- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 10/18/22 at 11:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
There was no request for NATO to disavow their membership, i.e., their protection under a nuclear umbrella and defense treaty would remain.
But there was a request, directly in Article 5 of the proposed treaty, which stated
quote:
'The Parties shall refrain from deploying their armed forces and armaments, including in the framework of international organizations, military alliances or coalitions, in the areas where such deployment could be perceived by the other Party as a threat to its national security, with the exception of such deployment within the national territories of the Parties.'
What is important here is that first what is at issue is perception and not reality. Second, the language here is so general that it means nothing. Are NATO exercises in Poland a threat to Russia because they perceive them to be? The perception threshold is such a deeply stupid standard that I'm amazed we have to take it seriously. Here Russia is attempting to dictate the politics of an organization of which it is not a member. It is straight up a non-starter for any serious negotiations.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:00 pm to WeeWee
quote:
To be so pro-Russian, you are really wanting this Zap offensive to happen. I highly doubt that you truly believe that Russia and it’s T62s will stop the Ukrainians. So what gives? Are you wanting to lure the Ukrainians into a trap where Russia uses a tactical nuke or do you think that Russia will use a Ukrainian offensive as cover for the Russians to cause a meltdown at the ZNPP?
Yeah, he's said this several times. I don't get it.
But I agree with him that the likelihood of a powerful Ukrainian offensive SE of Zaporizhzhia is high. It makes too much sense. But maybe Ukraine is first waiting for the Russian forces at Kherson to collapse from undersupply.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:01 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Then WWIII is inevitable. How fricking stupid!
Because Russia wants it to happen, just like you said. Russia cannot dictate the security terms of other parties, regardless of what you think the effects are going to be. That isn't the way international politics works. If Russia wants to dictate those terms, they have to fight. Given their performance in Ukraine, and the structural issues in Russia with respect to development and demographics, I'm 100% that Russia will lose any escalation so thoroughly that the Russian elite should perhaps take a moment and think about their own self-preservation.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:02 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
NATO plans to provide Ukraine with "hundreds" of active interference stations to boost country's capabilities of countering drones in the near future, NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg announced at the Koerber Stiftung’s Annual Berlin Foreign Policy Forum.
LINK
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:04 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
quote:
Russia has a long history of unjustly invading and interfering in NATO countries.
First off, with regard to our interference in Russia, that's false of course.
Regarding Russia, you mean interference prior to NATO memberships?
This isn't difficult. Russia has a long history of invading, terrorizing, colonizing, countries like Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Finland, etc. When those countries band together in mutual defense in direct response to that aggression, Russia turning around and claiming it's a threat to them is bullshite. It's a paper thin pretext for Russia's nakedly imperialist ambitions.
NATO nations have never done anything close to resembling an invasion of Russia, so your Israel / Arab coalition analogy is crap.
This post was edited on 10/18/22 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:13 pm to CitizenK
quote:
Natural gas prices continue to drop in Europe.
Better put OML on suicide watch.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:14 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
Well political has finally made this unreadable
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:15 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:Yet, all is relative
At some point we have to listen to the people most experienced with Russia and not people who take releases from the Kremlin without a grain of salt.
quote:
Americans can spot election meddling because they’ve been doing it for years
By Owen Jones
5 Jan 2017
For the US is a world leader in the field of intervening in the internal affairs of other countries. The alleged interference is far more extensive than hacking into emails belonging to unfavoured political parties. According to research by political scientist Dov Levin, the US and the USSR/Russia together intervened no less than 117 times in foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, or “one out of every nine competitive, national-level executive elections”.
As soon as Bill Clinton assumed the White House in 1993, his experts discussed “formulating a policy of American tutelage”, including unabashed partisan support for President Boris Yeltsin. “Political missionaries and evangelists, usually called ‘advisers’, spread across Russia in the early and mid-1990s,” notes Cohen: many were funded by the US government. Zbigniew Brzezinski, the former national security adviser, talked of Russia “increasingly passing into de facto western receivership”.
The results were, to put it mildly, disastrous. Between 1990 and 1994, life expectancy for Russian men and women fell from 64 and 74 years respectively to 58 and 71 years. The surge in mortality was “beyond the peacetime experience of industrialised countries”. While it was boom time for the new oligarchs, poverty and unemployment surged; prices were hiked dramatically; communities were devastated by deindustrialisation; and social protections were stripped away.
To the horror of the west, Yeltsin’s popularity nosedived to the point where a communist triumph in the 1996 presidential elections could not be ruled out. Yeltsin turned to the oligarchs, using their vast resources to run an unscrupulous campaign. As Leonid Bershidsky puts it, it was “a momentous event that undermined a fragile democracy and led to the emergence of Vladimir Putin’s dictatorial regime”. It is even alleged that, in 2011, Putin’s key ally – then-president Dmitry Medvedev – privately suggested the election was rigged. In the run-up to the election, Russia was granted a huge US-backed IMF loan that – as the New York Times noted at the time – was “expected to be helpful to President Boris N Yeltsin in the presidential election”.
Yeltsin relied on US political strategists – including a former aide to Bill Clinton – who had a direct line back to the White House. When Yeltsin eventually won, “Yanks to the rescue: The secret story of how American advisers helped Yeltsin win”.
Without the chaos and deprivations of the US-backed Yeltsin era, Putinism would surely not have established itself. But it’s not just Russia by any means, for the record of US intervention in the internal affairs of foreign democracies is extensive.
LINK
quote:
Putin says U.S. stoked Russian protests
By Steve Gutterman, Gleb Bryanski
December 8, 2011
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Prime Minister Vladimir Putin accused the United States on Thursday of stirring up protests against his 12-year rule and said foreign countries were spending hundreds of millions of dollars to influence Russian elections.
In his first public remarks about daily demonstrations over allegations that Sunday’s election was slanted to favour his ruling party, Putin said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had encouraged “mercenary” Kremlin foes by criticizing the vote.
“She set the tone for some opposition activists, gave them a signal, they heard this signal and started active work,” Putin told supporters as he laid out plans for his campaign to return to the presidency in a March election.
Invoking Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution and the violent downfall of governments in Kyrgyzstan -- another fellow former Soviet republic where Moscow has suggested street protesters had U.S. support -- he said Western nations were spending heavily to foment political change in Russia.
“Pouring foreign money into electoral processes is particularly unacceptable,” said Putin. “Hundreds of millions are being invested in this work. We need to work out forms of protection of our sovereignty, defense against interference from outside.”
LINK
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:17 pm to NC_Tigah
Muh whataboutism. Next talking point please.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:17 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
the Russian elite should perhaps take a moment and think about their own self-preservation.
In WWIII, there is no self-preservation.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:17 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
I'm 100% that Russia will lose any escalation so thoroughly that the Russian elite should perhaps take a moment and think about their own self-preservation.
This is how it ends
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:20 pm to REG861
quote:
Russia has a long history of invading, terrorizing, colonizing, countries like Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Finland, etc.
quote:Yikes!!
nations have never done anything close to resembling an invasion of Russia
Look up the history of France and Germany.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:21 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:I cant wait for the US to just start threatening to start ww3 over every single geo political thing that doesnt go our way! The russians are geniuses!
Then WWIII is inevitable.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:28 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Yet, all is relative
Again, this is a flip answer that doesn't address the claims of the Baltic states, who have been warning NATO at-large about Russia before the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008. You seem to take it as a personal insult when I tell you that Russian demands are just not the way international relations works or that the US is never going to agree to them, let alone negotiate them. You realize I'm just stating what those realities are? They are not expressions for personal preference.
Regardless, why were the Baltic states, as well as Poland, warning NATO about Russia before 2008? In other words, we have to take Russian security threats so seriously that we have to upend the entire framework of NATO, in practice, but why aren't we giving equal weight to the threats posed by Russia to those states?
And the choices in geopolitics is either you force others to live by rules you make but do not necessarily follow those rules when it suits you, like the US does, or have others force you to live by their rules. The geopolitical world is anarchic and cutthroat. There is no such thing as fairness. There is only one maxim. That the US does something regularly that it then subsequently claims Russia also does and also shouldn't do isn't evidence of anything other than the cutthroat nature of geopolitics, nor is it evidence that the US should do those things. In a perfect world, no country should meddle in the affairs of another. But we don't live in a perfect world.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:29 pm to NC_Tigah
yea i dont get the bullshite about "russia interferred with our election bullshite"
its a dumbass take
which ironically.....most of your takes are dumbass takes too. so worried about ww3 that you essentially are saying russia can do whatever it wants and perceive whatever it feels like as a threat and we should bow to them.
yea frick all that.
its a dumbass take
which ironically.....most of your takes are dumbass takes too. so worried about ww3 that you essentially are saying russia can do whatever it wants and perceive whatever it feels like as a threat and we should bow to them.
yea frick all that.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:31 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Yikes!!
Look up the history of France and Germany.
Yes, the Russians should look to the recent history of Germany and France to see how economic integration completely obliterates geopolitical flashpoints. If they want peace, then there is a path forward. The way forward isn't by insisting this is the 17th century, and that you need a buffer state for some reason or that the threat of invasion from the European Plain is so great that it justifies offensive action as defensive action.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:33 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
In WWIII, there is no self-preservation.
Lol. Let's talk about reality for once. The Russians have shown absolutely nothing that they could organize a worldwide response on the scale of WWII. The Russian elites self-interest drives their viewpoint about The Heartland Theory. Why wouldn't their self-interest also focus on their own self-preservation is interesting. They must be a magnanimous group.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:48 pm to crazy4lsu
Same goes for Britain and France in the 100 years leading up to the First World War.
Posted on 10/18/22 at 12:53 pm to TBoy
quote:I really hope we hear about Ukraine liberating Kherson soon. It would be such a key point in the war and it would silence the Putin fluffers for a while.
An endless stream of Russian talking points.
Page 2023 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News