stored there,” USAREUR chief Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges said during an interview with Stars and Stripes. “Maybe it’s a company, maybe it’s a whole battalion, we don’t know yet until we do the survey.”

Army looking to store tanks, equipment in Eastern Europe - Stripes

WTH? They should be on our southern boarder.

I agree. I'm not so sure that those Mexicans coming across the border aren't actually Russian secret service operatives.

The sooner we decide to get serious about things and blow them away at the border, the better.

JMO.

 

[myrobbins7]

I agree. I'm not so sure that those Mexicans coming across the border aren't actually Russian secret service operatives.

The sooner we decide to get serious about things and blow them away at the border, the better.

JMO.

I prefer my tax dollars setting on our soil, not others. That's all.

 

[volprof]

I prefer my tax dollars setting on our soil, not others. That's all.

That's a fair enough point.

And, to be fair to mine, it's stated doctrine in Russian military academies to teach about American multi-nationalities and to encourage subversion that way.

If American mercenaries and troops are running around eastern Ukraine, according to one side of this debate, there's no reason to believe that Russian agents aren't coming across the southern border to do what they've learned in their academies.

Foundations of Geopolitics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[volprof]

Honestly, the kind of thinking my last post took makes my head hurt.

I can't imagine what it most be like to sincerely think that there's a sprite or a spook behind every nook, cranny, and corner.

That takes real effort to have to sustain that kind of conspiracy thinking. And it's very bad for digestion. I've got a bad case of heart burn at the moment, as it is.

As for now, I'll just choose to go with the simplest thinking, which is that history happens, often despite the intentions of nations.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Honestly, the kind of thinking my last post took makes my head hurt.

I can't imagine what it most be like to sincerely think that there's a sprite or a spook behind every nook, cranny, and corner.

That takes real effort to have to sustain that kind of conspiracy thinking. And it's very bad for digestion. I've got a bad case of heart burn at the moment, as it is.

As for now, I'll just choose to go with the simplest thinking, which is that history happens, often despite the intentions of nations.

Here's to hoping you get heartburn more often. Given you likes on nearly all your posts and have actually enjoyed reading them. No sarcasm.... Just kidding on the heartburn.

 

[volprof]

Here's to hoping you get heartburn more often. Given you likes on nearly all your posts and have actually enjoyed reading them. No sarcasm.... Just kidding on the heartburn.

82, that you?

Well, glad you enjoyed it. I doubt you and I will ever completely see eye to eye on every political issue broached on this forum, but I apologize for being such a butthead in the past. I will try to be more cordial in the future. I'm just a passionate guy that gets carried away with himself at times.

Carry on.

 

[82_VOL_83]

82, that you?

Well, glad you enjoyed it. I doubt you and I will ever completely see eye to eye on every political issue broached on this forum, but I apologize for being such a butthead in the past. I will try to be more cordial in the future. I'm just a passionate guy that gets carried away with himself at times.

Carry on.

Same here boss same here.

 

[red butler]

Ok, sneaky Ras, we get it.

The difference is that, unlike Russia, the US has not actually taking over any territory since the previous turn of the century. While we were handing the Phillipines back, the Russians were annexing the Baltics with their good friend at the time, Adolf.

Neocolonialism, you say? Perhaps. I don't necessarily disagree with that. But, if you're going to hold that against us, then please hold that against your buddies in China, seeing as to how they've profited even more from the invasion of Iraq than America has.

I don't see Western imperialism as invading other territories though. It's much much more complicated. Control of a country could be accomplished in a multitude of subtle ways. Maybe through currency manipulation in conjunction with something that seems as innocuous as an IMF loan that is offered to bail the country out. The IMF is notorious for getting countries in massive debt and placing conditions like forced privatization of any resources. The Wall Street types can then go in and buy up everything at bargain prices. With all income producing assets sold the people of the country have little hope of ever getting out of poverty.

If that doesn't work there's always the threat of sanctions; or maybe we fund a revolution like the contras. Ask yourself this. Why are some of the poorest countries in the world still poor, when they're sitting on rich natural resources?

 

[volprof]

I don't see Western imperialism as invading other territories though. It's much much more complicated. Control of a country could be accomplished in a multitude of subtle ways. Maybe through currency manipulation in conjunction with something that seems as innocuous as an IMF loan that is offered to bail the country out. The IMF is notorious for getting countries in massive debt and placing conditions like forced privatization of any resources. The Wall Street types can then go in and buy up everything at bargain prices. With all income producing assets sold the people of the country have little hope of ever getting out of poverty.

If that doesn't work there's always the threat of sanctions; or maybe we fund a revolution like the contras. Ask yourself this. Why are some of the poorest countries in the world still poor, when they're sitting on rich natural resources?

Right. I agree. And I've not said anything thus far to suggest I disagree.

Two things to amend your post, however:

1) Wall Street is not a nation. Wall Street is a frame of a mind and a certain approach to the world. There are just as many "Wall Street"ers per capita in Russia as there are here in America. In fact, Putin is one of them, despite his ridiculous and often nonsensical protestations.

2) What countries in this world that are loaded with natural resources are currently poor, besides Venezuela, which has been a Russian sheep and therefore has remained poor, thinking it better to fight the evil Americans than to provide living wages to its people?

 

[volprof]

And I suppose you could say the North African countries, which have no economic versatility whatsoever, and Iran, which is too hell bent on destroying Israel and the US as official parts of their national policy to realize what's best for their people, but other than that?

 

[red butler]

Right. I agree. And I've not said anything thus far to suggest I disagree.

Two things to amend your post, however:

1) Wall Street is not a nation. Wall Street is a frame of a mind and a certain approach to the world. There are just as many "Wall Street"ers per capita in Russia as there are here in America. In fact, Putin is one of them, despite his ridiculous and often nonsensical protestations.

2) What countries in this world that are loaded with natural resources are currently poor, besides Venezuela, which has been a Russian sheep and therefore has remained poor, thinking it better to fight the evil Americans than to provide living wages to its people?

I agree that Wall Street is not a nation, which is why I said earlier that I don't really consider it American foreign policy. I look at it through the lens that the Wall Street types own the politicians and have tremendous influence on foreign policy decisions.

As for poor countries, most of the worlds gold and diamonds are mined in some of the poorest countries in Africa. Many agricultural products come from Central America. General Smedley Butler wrote about his involvement in setting up banana republics for US fruit corp in his book "war is a racket".

Asian countries like Vietnam have a lot of resources we need like rubber. Heck, Michelin had a pretty substantial investment in rubber plantations over there up until the end of the war.