CalExit? Cali wants to secede

#126
#126
SergeantVol said:
More than likely but to what extent? I do not know. Regardless of Russian involvement (because it is not how the information was discovered but the content of the information), all countries attempt to meddle in each other's affairs. It's what we do. Do I think Trump is more amicable to Russian interests? Potentially. He didn't want to establish a no fly zone in Syria that almost certainly would have led to confrontation. I personally do not see what is the issue with improving relations with Russia. Countries do not have to become allies to improve relations. They have to negotiate sore spots to prevent conflict. No one wants to see Russia and the US duke it out. That is bad for the world. The solution is to SMARTLY find common ground and KNOW what to yield on. Do I think we will concede the fight in Ukraine? Absolutely not. Historically, we support democratically elected governments. This conflict will likely remain frozen for the next few decades. It is the nature of conflicts in eastern Europe (see Moldova). Can we barter better trade deals? Yes. Can we attempt joint ventures to sponsor natural resource exploration? Absolutely. We will not have joint military exercises. We will not trade military technologies.

Sorry for the long paragraph but there is so much to political reconciliation with a geopolitical foe. I do think there are a great many things to keep an eye on. Nothing concerning but issues of interest. Geopolitics after all is a big chess game.
Click to expand...

Good post.

To be contrary though, I just can't accept the idea that all Putin wants is better relations with the US. Does he want a US that is easier to deal with and one not as antagonistic to Russian aims as in the past? Certainly, but I think he still aims to subvert us along the way, no matter how good our relations. Because, like any Chekist worth his weight in borsch, he knows that a foe can change its mind at any moment or can likewise be using subterfuge.

I think, like a minority of geopolitical analysts, that Putin resolved some time ago to either destroy the US through subversion tactics (clearly couldn't do it in a war, which wouldn't be desirable even if he could destroy us through such means) characterized by "special warfare" or to at least put our domestic situation into so much chaos that we are effectively removed from geopolitics.

I think he resolved this roughly 5-8 years ago, the result of some sort of combination of anger over the fall of the Soviet Union, US triumphalism as the lone superpower, NATO expansion to Russia's borders, and perceived American meddling in color revolutions in the post-Soviet space. I think that he and his security service allies determined that the only way for Russia forward was to rid itself of this American threat, and if it served vengeance on silver platter, then all the better. Men like Putin never forget a wrong, and they never forgive it.

There's actually a former member of Putin's inner circle that claims he was privy to Kremlin meetings regarding the "Third World War," which resolved to do the very things I just mentioned through hybrid warfare, especially through cyber warfare tactics, hacking, and disinformation. I tend to trust such men when they so often end up dead.
 
#127
#127
volprof said:
Good post.

To be contrary though, I just can't accept the idea that all Putin wants is better relations with the US. Does he want a US that is easier to deal with and one not as antagonistic to Russian aims as in the past? Certainly, but I think he still aims to subvert us along the way, no matter how good our relations. Because, like any Chekist worth his weight in borsch, he knows that a foe can change its mind at any moment or can likewise be using subterfuge.

I think, like a minority of geopolitical analysts, that Putin resolved some time ago to either destroy the US through subversion tactics (clearly couldn't do it in a war, which wouldn't be desirable even if he could destroy us through such means) characterized by "special warfare" or to at least put our domestic situation into so much chaos that we are effectively removed from geopolitics.

I think he resolved this roughly 5-8 years ago, the result of some sort of combination of anger over the fall of the Soviet Union, US triumphalism as the lone superpower, NATO expansion to Russia's borders, and perceived American meddling in color revolutions in the post-Soviet space. I think that he and his security service allies determined that the only way for Russia forward was to rid itself of this American threat, and if it served vengeance on silver platter, then all the better. Men like Putin never forget a wrong, and they never forgive it.

There's actually a former member of Putin's inner circle that claims he was privy to Kremlin meetings regarding the "Third World War," which resolved to do the very things I just mentioned through hybrid warfare, especially through cyber warfare tactics, hacking, and disinformation. I tend to trust such men when they so often end up dead.
Click to expand...

Then he should have aided and abetted Barry 2.0 instead of Trump. There has been a ***** in office for 8 years, may as well have made it at least 4 more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#129
#129
volprof said:
Good post.

To be contrary though, I just can't accept the idea that all Putin wants is better relations with the US. Does he want a US that is easier to deal with and one not as antagonistic to Russian aims as in the past? Certainly, but I think he still aims to subvert us along the way, no matter how good our relations. Because, like any Chekist worth his weight in borsch, he knows that a foe can change its mind at any moment or can likewise be using subterfuge.

I think, like a minority of geopolitical analysts, that Putin resolved some time ago to either destroy the US through subversion tactics (clearly couldn't do it in a war, which wouldn't be desirable even if he could destroy us through such means) characterized by "special warfare" or to at least put our domestic situation into so much chaos that we are effectively removed from geopolitics.

I think he resolved this roughly 5-8 years ago, the result of some sort of combination of anger over the fall of the Soviet Union, US triumphalism as the lone superpower, NATO expansion to Russia's borders, and perceived American meddling in color revolutions in the post-Soviet space. I think that he and his security service allies determined that the only way for Russia forward was to rid itself of this American threat, and if it served vengeance on silver platter, then all the better. Men like Putin never forget a wrong, and they never forgive it.

There's actually a former member of Putin's inner circle that claims he was privy to Kremlin meetings regarding the "Third World War," which resolved to do the very things I just mentioned through hybrid warfare, especially through cyber warfare tactics, hacking, and disinformation. I tend to trust such men when they so often end up dead.
Click to expand...

That's every country's aim. They want to shape the international geopolitical environment. We utilize the same tactics. As of right now, we are a geopolitical rival.

I don't think Putin is sore about the fall of the USSR. Their economy was collapsing due to government interference. Their oligarchal system is more beneficial to him. Putin is, however, a neoczarist. He idiolizes the Russian empire. We wants Russia to be the only power in Eurasia with no American influence. If America is more amicable to not putting up resistance, I think you would see a larger decrease in rhetoric and cyber based attacks. Which, fwiw, China carries out more cyber attacks than anyone.
 
#130
#130
SergeantVol said:
That's every country's aim. They want to shape the international geopolitical environment. We utilize the same tactics. As of right now, we are a geopolitical rival.

I don't think Putin is sore about the fall of the USSR. Their economy was collapsing due to government interference. Their oligarchal system is more beneficial to him. Putin is, however, a neoczarist. He idiolizes the Russian empire. We wants Russia to be the only power in Eurasia with no American influence. If America is more amicable to not putting up resistance, I think you would see a larger decrease in rhetoric and cyber based attacks. Which, fwiw, China carries out more cyber attacks than anyone.
Click to expand...

Putin is primarily concerned about making Putin and his closest allies money. Everything else is just background noise, so to speak.

Even so, I think he takes certain things personal. If a more friendly, responsive America can make him and his more money, then he'll certainly listen, but the KGB man in him always knows that such relationships can change overnight and, as such, measures must always be in place to negate the negative consequences of such vicissitudes.
 
#132
#132
volprof said:
Putin is primarily concerned about making Putin and his closest allies money. Everything else is just background noise, so to speak.

Even so, I think he takes certain things personal. If a more friendly, responsive America can make him and his more money, then he'll certainly listen, but the KGB man in him always knows that such relationships can change overnight and, as such, measures must always be in place to negate the negative consequences of such vicissitudes.
Click to expand...

Russia is an oligarchy. Putin is very savy at navigating politics and utilizing information operations to his benefit. I don't think he would be bold enough to take his normal actions against political opponents and do the same to a leader of a world power. Smear campaign, yes. Assassination, no.
 
#133
#133
Amazing how quickly the forum forgets about Texas' threatened secession after Obama was elected.
 
#134
#134
jvol1 said:
Amazing how quickly the forum forgets about Texas' threatened secession after Obama was elected.
Click to expand...

Texas secession is not a new concept. They have been threatening long before Obama became president and will continue to do so after Obama is gone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#138
#138
Let's hope Mexifornia is successful. Maybe they will integrate their institutions with Mexico.

We can build a second Wall that keeps the Mexifornians out of America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#139
#139
Franklin Pierce said:
Let's hope Mexifornia is successful. Maybe they will integrate their institutions with Mexico.

We can build a second Wall that keeps the Mexifornians out of America.
Click to expand...

Yeah, spending huge amounts of money to make gestures i like is awesome!

If we're going to double the length of the wall, why not go big and do Canada too? Can't wait until there is no terrorism, no immigrants, and everybody is employed doing the work of an unskilled child. 'murica!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#143
#143
I love how self-proclaimed American nationalists who voted for a fake American nationalist openly support another state's secession because of their fee fees.

Here's a newsflash for you, an American nationalist - a real American nationalist - does not support the secession of any state. It's kind of like such an individual is, you know, a nationalist.
 
#145
#145
volprof said:
I love how self-proclaimed American nationalists who voted for a fake American nationalist openly support another state's secession because of their fee fees.

Here's a newsflash for you, an American nationalist - a real American nationalist - does not support the secession of any state. It's kind of like such an individual is, you know, a nationalist.
Click to expand...

I support the right of secession for states, but I am not an American nationalist. I am a "Tennessean nationalist" and a "Regional Nationalist" in that I believe individual states and similiar regions would be better at governing for their people as separate or more loosely affiliated entities than our Frankenstein of a federal nation.

I say let California, Oregon, and Washington go. Texas, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#146
#146
Arent these the same type of people that hold a grudge against the South for actually seceding? I believe many on this board called it "being traitors" or some other nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#148
#148
Let them secede. That state could take care of itself. It has a multibillion dollar enertainment industry and a lot of vineyards. I'm sure they will be ok!

However they do lose all of the USA military so they would have to create their own defense forces. I suggest the name Peoples Purple Slushy Liberal Fight Brigade.

Then after a few Escape from LA type years we can invade California and annihilate the enemy and reclaim our lands.

Win win!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#150
#150
FLVOL_79 said:
Let them secede. That state could take care of itself. It has a multibillion dollar enertainment industry and a lot of vineyards. I'm sure they will be ok!

However they do lose all of the USA military so they would have to create their own defense forces. I suggest the name Peoples Purple Slushy Liberal Fight Brigade.

Then after a few Escape from LA type years we can invade California and annihilate the enemy and reclaim our lands.

Win win!
Click to expand...

This \/
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4070.jpg
    IMG_4070.jpg
    53.5 KB · Views: 1
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top