Is Russia Going to Invade Ukraine? Should America care if they do?
I guess in this situation I do have a bias. I'm Ukrainian. I have relatives in Ukraine. I've been to Ukraine more than once. I have a bias, but I may also have a bit more insight into the situation.
Russa invaded Ukraine in 2014. The propaganda will say it was Ukrainian separatists, it was those people supported, funded, and assisted with soldiers by Russia. That conflict has not ended. Ukraine has lost over 14,000 soldiers and over 3,000 civilians.
When obama was President Russia annexed Crimea. obama sent blankets, food and other things. This did not help Ukrainians fight the Russians. I can tell you in Ukraine there was a feeling that President Donald Trump supported Ukraine. He provided Ukraine with the latest surface to air rockets as well as the most advanced tank destroying weapons and more. Russia knew President Doanld Trump supported Ukraine. They knew it was not wise to attack Ukraine with Donald Trump as president.
Now biden is viewed around the world as an old, weak and feeble leader. Russia has no fear or respect for biden. He is a joke to them. biden lack of actions have emboldened Russia and their goal to take over Ukraine. biden has made the situation in Eastern Europe very volatile.
I have ties to Ukraine, but I am an American and former soldier. I don't think the United States should get involved unless it directly impacts our country. War is a horrible thing. It would hurt me deeply to think of our soldiers going over there to fight. Every possible option must first be exhausted.
I do worry, because if there is not resistance to Russia now, and they do take over the Ukraine, what's next? I don't think they will stop. To not make a stand now could have very serious consequences in the future. I will tell you once Russia starts, they won't stop.
"Ukraine tension: President Zelensky hits back at Biden comments"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60072502Here is a link to the transcript of the press conference Biden gave yesterday --- Jan 19. I think it important to read the full question and his answer to give total context to what Biden said. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo … ference-6/
Q. " Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Your top foreign policy advisors have warned that Russia is now ready to attack Ukraine. But there’s still little unity among European allies about what a package of sanctions against Moscow would look like. If the U.S. and NATO aren’t willing to put troops on the line to defend Ukraine and American allies can’t agree on a sanctions package, hasn’t the U.S. and the West lost nearly all of its leverage over Vladimir Putin?
And given how ineffective sanctions have been in deterring Putin in the past, why should the threat of new sanctions give him pause?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, because he’s never seen sanctions like the ones I promised will be imposed if he moves, number one.
Number two, we’re in a situation where Vladimir Putin is about to — we’ve had very frank discussions, Vladimir Putin and I. And the idea that NATO is not going to be united, I don’t buy. I’ve spoken to every major NATO leader. We’ve had the NATO-Russian summit. We’ve had other — the OSCE has met, et cetera.
And so, I think what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do, et cetera.
But if they actually do what they’re capable of doing with the forces amassed on the border, it is going to be a disaster for Russia if they further ingra- — invade Ukraine, and that our allies and partners are ready to impose severe costs and significant harm on Russia and the Russian economy.
And, you know, we’re going to fortify our NATO Allies, I told him, on the eastern flank — if, in fact, he does invade. We’re going to — I’ve already shipped over $600 million worth of sophisticated equipment, defensive equipment to the Ukrainians.
The cost of going into Ukraine, in terms of physical loss of life, for the Russians, they’ll — they’ll be able to prevail over time, but it’s going to be heavy, it’s going to be real, and it’s going to be consequential.
In addition to that, Putin has — you know, has a stark choice: He — either de-escalation or diplomacy; confrontation or the consequences.
And, look, I think you’re going to see — for example, everybody talks about how Russia has control over the energy supply that Europe absorbs. Well, guess what? That — that money that they earn from that makes about 45 percent of the economy. I don’t see that as a one-way street. They go ahead and cut it off — it’s like my mother used to say: “You bite your nose off to spite your face.” It’s not like they have all these wonderful choices out there.
I spoke with the Prime Minister of Finland. And, you know, we’re talking about concern on the part of Finland and Sweden about what Russia is doing. The last thing that Russia needs is Finland deciding to change its status. They didn’t say they’re going to do that, but they’re talking about what, in fact, is going on and how outrageous Russia is being.
We’re finding ourselves in a position where I believe you will see that there’ll be severe economic consequences. For example, anything that involves dollar denominations, if they make — if they invade, they’re going to pay; they’re not going — their banks will not be able to deal in dollars.
So there’s — a lot is going to happen.
But here’s the thing: My conversation with Putin — and we’ve been — how can we say it? We have no problem understanding one another. He has no problem understanding me, nor me him. And the direct conversations where I pointed out — I said, “You know, you’ve occupied, before, other countries. But the price has been extremely high. How long? You can go in and, over time, at great loss and economic loss, go in and occupy Ukraine. But how many years? One? Three? Five? Ten? What is that going to take? What toll does that take?” It’s real. It’s consequential.
So, this is not all just a cakewalk for Russia.
Militarily, they have overwhelming superiority, and on — as it relates to Ukraine. But they’ll pay a stiff price — immediately, near term, medium-term, and long term — if they do it."
It seems clear to me Biden at this point is of the mind to only step in if Russia launches a large take over of Ukraine. Hey, he is vague about what he would consider a "minor incursion?" This is a politician's way of saying --- I don't know what to do in my view.
I am never for war, but I am also not one that cares to turn the other way if innocent people are being killed due to this kind of waring aggression.
I would hope Biden would go the way of Trump, and aid with weaponry for Ukraine to fight back with state-of-the-art weapons. Hey, did not we know this would be coming? In my view, Biden is seen as a weak man that does not have the ability to make strong sound dessions."But Mr Zelensky tweeted: "There are no minor incursions. Just as there are no minor casualties and little grief from the loss of loved ones."
biden's "minor incursion" comment sent shock waves in Ukraine. I know how they think in that part of the world. What biden said will be interpreted by the Russians as a green light to do what they want in Ukraine. biden and his handlers have NO idea how badly they are really messing this up.
The western European countries are like they have always been, they talk a lot. Too much. Russia doesn't worry about them. Russians believe the western Europeans don't have the courage to engage with Russia. They may be right.I would hope Biden would go the way of Trump, and aid with weaponry for Ukraine to fight back with state-of-the-art weapons. Hey, did not we know this would be coming? In my view, Biden is seen as a weak man that does not have the ability to make strong sound dessions.
A State Department spokesperson confirmed to The Hill that the agency has authorized third-party transfers for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to send “U.S. origin equipment from their inventories for use by Ukraine.”
“The United States and its allies and partners are standing together to expedite security assistance to Ukraine,” the spokesperson said. “We are in close touch with our Ukrainian partners and our NATO Allies on this and are utilizing all available security cooperation tools to help Ukraine bolster its defenses in the face of growing Russian aggression.”
The U.S. has invested more than $2.7 billion in military assistance to Ukraine under the authority of the State Department and Department of Defense since 2014, when Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula.
In the last year alone, Washington has committed $650 million in defense equipment and related services to Ukraine, the spokesperson said, more than at any other point since 2014.
On top of this funding, the U.S. has expedited up to $60 million in lethal and nonlethal equipment from existing Pentagon stocks since August and in December authorized up to $200 million in additional security assistance to Ukraine.This is great news. As I said, I am never for war, but I am also not one that cares to turn the other way if innocent people are being killed due to this kind of waring aggression.
I would hope Biden would go the way of Trump, and aid with weaponry for Ukraine to fight back with state-of-the-art weapons. Looks like Biden came through, and with good speed.
Exactly, Biden is the laughing stock of the world. He is beyond inept.
For once I agree with you, we should arm the Ukrainians and support them up to and not including sending in troops. An international effort if agreed to by NATO may be more appropriate for addressing this crisis.
It is the same principle that may well apply to Taiwan and one we would well employ if any of these major powers were messing around in our region of influence.Cred,
I spoke with a guy who is for a war with Russia. I told him to come down to the VA with me to the residential section. I can introduce him to some fellow soldiers who have lost limbs, eyesight, have partial plastic skulls because part of theirs was blown away. He can look at all the bullet scars and more. THEN talk to me about sending out troops to war. I go down to the VA regularly, and I don't think people see this enough to understand the toll war takes on those who fight them.I see Putin as having a direct hatred toward the US and wishes to undermine its power and influence worldwide. Did he not say, that the dissolution of the forme r Soviet Union was the worst thing that happened. Putin is KGB and beyond ruthless. The comment that we underestimate him applies to the current administration as well as the last one. And I reiterate, that it is best to stay out of the sph res of influence belonging to other powers as we are not prepared to wage war on Russia in their own backyard.
I think your "sphere of influence" thought is right. And, as I discovered so do a lot of other rational and knowledgable sounding "experts and scholars."
GAYes, and that goes for China in relation to Taiwan as well, no other option is really possible.
We certainly did not like the idea of the Soviet Union moving nuclear warheads 90 miles from our shores in 1962.Although I sympathize, and mostly agree with, the sentiment, does that not leave Russia almost completely free to rebuild the USSR through simple invasion?
Certainly European nations are not going to stop it....does that not leave Russia almost completely free to rebuild the USSR through simple invasion? ...
Having family and business ties to Russia, i would disagree. I don´t think the objective of Russia is to rebuild the USSR. All in Russia are fully aware of the big nationality problems in former USSR. It is not a pure coincidence that countries were shaped after the collapse to their respective nationalities. And as the name USSR says, it was a union of republics. And this union needed strong efforts to keep it together. Why waste power and exhaust on this issue?
The internal problems in Russia of corruption and powerplay between central government, oligarchs and regional administrations prevent from having appetite for extending territory.
This does not prevent Putin from playing political chess on a grandmaster level. Actually he needs this skill to prevail domestically in Russia´s lions den.I agree with what you are saying. But that does not mean that Russia will not do exactly what Iraq did, or what they are poised to do in the Ukraine; walk over smaller countries, re-instituting them into the Republic.
It may not be in Russia's best interests, at least from our point of view, but that does not mean it won't happen.
Chris57 has a good answer to your question. I agree with him that this isn't really a matter of containing Russia to prevent expansion.
GA
Following the news on Ukraine crisis over here in Germany a new development can be seen:
Apparently the US administration was on tour in Europe last week to convince governments of the Russian threat to Ukraine. This seemed to have been a total failure. None of France, Italy, UK, Germany was convinced by the "truckload" of evidence that the Americans had brought with them.
Even more: When it became apparent that German government was not in line, chancelor Scholz was invited to Biden on short notice. Scholz declined. They then agreed on meeting sometime later in February.
https://www.politico.eu/article/white-h … en-invite/
Even more: Part of proposed sanctions on Russia is the exclusion from SWIFT international banking protocol. But the main trading currency (including Russia´s foreign currency reserve) is Euro, not USD. Europe will not support thes SWIFT sanctions so the USA will stand alone.
May be it is a better idea for the USA to stay out of these quarrels. Russia only wants NATO to stay out of Ukraine, that is all.If history is any type of lesson, Europeans are not good judges on the behavior of dictators. If Ukraine falls, what will an emboldened Putin do to western Europe?
Poland was the first country to fall to Hitler. History teaches us that if he had met any resistance from western Europe, he would have left. World War II may not have happened.
I tell often think about the quote from England's George Santanya that goes "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."We don't have to ignore Putin to the extent Western Europe once appeased Hitler's aggression. Any attack on a NATO member state would be grounds to circle the wagons against him, as now he is attempting to play outside of his own playground. Is he prepared to take on the "West" in its totality?
History only repeats itself if circumstances are the same.
What does a prospering Europe of today have to do with struggling economies in the aftermath of the great depression? What does isolationist USA of the 1930ties have to do with global interests of today? Is there a Hitler-Stalin pact or equivalent?
To look at history is not a good advice. History raises sentiments, collective memories, some feelings in your stomach, moral justifications in the aftermath. But history does not help to navigate in todays situation.
As German advisor Egon Bahr (our equivalent to Henry Kissinger or alike) once said: There are only interests in politics, no morals, no sentiments. If someone starts talking about history and morals, you should leave the room on the double.
By the way, if history was the measuring bar: where did Crimea belong to in the 1930ties?I am not disagreeing with you on your point Chris.
It's not 1939
Hitler had ideas of continental scale conquests, I think Putin just wants the West and NATO out of his backyard.
Today, there is a militarily armed NATO, and not the weak League of Nations of the 1930s.
This total war stuff does not play well in the nuclear era. That little impediment did not exist in 1939. Based on that, all previous assumptions are out the window.
For these reasons, Putin does not rise to a Hitler level world crisis.
I have noted Soviet control of the Crimea during the 30s.You do realize the Soviet Union controlled many things during the 1930s.
This includes the Baltic nations of Latvia, Estonia and Belarus. Poland, Lithuania and others.
What does it matter what the Soviet's controlled during the 1930s?Mike, you are right ... What does it matter what the Soviet's controlled during the 1930s? ...
I brought this into discussion as an example the looking at history doesn´t get us anywhere. It is only important what circumstances, objectives are there today and what means are possibly used to achieve the goals.Exactly, Ukraine endured a particularly brutal Soviet regime, especially in the 1930s. There is a Ukrainian fear & hatred of the Soviet regime. Putin has resurrected these hatreds & fears.
One important thing to remember is military history.
Many times, in history leaders have tested the resolve of other countries to see if they could easily achieve their goals.
Germany did this in the 1930s. Other militaries have done similar things throughout time.
Putin could be doing the exact same thing.
I hope Putin is sitting back and laughing saying how he has made NATO and Ukraine so upset by moving some troops around. Maybe doing just this will be welcomed in Russia. I hope it is something viewed as a Russian success. A way Russians can make the west dance like puppets. I hope this is all that comes of what is occurring.
I don't know how the Russian people will react to the significant loss of life that would occur between the Russian and Ukrainian militaries.
The loss of life could be something he struggles to sell to the people in his country.Putin is not the type to be concerned with how the Russian people will react. There are no polls that he has to pay attention to.
Putin may be in error if he tests the West's resolve and crosses a line that may be one of no return. He will keep his matters regional and not invite outside intervention."There are no polls that he has to pay attention to"
I would have to disagree with that one. The public sentiment does have a strong influence over the Russian government. The Levada Center is a Russian independent, nongovernmental polling and sociological research organization.
"According to a poll by the independent Levada Center published last month, almost 40 percent of Russians see war as either probable or certain. Almost the same number, 38 percent, consider a war between the two countries unlikely, and another 15 percent completely rule out the possibility. That means, in effect, that a majority of Russians are psychologically unprepared for war.
Which is one reason escalation of the conflict with Ukraine could be a tough sell for many Russians.
“In an urbanized and modernized society, there are not that many families who are willing to send their boys to a real war,” Andrei Kolesnikov, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Moscow Center think tank, told me.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ … war-526967
Nobody should ever underestimate Putin or anything he could do. People in the Ukraine are nervous, but I wouldn't say scared. The ones I spoke with believe a war can and should be avoided. I don't think the Russian people, or the people of Ukraine want this.Mike, i agree with your assertion on Russian sentiments.
As i wrote earlier in this discussion: There is not much from Ukraine in economy and natural resources that Russia doesn´t have.
So yes, ... the conflict with Ukraine could be a tough sell for many Russians ...
This is different today than it was in 2014. When Russia annected Crimea and faced criticism, some of my Russian friends, grown, sober men got agitated and said something silly like " if i was younger, i would join the fight for our country". Again, this is different today.Yes, the annexed Crimea without a fight. It was easy for them.
Do you know in Ukraine Crimea was always referred to as "The autonomous area" They were part of Ukraine, but not really a state within the Ukraine.
Many people in Ukraine found the annexation of Crimea disturbing, but not really all that upsetting.
Of course, Putin isn't concerned. He is a 21st century version of Josef Stalin. He is the ultimate totalitarian.
For interest I read a scathing opinion article on Putin you may like from the Guardian. I found it informative for me to get more insight. Yet, it leads back to my question way back, "Why?" Like you shared above it is history and Putin basically is egotistical scoundrel the way I see now.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … GTUS_emailThere is only one part in the opinion piece that holds thruth: Putin is small.
I should know. One of the people on the photo is me.
To call him rogue is way off track. He is simply thinking ahead further than most others do. And with thinking ahead the recent US administrations didn´t and don´t earn much merit.Thanks for the input! I must share I was being flippant calling him an egotistical scoundrel as a reaction to the opinion piece. However, I do think with a sifter there are truths discovered within the article. Yet I am unarmed compared to your knowledge of current affairs in Europe as well factors such as history, economics, and etc. I appreciate your perspective while am learning.
I think if you have followed my previous posts informed by your two videos presented and posts I am in agreement there is somewhat of a simple solution he seeks - Keep NATO off my doorstep. As I see it he sees that as threat to his sovereignty and liberty. (He and His being Russia) Is that the answer to my ongoing question, "Why?" Will that put and end to current situation and he would withdraw his troops. What position will the Ukraine take if that is so?
May I respectfully ask, do you see more threat from the U.S. than with Russia? That is what I gather. If that is so, does that reflect European thought at this time as well?tsmog,
to answer your question directly: I don´t see a threat from Russia and also not from the USA.
But what is a threat? Is it power and influence enforced by military action and superiority? Or by economic influence? Or by cultural influence?
The USA is a cultural threat. Way too many Hollywood movies :-)
Russia is a resource threat. We don´t have any natural resources in central Europe and our economies run on turning natural resources into cars, lawn mowers, medical equipment, chemicals, ..
The USA is running NATO, us in Europe being part of NATO, so no immediate threat. However if the USA decides to run ahead us smaller allies may have to follow suit. I would call this a secondary threat.
After WWII the USA accounted for more than 60% of world GDP. This is now down to a little over 20%. While still a big boy on the block, the USA lost its ability to control the streets. (This Ukraine conflict being one of the "streets"). The USA is economically very vulnerable, because a lot of its GDP is wasted on high military spending and more than 5% of annual GDP are used to import products.
The real threat of the future will be China. But China will not attack with a sword. China will use economic and organisational superiority and impose their will on much of our planet. We see this already unfolding in Africa.
Future wars will not be fought with military but with economic power, me think.Thanks again for the background info giving food for thought. That leads to another thought of inquiry regard Ukraine and Russia. Does Russia only see it as a threat seen with NATO. In other words it is militarily and cultural forces at play.
Or, economically is their some value the Ukraine has they want as well? Are there any natural resources with that much value? That is why I was questioning why earlier. In other words is it only intangible values at stake? Otherwise wouldn't it just be handled through trade?I am not too firm on the distribution of productivity and wealth in Ukraine. But i have the impression that most of natural resources are in the Donbas region and most of the industrial backbone is more to the south along the river Dnjepr. The north western part of Ukraine with very nationalistic sentiments is not interesting economically.
In general the Ukraine holds nothing of value that Russia doesn´t have. Except may be secure access to the Black Sea (but that was achieved by adding Crimea to Russia). The separation of Ukraine from the USSR hurt Ukraine much more than it did Russia, because much workshare for industrial production were allocated in Russia and had to be reallocated or were lost completely.
An example from my personal work experience: Company Antonov in Kyiv used to build large transport aircraft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov
Prominent examples are the AN124 and the by far worlds largest transporter AN225. Now - this AN225 was only built once, shortly before the downfall of the USSR. Crucial parts came from Russian plants and these plants had been torn down in the wake of the collapse, for what reason ever.
So by now Antonov is no more able to manufacture the AN225. When Chinese tried to buy the remnants of the AN225 design and preproduction they soon found out about this and halted purchasing. Video link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7pSK2o3krg is kind of inaccurate and outdated, but to some extent shows the decade long crippling of the Ukrainian industry.
Although, as an opinion piece, I don't agree with a lot of it, I think it does reinforce the point that Putin is a 19th-century man and must be addressed in that manner. He is trying to increase his nation's power and protect his backyard, (sphere of influence).
As many say, he may be a chessmaster playing many moves ahead, my perception is he is playing by 19th-century rules and doesn't give a hoot about international respectability or morality.
GAPutin is playing by his own rules. But don't we all do that? We may decide what our rules will be based on what others threaten us with, but ultimately we all decide our own rules.
Certainly the Cuba Crises was set up when we made our own rules about what others could or could not do. We have been doing that every since we were strong enough to do so, and Putin is no different.
We just don't like his rules, and given that it is up to us to either accept them anyway or deny them with sufficient force to convince Putin to change his rules.Interesting! I must confess not being literate with history as yourself, what do you mean by 19th century. My thought without visiting Google University is manifest destiny and western expansion here in the U.S. I am not familiar with European history. I agree he is certainly playing his chess pieces. Hopefully it remains a game while their seems to be recent alarm with staff evacuations and travel advisories.
Putin is acting like an imperialist. He believes that Ukraine is his or should be his. He contends that Russia's former territories are his by right. He doesn't believe that each nation should be autonomous. He wants a Russian empire. He has a tsarist mentality.
No expert here, yet I have great concern almost to the extent of grave. It is evident with your discussion with Chris there is history and differing views to consider. But, the bottom line for me is Russia is getting more aggressive not only there yet in many places in Europe. Why? What do they desire to gain? Is it that they just feel threatened based on nothing but paranoia?
To get a grasp I read the link below from the State Department by Blinken on the 20th. I am still trying to wrap my brain around why Russia is being so bold.
https://www.state.gov/the-stakes-of-rus … nd-beyond/
I follow Sweden closely seeing they have stepped up their military because of Russian activity near the Baltic Sweden island Gotland.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/sw … 022-01-13/In case you missed it, I recommend the link from Chris57: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
I liked it because it offered a different perspective that makes a lot of sense, and may partially answer your "why" question. I don't know if the speaker's perspective is right, but he knows a lot more about the subject than I do, and what he says seems logical.
GAThanks for bringing it to my attention. I read your thoughts on it earlier and that perked up my curiosity. I was reluctant with the 1 hour+ time for it, yet more motivated now. I'll let you know if I do.
Edit (Later in the afternoon)
I watched and now have a better grasp of what is happening while agreeing with his perspective at this time. Especially with the three central areas of importance - Persian Gulf, Northast Asia, and Europe. I liked how he brought those into the mix for a big picture of what our foreign policy making is faced with. I have been enlightened.
I had not thought about the goals being promoting democracy, EU expansion, and NATO expansion regard Ukraine. Makes sense and see how Russia is not in favor of that of course. I ask can we let go of those goals enough to compromise with Russia for the benefit of the Ukraine while giving and taking for Russia and the West to be satisfied. In other words where is the line of how far is far enough for both of their ambitions.
"Russia is getting more aggressive not only there yet in many places in Europe. Why?"
The truth? Because biden is president and the Russians see him as weak and unpopular. I know how they think. They probably believe biden's lack of popularity will keep the United States from directly confronting anything they do. They doubt biden's ability to do anything. They have no fear of a world leader they see as weak, feeble, old and senile.
That is that is the truth.You may be right while I can't argue with it. I bite my tongue regard Biden while flip a coin on many things not being as learned as many here are. From what I have learned from this thread and the links it is much more complicated than many realize such as the history, culture, language, economics, politics, and on it goes. That is true just with our relationship with both Ukraine and Russia. I am learning much.
From my gut I think the solution is easy, but as said I am not a learned man . . . yet. Assure Ukraine full independence as a non-NATO actor and support them fully on developing themselves as a nation guided by principals of Democracy. To me that is a worthy compromise. Again, that is just a gut feeling.
let's put the Obama "sent blankets to the Ukraine" misinformation to rest. He didn't provide lethal assistance to Ukraine, but did provide more than $100 million in security assistance, as well as a significant amount of defense and military equipment.
By March 2015, the US had committed more than $120 million in security assistance for Ukraine and had pledged an additional $75 million worth of equipment including UAVs, counter-mortar radars, night vision devices and medical supplies, according to the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
That assistance also included some 230 armored Humvee vehicles.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/th … ruary-2014"He didn't provide lethal assistance to Ukraine"
Don't know if you've ever been involved in a war, but when the bad guys are coming at you with their bombs and bullets lethal assistance is what you need. What exactly did they define as "security assistance?"
It's kind of silly to me to think you can win a war without lethal assistance. Night vision devices, armored Humvee vehicles are great if you want to run, not too good if you want to stand and fight.
The question remains, why didn't obama provide Ukraine with what it needed at the time? They had the resources. If they had given Ukraine as much military equipment as biden did the Taliban, Ukraine would have one impressive military.According to former CIA director John Brennan, the military was opposed to providing Javelin anti-tank missiles to the Ukrainians during the Obama administration "because of fear that the Russians would get access to Javelin's sensitive technology,"
He said, "The Russians had deep penetrations of Ukrainian intelligence, security, and military forces in the aftermath" of that country's 2014 revolution that overthrew a pro-Russian government he said, and it took time to rid those forces of Russian moles, agents, and spies"
He added, "I believe it is appropriate that Ukrainian forces have Javelins now because of the work that has been done over the past five years to reduce Russian presence and influence, but giving Javelins to the Ukrainians earlier would have risked compromising a very important and sensitive weapon system that could have come back to haunt U.S. forces on the battlefield."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nation … y-n1089926John Brennan? You cite John Brennan? Do you know anything about the history of this proven and established liar? He was so terrible he had his security clearance revoked. Is this all you have? A corrupt former head of the CIA?
Guess what? Under President Donald Trump Ukrainians got Javelins and much more. There's not been a problem. So THAT argument is ridiculous.
obama didn't provide lethal aid to Ukraine because he was afraid of Russia. It's the lack of lethal aid to Ukraine that made it possible for Russia to annex Crimea. It also led to deaths of many Ukrainian soldiers who would have been better able to protect themselves with the right weapon systems.
Under obama Ukrainians were on their own and you have no idea how bravely they fought to protect their homeland against Russia.
Oh, and the United States doesn't "give" weapon systems to Ukraine, all of them are paid for by Ukraine.
"This did not help Ukrainians fight the Russians. " - And you begin your forum with misinformation.
Obama did send non-lethal weapons. One could say these weapons could aid one in battle. But, do little to win in combat.
It well appears Obama did not sell lethal weapons to Ukraine even under great pressure from Congress (both sides). He as Biden showed weakness in regard to Foreign affairs. https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-barack … 1646692058
Why Obama Didn’t Arm Ukraine
He misunderstood Putin and the reality of military force in foreign affairs.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/worl … raine.html
The US is rushing to arm Ukraine now, but for years it stalled
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national … ms-supply/
To be very fair --- here is what Obama gave Ukraine ---non lethal weapons " By March 2015, the US had pledged $75 million worth of equipment including UAVs, counter-mortar radars, night vision devices, medical supplies and 230 armored Humvee vehicles, according to the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency."
Please read quote --- "Poroshenko used a speech to members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives to appeal for lethal aid.
“Please understand me correctly. Blankets, night-vision goggles are also important. But one cannot win the war with blankets.” He added: “Even more, we cannot keep the peace with a blanket.”
Drawing cheers from those lawmakers who want to arm the former Soviet state, Poroshenko declared his forces “need more military equipment, both lethal and non-lethal, urgently need.”
At the White House, Poroshenko told reporters after his talks with Obama that he was satisfied with the level of cooperation." https://www.euractiv.com/section/europe … -blankets/
A second source on what Obama actually sent to Ukraine. -- https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/wor … /15819211/
I would be very interested if you have information on Obama sending any lethal weapons to Ukraine. It is clear he sent non-lethal weapons as well as aid."One could say these weapons could aid one in battle." - [i]\Yes, you certainly COULD say that. Consider the weapons Obama (and Trump) sent.
- UAVs,
- counter-mortar radars,
- night vision devices,
- medical supplies and
- 230 armored Humvee vehicles,
Obama had his reasons for not sending lethal weapons to Ukraine. I disagreed with him, but he has a LOT more information available to him than either you are I do. Maybe he had intel that suggested giving Ukraine lethal aid might start WW III. Are you in favor of chancing that?
https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/16/politics … index.html
Trump sent the same things plus a few Javelins which, as it turns out, they couldn't us at the time since Russia had withdrawn its armor.
But that wasn't my point, was it. My point was that Mike started out reporting misinformation in his attempt to denigrate President Obama and you failed to address it.My comment in regards to what Obama sent was non-biased. I just offered info on what was reported he had sent. I also clarified the "blanket" statement and how it started with Poroshenko speech to members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives to appeal for lethal aid.
This is clearly how the Republicans, as well as Trump, started using the statement.I wasn't talking about your comment regarding Obama, I was referring to Mike's deceptive claim.
As I responded to Mike below, it turns out Obama DID authorizes lethal aid in late 2015.Obama never authorized lethal weapons to Ukraine. Not sure where you got the idea he sent lethal weapons? The weapons he approved were considered non-lethal. You have the right to say you feel the weapons are lethal in your view. However, the weapons are technically non-lethal.
The fact is Obama did not supply Ukraine with lethal weapons or sign any bill that would sell or give Ukraine lethal weapons. . He went against his own Congress that perused Ukraine to be armed with lethal weapons. Congress pushed to arm Ukraine, and Trump took his time before signing the bill to send lethal weapons. It was widely debated in Congress, and many Democrats supported sending lethal weapons. Just never got Obama to agree. If would be interested in seeing something I missed, I followed it while it all was going on. I posted a Cspan that I watched when Congress debated the need to arm Ukraine. Sorry, I lay this on Obama, Congress tried like hell to arm Ukraine with lethal weapons.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/worl … raine.html
H.Res.162 - Calling on the President to provide Ukraine with military assistance to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-con … n/162/text
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/ … ine-115999
CSPAN Congress debates sending lethal weapons - https://www.c-span.org/video/?324438-1/ … ng-ukraine
The facts show( and I repeat) Trump armed Ukraine with lethal weapons on two occasions of his presidency, in fact, he sold the most lethal weapon that had ever been sold to Ukraine. In my view -- It would appear Biden will break this record due to a Ukraine at war.
Why does this all matter at this point?Hmm . . . "What difference does it make"
GAYes, my very last sentence to ECO --- "What difference does it make"
Why does it matter? This is a forum that although I would not consider a social media forum, should not what appears to be misinformation be addressed? Should it be addressed at AdNauseam? No, but I get into the weeds more often than I should, is that not my prerogative?
In my view, misinformation, should be addressed with facts or another view? In fact, it's one way to unmuddle what we get from media.
The difference may be an open discussion, a dispute over facts can work to clarify misinformation. Ultimately it may not make a difference at all ib the current situation. However, if Ukraine had been armed to the teeth could have this war been prevented? In this scenario, Mike brought up a good point about the Obama administration not sending lethal weapons. Especially after Putin's take over of Crimea. A what-if, but a very interesting what-if.Nah, you missed it. I was only scanning the thread when your statement exposed a soft spot. Sorta like the poke in the ribs one might get when they step in with high elbows. I don't even know what either point was, so it certainly was not an informed "poke."
You didn't say "What difference does it make," you said, "Why does this all matter at this point?."
Hillary was the one that said "What difference does it make?" relative to the Benghazi stuff.
Sorry, it's the devil again. Just throwing in nonsense to derail the train.
GA ;-O
"Obama never authorized lethal weapons to Ukraine. " - You sure you want to stick with that piece of disinformation? Let me repost my reply to Mike
Tell me how Night Vision devices, Drones, AFVs, and Counter-Mortar radars are "are good for running away from an enemy."? If they are so useless, why were they the most of what Trump sent?
Maybe this will help to inform you better. In the 2016 DAA (effective Nov 2015), Obama authorized these additional weapons:
- anti-armor weapon systems (not the Javelin)
- mortars
- crew-served weapons
- ammunition
- grenade launchers
- small arms
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 … -military/
I bet you are going to tell me now that ammunition, small arms, mortars, anti-tank weapons, grenade launchers, and crew-served weapons ARE NOT lethal weapons. LOL. Why do you read a lie in your right-wing propaganda outlets and proceed to distribute it?
Why does it matter, because your side keeps bringing it up and lying about it.
Then I apologize for misreading your comment.
This is very interesting, could you supply information on Obama sending lethal weapons to Ukraine. in 2015. I remember him sending non-lethal weapons only in 2014. In fact, he fought Congress in 2015, and never agreed to send lethal weapons is what I remember. Are we in the weeds over lethal and non-lethal? I have been disputing that Obama at any point sent Ukraine what are to be considered lethal weapons.
Let me just jump in here with a little aside. President Obama's decision was portrayed as an example of his timidity in foreign policy. But the story is more complicated than that or at least has some confounding factors. Former CIA Director John Brennan stated the military was opposed to providing Javelin anti-tank missiles to the Ukrainians during the Obama administration "because of fear that the Russians would get access to Javelin's sensitive technology," he said.
"The Russians had deep penetrations of Ukrainian intelligence, security, and military forces in the aftermath" of that country's 2014 revolution that overthrew a pro-Russian government he said, "and it took time to rid those forcesof Russian moles, agents, and spies. That was the purpose of my visit to Kiev less than eight weeks after the Revolution of Dignity."
Additionally, Even at that time there were arguments that providing such weapons would further escalate the situation. That's how Russian expert Fiona Hill described the Obama administration's thinking in her testimony to Congress.
But We don't know if that would have deterred Putin from invading Ukraine on Feb. 24. It looks like many think that Putin felt that no matter how well armed Ukraine was, that he would be able to roll over Ukraine.
Additionally, Mariya Omelicheva, a professor of national security strategy at the Washington-based National War College, noted that Ukraine's ability to "absorb" such (high tech military)systems "was a serious problem." She said very expensive equipment has been supplied that is just standing idle because there aren't enough military personnel who are trained to operate it. Although , I have read accounts in recent history of the West's efforts to train Ukraine's military.
In the end what do we have? In my opinion, successive administrations showed resistance to arming Ukraine
Like other countries and issues, they had become a political hot potato tossed from one to the next.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/obama-tru … -1.6371378Yes, Obama certainly did have advisors that advised against arming Ukraine, as did Trump. The media took the opportunity to slam Trump for waiting on sending lethal weapons ASAP. Long story short he did listen to Congress ultimately and sent the weapons. Just a fact dispute. It would be misinformation to say Obama armed Ukraine with lethal weapons, was stated in this thread.
Faye this conversation was more technical than all the whys of it. It was just looking for ultimately one fact --- did he or didn't he send lethal weapons. Your summation was well put together, and historically true.
"But We don't know if that would have deterred Putin from invading Ukraine on Feb. 24."
No one has claimed that. I think that would be conjecture, and a view one could think about, but there is a way of knowing what would have happened if Ukraine was well-armed by previous presidents.
"Fiona Hill described the Obama administration's thinking in her testimony to Congress."
Yes, I offered a CSpan video of the hearings, which I watched as they happened in 2015.
The hearings gave a good picture of what Congress wanted, and ultimately
they did not get. Hill, gave presented a good case for Obama's thoughts on the matter.
I just wanted to point out a bit of misinformation on the subject. As I told ECO --- "why does all this matter? " All that mattered to me was misinformation."The media took the opportunity to slam Trump for waiting on sending lethal weapons ASAP. " - [i]When did they do that?? I never read such criticism in the MSM.[/i[
"the military was opposed to providing Javelin anti-tank missiles to the Ukrainians during the Obama administration " - Great Point. Now I hope the Obama-bashers will start bashing our generals as well so that they can stay consistent.
"because of fear that the Russians would get access to Javelin's sensitive technology," - Either the Ukrainians tightened up their security greatly or Trump didn't give a damn about passing along our Javelin technology to Putin.
Here, I will do it a third time.
Tell me how Night Vision devices, Drones, AFVs, and Counter-Mortar radars are "are good for running away from an enemy."? If they are so useless, why were they the most of what Trump sent?
Maybe this will help to inform you better. In the 2016 DAA (effective Nov 2015), Obama authorized these additional weapons:
- anti-armor weapon systems (not the Javelin)
- mortars
- crew-served weapons
- ammunition
- grenade launchers
- small arms
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 … -military/
I will tell you the things Obama sent are good for running away from an enemy. They are not so good when trying to stand ground and advance on an enemy. That require offensive weapons. Bullets, bombs, and lots of "boom boom" is what is needed. Sorry, that is a fact of warfare. Obama did next to nothing to help Ukraine defend itself.
YOU try and defend yourself against an enemy with what Obama sent and then tell me about it. Use your military background to explain how to stop an advancing enemy with what Obama sent. I want you to explain.Tell me how Night Vision devices, Drones, AFVs, and Counter-Mortar radars are "are good for running away from an enemy."? If they are so useless, why were they the most of what Trump sent?
Maybe this will help to inform you better. In the 2016 DAA (effective Nov 2015), Obama authorized these additional weapons:
- anti-armor weapon systems (not the Javelin)
- mortars
- crew-served weapons
- ammunition
- grenade launchers
- small arms
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 … -military/
As to stopping an advancing enemy, I don't need to rely on my experience. I will simply point to Ukraine who DID stop them from 2014 to 2022.
Yes, Trump, would have been a mighty deterrant if he had given a second mandate. But America, foolishly choose joe biden over Trump. It was terrible and awful. 25 year sentence was for Vladimir Mara was terrific! Thanks for the link. It's a read.
I am not sure when Mike posted that comment, but I need to correct the record and expose some right-wing mythology.
Yes, Obama sent blankets. He ALSO sent all sorts of military equipment and supplies. Those things DID HELP UKRAINE fight Russia. He just didn't send lethal aid. Should have he? Certainly. But to say he did basically nothing is a lie and being very biased.
I don't doubt Ukraine appreciated the lethal aid Trump sent? But you know what they didn't appreciate? Trump saying Crimea belongs to Russia and for dragging Zelensky into his illegal scheme to hurt Biden politically (which didn't work as Biden clobbered him as badly as Trump says he beat Clinton)
I really doubt Putin was afraid of his friend Trump.
No, Biden is NOT " viewed around the world as an old, weak and feeble leader". The OPPOSITE is true. The only people who think that are the undemocratic, Putin-loving MAGA-types.Yep, as you said, “Biden is NOT " viewed around the world as an old, weak and feeble leader".
I just looked at the latest YouGov opinion poll in the UK to see what the British think of foreign leaders, and the results are quite interesting:-
In the UK the most popular foreign leader is Barack Obama – the top 10 most popular foreign leaders in the eyes of the British are:-
1. Barack Obama @ 72% popularity.
2. Volodymyr Zelenskyy @ 57% popularity.
3. Joe Biden @ 33% popularity.
4. Angela Merkel @ 32% popularity.
5. Justin Trudeau @ 31% popularity.
6. Hilary Clinton @ 29% popularity.
7. Bill Clinton @ 27% popularity.
8. Bernie Sanders @ 25% popularity.
9. Kamala Harris @ 24% popularity.
10. Imran Khan @ 23% popularity.
Donald Trump is 13th at just 18% popularity.
So in the UK Biden is almost twice as popular as Trump – which shouldn’t be any great surprise.
Of the 33 foreign listed, Vladimir Putin is in 32nd place, at just 6% popularity; with Abiy Ahmed in last place with just 4% popularity, but I think that’s only because 16% of those who were asked knew who Abiy Ahmed was, whereas 98% of Brits who were asked know who Vladimir Putin is.I see Biden is the leader of the second pack, lol. Quite a drop between Obama-Zelenskyy and everybody else. I suspect Trump did as well as he did because there are a lot of right-wingers in Britain.
I had to look up Ahmed myself, although the name sounded familiar.
Thanks for the education.Yes, the gap between, Obama/Zelenskyy and everyone else is striking; Obama has defiantly left a positive mark as a great leader in the minds of the British.
Yep, there are a small core of hard right wingers in Britain, who will always vote Conservative regardless, just as there’s a small core of hard left wing socialists who will always vote Labour regardless; and I think that percentage on the both extremes is similar, at around 20% (give or take a small percentage point). And everyone else is generally spread evenly across a wide political spectrum.
In the UK, the voters that the political parties are most interested in aren’t so much their staunch supporters but more those in the middle politically – the floating voters.
The latest opinion poll showing UK people’s voting intention at the next General Election (in 18 months’ time), taken on the 18th April (yesterday):-
• Labour = 45%: Which under the British ‘first past the post’ voting system in a multi-party system would be enough for a landslide victory, with Labour winning 2/3rds of the seats).
• Conservatives = 27%: which would be a humiliating defeat e.g. they could easily lose a 1/3rd or a half (or more) of their seats at the next General Election.
• Liberal Democrats = 10%
• Green Party = 5%
• SNP (Scottish National Party) = 3%: Although the SNP only has 3% in the national polls, that 3% is concentrated in Scotland, which translates to the SNP having 45 out of the 59 Scottish seats in the UK Parliament. So with there being 650 seats in Parliament, 45 seats gives the SNP a formidable voice in British politics.18 months can't come soon enough and I hope opinions haven't changed by then.
It is clear by the poll Obama receives such wonderful adoration, and at this point, we find the US president receives such a low popularity percentage. Obama was a man that had respect around the world.
Interesting poll -- https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public … than_trumpYes, there’s no doubt that Obama commanded a lot of adoration from around the world.
Thanks for your link to USA opinion poll. It shows that 53% of Americans think that World Leaders See Biden as being Weaker than Trump: which I guess for American elections is going to be important.
But of course, views in different parts of the world are going to differ. I don’t know how leaders of African countries or the Middle East view Biden in comparison to Trump; but in Europe Biden is generally seen as a better Leader e.g. relationships between Trump and European leaders, (including UK) was strained at the best of times. Trump was tolerated by our British leaders because he was President, but he wasn’t liked in Britain, and he wasn’t welcomed either.
UK Trump ban debate: Trump branded "dangerous fool", “crazy", by UK Parliament https://youtu.be/PCSrnrlepl0
Trump banned from speaking in Parliament on his visit to UK: https://youtu.be/vELQlgoaDdQI am not surprised by that poll of Americans. Studies show that the election of black man to the presidency was what lit the fuse to what has exploded into MAGA and the Trump phenomenon we are experiencing in America today. It put the fear of God into the tens of millions of racist that exist in America at the time.
That doesn’t surprise me for America. While in contrast in the UK:
• Londoners voted in Sadiq Khan (Labour politician), a Muslim as their Mayor in 2016, and re-elected him as their Mayor in the 2021 Mayoral elections.
• Our current Conservative Prime Minister is a Sikh, of Indian origin.
• Our Bristol Mayor (Labour politician), elected into Office in 2016, is black.
• Of the 650 MPs in Parliament (elected politicians); there are currently 4 Conservative Muslim MPs, and 16 Labour Muslim MPs.
So although racism does exist in Britain, it’s not tolerated by any political party, and it doesn’t have the same political fuse with voters that exist in the USA.
Thank you for the information. I did read the poll, and certainly, I picked up on the most to least popular status of the presidents. So, many very unpopular presidents, hard to compare one to the other.
So, I concentrated on the positive, Obama. He certainly was, and is well-liked
I think you have well made your point in regard to Trump's popularity in the polls you shared.
I appreciate your info.
At this point, Trump is slightly ahead of Biden in the polls. It is evident Trump is still well-liked here in the US. Polls are very fickled and certainly could change. Trump's indictment slightly boosted his numbers.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/1 … m-00092190Isn't that a terrible thing where indicting someone makes him more popular with his supporters. SAD.
Yeah, polls can be very fickle, and can change. Assuming the polls are done properly, and most independent pollsters do, they are generally accurate to within a 2% margin of error.
The main problem with opinion polls is that they are only an ‘as at’ this moment in time ‘snap shot’ of public opinion; and public opinion can and does shift overtime – especially in the run up to an election, when politicians are promising the earth to millions of voters who believe what they hear and read, or when politicians sling mud at their opposition to discourages people voting for the opposing party.
I see you failed to mention how much worse Trump did. Odd.
I feel the same way you do. But I fear that biden will screw it up to the max no matter what happens. Just as I have alway said; biden is living proof that stupidity has no limits.
Like Obama said, Biden will always find a way to f_ck things up. Who has killed better than Obama? and won a prize..
They already have a civil war at home. Dose anyone here trust a man who is out of mind then let him play with nukes?
Chinese saying ,(who haven't had a major war since 1979,) Firey Dragon cannot defeat the snake in the grass.
Stick a contingent of our troops on the Ukraine-Russia border, much like we had on the Syria-Turkey border, or currently have in South Korea, and let it be known that any harm that comes to our forces will be considered an act of war with the United States, and by extension, NATO.
I doubt Putin would want to risk an oops situation with an invasion that begins an engagement with our troops. I'd park the pair of navy ships we have there just short of the border in the Black Sea for support.What business would US or any other foreign troups have on Ukraine grounds except aggressively threatening Russia?
Russia is relocating troops inside its own territory and this is considered dangerous? Meanwhile NATO has moved directly to Russian borders (Estonia, Latvia). Who is threatening whom?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
This guys tells it all, even though the lecture was kind of in the aftermath of the Crimea annection.
Goestrategic policy of the USA is to destabilize the landmass between Europe and Asia. There is Iran, an issue of its own. Then there is the Caucasus (Didn´t Georgia try to become Nato member, but got clobbered?). Last but not least: Ukraine. Easy prey for USA strategies. 3 major domestic problems:
1. the deep divied between western Ukraine (Galicia) and Eastern Ukraine.
2. Struggle between administration and oligarchs, namely Zelensky against Akhmetov.
3. Corruption on the express lane. The not so big Ukraine is no. 1 in the Pandora papers on tax evasion and money laundering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandora_Papers
Seems to be very conveniant for the Ukraine (remote controlled by the USA) to destract from internal problems with this supposed threat by Russia.
At least this is my point of view."Russia is relocating troops inside its own territory and this is considered dangerous?"
Yes, all military people know you must mass troops before an invasion. To say it is simply "relocating troops" is foolish.
"Meanwhile NATO has moved directly to Russian borders (Estonia, Latvia). Who is threatening whom?"
I guess you don't comprehend the significance of massing large numbers of a military. Have a presence is far different from massing troops.
To the rest, yes, Ukraine has problems. But so does EVERY country. There are still challenges between the former west and east Germany.
"Seems to be very convenient for the Ukraine"
It's very insulting to refer to it as "The Ukraine." That was its name before it obtains independence. Now, it should simply be referred to as "Ukraine."
"Goestrategic policy of the USA is to destabilize the landmass between Europe and Asia. There is Iran, an issue of its own. Then there is the Caucasus (Didn´t Georgia try to become Nato member, but got clobbered?). Last but not least: Ukraine. Easy prey for USA strategies. 3 major domestic problems"
This is absolute nonsense.
There is a long history between Russia and Ukraine most people just don't understand. Majority of the world doesn't seem to know about Holodomor.Mike,
we exchanged viewpoints previously. You know that my insight on Eastern Europe is not superficial from the media but from personal involvement (similar to yours).
So, lets not talk about nonsense. Political power and influence is always linked to strategies. And these strategies were layed by advisors like Zbigniew Brzezinski or Henry Kissinger decades ago and hold merit until today.
Concerning the great famine: Wasn´t that during the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin? Him not even being Russian, but Georgian. What does Holodomor have to do with the situation today and Russia supposedly threatening?"What does Holodomor have to do with the situation today and Russia supposedly threatening?"
It is part of the long history between Ukraine and Russia. The attitude of Russians for a long time has been that Ukraine is like their out-of-control little brother and needs to be smacked around and dominated for their own good. During World War I, Russia gave parts of Ukraine to be occupied by Austrians and Germans. Ukraine tried for its independence but was defeated. Then there was the Ukrainian civil war, which too complicated to even mention. During the 1940s and 1950s Ukrainians fought for their independence from Russia and failed. Once the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Ukraine became independent. Many Russians believe it is their right to control the land of Ukraine. It is in their national psyche. They don't think much of Ukraine and its ability to fight. When Ukraine stood against them in 2014, Russia was both shocked and angered. I don't think many people realize how hard Ukraine will fight if invaded. Nothing is worse for a bully than when those they bully are not afraid to fight them.Your thoughts seem to support the video speaker's premise that a neutral Ukraine is the best choice for all.
The comparison of the Cuban missile crisis, (threats on our doorstep), to the Russia/Ukraine positioning, makes sense to me.
That thought is further cemented by the apparent Russian offer of positive engagement if the Ukraine NATO-membership question is resolved.
No Cuban missiles on a doorstep to the U.S and no NATO missiles on a doorstep to Russia—aren't they the same, relative to national security?
GAThe comparison to the Cuban missile crisis seems to be obvious.
But if we look deeper: Cuba was a symmetric power play. At that time the Soviet Union was at their peak (the Sputnik shock not long ago then).
Today Russia is a shadow of what the Soviet Union was 60 years ago. Looks very strong superficially from the outside, but industrial base to support even medium term modern warfare is not existent. Too much corruption trickles down into every corner of the economy.
NATO is not much better off. A fairly well functioning industrial backbone is countered by endless decision making processes.
So today the powerplay is either no more symmetrical or if so, then at a much lower level of deterrence. - One exception: If the USA decides to go on their own and make the first step of aggression, then NATO may fall in line. But then: Who is the aggressor?
We should not expect any hot conflict to emerge. Both sides know their status quo. Putin sitting naked on a horse in the wilderness or Biden making foolish comments doesn´t change the overall picture.
So we were threatening Turkey and North Korea? That was our policy goal as opposed to protecting allies?
I definitely disagree with your viewpoint that a troop presence is unilaterally a threat as opposed to a defensive strategy....So we were threatening Turkey and North Korea? That was our policy goal as opposed to protecting allies?...
A typical American viewpoint.
May be some "allies" don´t want to be protected. I am not sure about Turkey in this aspect.
And when previous president Trump announced that he would withdraw troops from Germany, a lot of people rejoyced and chanted: "take the nukes with you". Well, at the end of the day he didn´t do it, but anyways: sentiments are not always what you would expect.
Back to the Ukraine:
There is a historic brawl in and around the region of former Galicia, involving Poland and Western Ukraine. Going on for centuries, for almost 1000 years, just to mention the role of the Kievian Rus in the 11th century.
While one part of the Ukraine today is pro western, the eastern part is pro Russian. This does not necessarily mean much, Belgium is half French, half Flamish and they get along (with some struggles once in a while). Switzerland is a mixture of French, German, Rhaetoroman(Italian) and they manage perfectly. But Ukraine never got things straight until today. What to think of fascist movements of Stepan Bandera and the "Western Ukrainian Republic" after the revolution in Russia.
There are many, many domestic problems in the Ukraine. Any distraction is welcome. Foreign powers should keep their fingers off.
Great video. I find myself agreeing with the speaker. To me, the speaker's points sound realistically and historically true. The fact that the video is dated to 2013 gives the benefit of hindsight as support.
I think the guy nailed it.
Although I do think the Russian troop movement is highly dangerous, I also think it is more of a reaction than a provocation.
One theme of the talk really agreed with my mindset, (as can probably be seen in my many responses to discussions of our own current Constitutional issues), and that was his reference to 19th-century thinking vs. 21st-century thinking. That is the point that I think is missed by most in discussions like these.
Discussions of sanctions as a tool for this type of issue are 21st-century thinking that ignores reality. I think sanctions are useless in this situation.
GAStumbled over this guy. He seems to be well informed and he gives a good overview on the international interdependencies associated with sanctions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hk9b0yw1XBk
I have said this before: Putin and Xi play 3D chess while the US administrations barely match checkers, no matter the Biden or the Trump administration.You always have to be careful about the sources. My previous video link is from Alexander Mercouris, a former British lawyer with a doubious past, putting him in line with barred US lawyers from the Trump theater.
Having said this, the information this guy presented seem to be accurate however.
The big issue with natural gas in Europe is not that new and recent info in German news media suggest that Russia had long prepared for the current setup.
Germany has a huge underground storage system for natural gas. But now the filling is as low as never before. A reason may be that Russian deliveries through Ukraine and Belorus pipelines were low in the past year, only direct Germany-Russia connection North Stream 1 was operating at full capacity. May be a hint that there was deliberate coordination between troop relocation and natural gas delivery reduction.
And while we are sorting out the moves on the chess board, there probably was a move even before the gas delivery reduction.
Russia carefully observed what is happening in Germany with CO2 reduction. Electricity relies to some 30% on hard coal and lignite. Their CO2 output per kWh is almost double of natural gas. So in the effort to reduce CO2, coal fired power plants are shut down. The transition speed is too fast for renewables to step in. So the burden is on natural gas, making the European economies, foremost Germany even more at mercy to Russian gas supplies.
Perfect "keep NATO out of Ukraine" gambit for Russia:
1. observe growing demand for natural gas
2. relocate troups and cut gas deliveries ( at that time the USA was playing in the dust of Afghanistan)
3. Make Ukraine, USA and allies furious about troup relocations
4. The USA then decides prematurely on sanction threats
5. The EU is aware of the natural gas issue and does not immediately follow suit.
5. Then the USA finds out about the trap and that the EU, UK, allies and the USA are hurt severely if sanctions were imposed.
6. Russia can sit back and watch what is coming.
7. The USA is trying to step back (that is where the new more friendly tone is coming from)
Let us see what the future will bring. The goal of Russia is to keep NATO away from its borders. Ukraine is only means for the purpose. As situation is now, there will be no hot conflict, there will be no sanctions. And Ukraine will not join NATO.It's another reason I enjoy the peaceful and loving life of an Anarchist.
So called liberals play the game of chess and the conservative eat the chess pieces, a not ever ending life of conflict. It's easier to move to another country of less conflict. My main beef is Centralist military fixed that with forced vaccines against ones will.
Thanks. I get the point being made, and it seems logical—for this situation, but I couldn't last past the 7-minute mark on this latest guy.
GA
Putting politics aside, as a Brit we’ve always seen Russia as a threat, hence our four nuclear submarines of which one is always hidden at sea equipped with nuclear warheads.
Therefore, we’re on the same page as you with regards to this issue.
50 years of nuclear submarines on the Clyde: https://youtu.be/nnAwW5So5QULooking at the way the USA and UK are reacting to Putin, show they have no clue how to deal with him. The UK better forget about its past glory and look at reality and the USA is a defeated nation, exerting on Ukraine is not going to help. If I were Putin I would launch an invasion straightaway and wait and see whether the UK and USA would like to destroy their civilization for Ukraine which was always a part of Russian sphere of influence.
Sad but true. Ukraine and Russia have had battles for many, many years.
The Americans have always made the rules and played the game the way they wanted it. No wonder no American or western nation ever talks of the atomic bombing and killing of 200,000 defenseless civilians during the last days of WWII. But times are changing and now the Americans are on the back foot and they're facing an adversary jointly with China that also wants to play the game by its rules. The Americans have now to play the game with a different set of rules and they have to decide whether the destruction of the United States is worth fighting for an inconsequential country like Ukraine, which in any case was always in the Soviet or Russian sphere of influence.
NATO is not united and the UK and US should not try and lord over everything. The recent statement of the chief of the German navy is a pointer, though he resigned later. Please read https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ … er-ukraine
He made this statement in Delhi on a visit to India.I'm hoping that all of this is for show, and nothing comes from it.
There is NO benefit to Russia, NATO, the United States and especially Ukraine to engage in an armed conflict.
I know the Russian mind and what they think about Ukraine. This is more about the Russian ego than it is about a Russian benefit. There is a long history of Russians being enraged when Ukrainians stood up to them. Russia does want to have their leader put back in power in Ukraine.
This is probably why Russia was not so upset when Poland became part of NATO.
I am praying this does not turn into a war. Let us pray that his conflict can be resolved without any armed conflict.
The whole thing makes no sense at all.
"NATO sends more ships, jets to eastern Europe as Russia builds up troops near Ukraine"
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nato-jan2 … -1.6325096Thanks for the informative article Mike bringing current events closer to mind. As shared earlier I keep an eye on Sweden and their concern with landing craft near in the Baltic Sea. I am getting a grasp on things now including how much as you shared is embedded in history with previous relations.
I, too, will keep this in prayer for the Ukraine, Europe, and you as well with such close family ties!Thankyou.
It is a very stressful time for people in Ukraine.
I am hoping for a peaceful solution.
Ukraine should have autonomy. The Ukrainian people should exist without interference from Russia. Russia doesn't own Ukraine although Putin wishes that it was so. Russia should mind its own business & leave the Ukrainian people & nation alone. Ukrainians have encountered problems with Russia for centuries. It is time for Russia to stay out of Ukrainian affairs. It is analogous to an authoritarian parent who refuse to believe that their children are separate entities.
I have relatives in the Ukraine right now that would hear what you said and cheer.
I mean it. Ukrainians have a right to autonomy. What right does Putin have to want Ukraine. Ukrainians have been fighting against Soviet now Russian hegemony for centuries. Each nation has a right to its own autonomy. Isn't imperialism &/or colonalism a thing of the past? Putin is a Stalin. Ukrainians should fight & better fight to REMAIN AUTONOMOUS.
I think you are simplifying everything because Ukraine in particular is an extremely complex subject and the world apart from Europe is not concerned about Ukraine and nobody wants the world should be destroyed just for Ukraine. The villains here are the USA and UK and I have not been able to fathom what freedom they're talking about? Does freedom mean that you ring a country like Russia with weapons and threaten it? The eclipse of the west, in particular, the USA and UK has already begun and it will be hastened by their actions in Ukraine. All over the world, I find no sympathy for American action in Ukraine because the Americans are known to destabilize every country they went from Afghanistan to Korea, Middle East to Vietnam. I will also state that Russia is not going to invade Ukraine, which is a boogie created by the US and UK.
"I will also state that Russia is not going to invade Ukraine, which is a boogie created by the US and UK."
Maybe having over 100,000 combat troops, war planes, tanks, etc. within 23 miles of Ukraine is not an invention of anyone, it is a fact. You don't build a military force this large to just enjoy the eastern European winter weather.
There is always a reason for it.
Hi Ya! I talked to a man in the pool, where I swim, who had come from from Russia three years ago. He told me Putin is just trying to to look powerful to his people who are suffering and doubting him right now. Things are not good in Russia. There is a lot of corruption in education and healthcare. This man, Viktor, felt so happy and fortunate to be able to come to the United States. He says Putin is a horrible "president" and is only posing in his stance with Ukraine. Victor asked his Russian friends how they felt about war with Ukraine and they expressed that do not want war at all. Who wants their sons to die ... and for W H A T?
I also think Putin wants to fight over Ukraine's Nato involvement for the purpose of maintaining Russia's connection to Ukraine, which has always been part of the Soviet Union.
Therefore, Biden needs to chill out.I would have to agree with your Russian friend. I believe most Russians would not support an invasion of Ukraine. There are Russians who think of Ukrainians as their family, others who think Ukrainians are less than Russians and owe Russia everything and then there are those who believe Ukraine should be made part of Russia whether they want it or not. These are the same people who believe Russia should be able to pick the president of Ukraine. I've spoken with them. Don't understand them.
"Therefore, Biden needs to chill out."
I think that biden is behaving like Putin. We have no defense of our southern border, supply chain issues, high inflation and its only getting worse.
Building up a story like this about Ukraine and Russia gets his failure off of the front of the news cycle for a little while.
I do remember the thread.
For my part in hinsight i never expected Putin to be that foolish and invade Ukraine. So i had to adjust my attitude towards Russian administration.
And i had to adjust my interpretation of Ukraine being a country divided by language barrier. As i found out from personally talking to refugees, there is no real language barrier.
While Russia and Ukraine both earned a reputation of being thorougly corrupt, Ukraine seems to work itself out of the dirt slowly in the past decade, while Russia is stuck in the corruption mud. Is it an indication that democratic ideas and western support do work? At least since 2014?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruptio … ions_IndexWikipedia might as well be written by the CIA propaganda branch these days.
The pretense that this is a war between Ukraine and Russia will be dropped after the November elections.
After that it won't matter who you want to blame.
Ukraine pushed the West into giving them Battle Tanks. Will Jet Fighters be next?
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/26/europe/u … index.htmlOne bit of good news, the owner of the gay nightclub in Bristol recently raised donations for humanitarian aid for Ukraine, and raised enough money to buy and fill two vans full of supplies. So, rather than just give it to charity the gay nightclub owner decided to drive the van and supplies to Ukraine in person. Before starting his journey he stuck removable self-adhesive stickers on the outside of the van, which in large print reads “Humanitarian Aid for Ukraine”, and he put donations buckets in the van to collect more money on the long journey from Bristol to Ukraine.
For those who’ve been keeping tabs on UK news, you might be aware that due to Brexit, there were 16 hours delays at the port of Dover last week. The good news is that on his approach to Dover the police spotted his van, and seeing the sign ‘Humanitarian Aid for Ukraine’ on the side of the van, offered to give him a police escort all the way to the port. So he had a police escort, bypassing the 16 hours of queues e.g. being escorted by the police to the front of the long queue, and on arriving at the port the British border control just waved him onto the ferry without doing any of the border checks, and on the other side the French border control, likewise, just waved him on his way, without carrying out any of their border checks – so when he Facebooked us he was already in France, and making good progress towards Ukraine; the owner of the Bristol gay nightclub is a close family friend, and kept in touch with us via my wife’s Facebook.
On reaching Germany and heading for the Polish border, while still in Germany he was advised by the authorities to remove the stickers before entering Poland, as there had been a spate of hijackings in Poland, targeting ‘humanitarian aid’ – but once he crosses the border into Ukraine it will be safe (and desirable) to put stickers back on.
When he reached the Polish/Ukraine border he stayed overnight in an animal rescue centre on the Polish side of the border, before venturing into Ukraine; and while there, used some of the cash he raised from donations on his journey through Europe to buy a large supply of cat and dog food for the warzone, and crammed the van full with the extra supplies.
On entering Ukraine, he was given a police escort through the back roads to the outskirts of the war zone, where he and his co-driver meet their Ukrainian contacts; the back roads being a much longer but much safer route.
Now in the warzone, the van broke down, and they had a scary moment when their van was towed to a garage for repairs, only to be confronted by two huge blocks, heavily armed with machine guns – but fortunately their Ukrainian contact was able to explain who they were, and then they were welcomed with open arms, and the garage worked overnight to do the repairs, ready for the following morning; and in gratitude the garage did the repairs free of charge.
On leaving the garage they drove to their final destination in the war zone, where they could hand over the humanitarian aid, cat & dog food, and the van itself, to the Ukrainians to put to good use. And spent the night with a Ukrainian family, who took them in and gave them full hospitality, in gratitude; including what turned out to be a vodka party – a social evening with the family, being plied with lots of vodka.
The following day, they were taken to the airport and flew back to Heathrow, London, and from there caught a train to Bristol.
They’ve got enough money to buy a 2nd van full of humanitarian aid; so I’ll have to wait and see if they make a 2nd trip themselves.
Certainly I think it’s a brave thing to do; I wouldn’t have the guts to voluntarily make such a trip.Great report! Inspiring! Thank you.
It takes a special kind of person to do that. The best I do is give regularly to one of the three donation sites at https://u24.gov.ua/Inspiring story. It bolsters the faith in humanity and reminds us that there is good out in the world especially in these days where many prefer to focus and hate and division. Thank you for posting.
Slovakia sends jets to Ukraine. Why can't Biden? After all, the leaked documents show that the Ukrainian air force is severely depleted. MAGA Marjorie Taylor Green and Kevin McCarthy thanks the traitor you stole these documents and let Russia know this weakness. We really should fill this void.
https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ru … index.html
(I spent time in Slovakia on a NATO mission to help them figure out the best way (cost-wise) to stand up a new air force so that they could gain admission. During that time, I took cover under the wing of a Mig-29 when a brief rain shower passed over head. I have to wonder if that is one of the planes they are sending even though it is almost 20 years since I went.)Good on Slovakia
Poland is also planning to send MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine in the coming days/weeks; NPR says 13 planes, the BBC says 4 planes.
Although the UK have ruled out sending any of its planes to Ukraine (at least for the foreseeable future), the UK have nevertheless been training Ukrainian fighter jet pilots to fly the older stock of RAF fighter planes?
However, the UK is prepared to supply some of its older fighter jets to Eastern European allies to enable them to release their Soviet-era planes to Ukraine.I have been to Poland as well, but with no so fond a memory as I had with Slovakia (did I mention how great their food was?)
It wasn't Poland's fault that 1) I caught a bug that forced me to leave early, 2) had the worst massage by a male, I hurt a week later, and 3) watched a team from General Electric trying to sell Poland their engines have a new rectum torn for them because they were acting like the proverbial Ugly American.Wow, quite an experience you had in Poland - an unfortunate string of events.
Yes it was. I really would have liked to looked around Warsaw a bit but I spent most of my time between meetings and bed.
I haven't made it yet, but I really would like to get back to Slovakia. I brought back a beautiful tea set (made in Czech Republic) and tour that beautiful country at my leisure.
(Yes, I have been to England as well, to give a presentation on that AFTOC MIS I mentioned in one of these forums). A co-worker and I arrived one somewhat rainy morning and had time to visit a site in London (damned if I can remember what, but a castle of some type comes to mind - did I tell you I hate old age). We returned to get a rental car where I learned to drive from the right on the left and had my first experience with real roundabouts (and not their fake cousins in New Jersey). We travelled to Mendenhall RAF where I was to give my presentations. While there, I also learned that British food is really quite good, lpl.Thanks for the update, and I hope you do manage to get back to Slovakia. Yep, that sums up Britain quite well – the rain; we never get the heavy rains that they have in Australia, so when my Australian cousins visited the UK (and us) a few years ago they thought we Brits complain about nothing (with the drizzles we get in the UK); but after spending 3 months touring the UK they were thoroughly fed up with the constant rain – but otherwise they enjoyed their visit to the UK, and thrilled with finally meeting me and my family in person.
Yeah, our Australian’s had a word or two to say about the sheer numbers of our roundabouts; and they weren’t that thrilled about the mini and double mini roundabouts either (which I think are quite cute).
The most famous roundabout in Britain is the ‘Magic Roundabout’ in Swindon.
See How an Insane 7-Circle Roundabout Actually Works: https://youtu.be/6OGvj7GZSIo
Yes, old age – I’m just grateful that I retired early at 55 so that I’ve been able to get more out of my life in retirement, while I’m still fit and young enough to do so.ROFL - I had to show that video to my wife.
Retirement? What's that? Well, I guess I should know. I am retired Army, retired AF civil servant, once retired from my own company but had to go back. At 75, still chugging along.Wow. And my main daily routine these days is generally gardening and DIY done at a leisurely pace, especially in the summer months when I can take long beer breaks in the sun between the weeding and sewing and planting. Although I do make a point of keeping a routine whereby I'm working (keeping busy) from 9 to 5 to keep mind and body active.
It certainly had that impact on several of my friends and family who of course would never admit it. But it explains their visceral anger directed at a man who otherwise exemplified their Christian values and their support of a man who exemplified none of them.
I wrote this post as a reply to a comment about the election of Obama triggering the advent of the mega crowd. Now I can't even find the original post! I apologize if I just chase a rabbit down a hole.
What do you mean "triggering the advent of the mega crowd"
That was me. The culmination of the reaction to a black man becoming President in America set of a chain reaction of hate that led to the creation of MAGA.
An interesting little bit of analysis as Ukraine is about ready to launch their long-awaited counter-attack. Seems lik Russia, after 7 months of preparation, might not be ready.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/01/europe/u … index.htmlI have an interesting little thread to share regarding the Ukraine conflict as well. Enjoy.
https://twitter.com/TheThe1776/status/1 … 2606529539Ken, the stories that my Ukraininan friends tell me about Euromaidan are very different. All their stories start with the peoples desire to separate from the former USSR and the influence of Russia.
This was the spark. It is not really importantant how then the fire (revolution) developed and if there were any fire accelerators involved.
The tread you provide is nothing more than a biased politicial statement: "Don’t hate America, hate our Government! "
Don´t follow Russian propaganda narratives. Same for the Odessa incident.I don't follow Russian propaganda narratives.
Just like I don't follow American propaganda narratives.
I spent many years working for our government, I know exactly how it works.
What Ukraine had going on for the last 20+ years is at best a Civil War.
At worst, it was the systematic effort to eradicate those with Russian sympathies and ethnicities.
Crimea seceded, the West does not want to accept that.
The Ukraine government at the time Crimea seceded, had no real authority, it was not an elected government, it was a puppet government installed by Western influencers.
We are currently supporting a Ukrainian government that is as dictatorial and corrupt as Russia, if not moreso.
More than half the Ukrainian population has fled Ukraine, the only thing this conflict has brought Ukraine is hundreds of thousands of dead Ukrainians and millions misplaced.
Ukraine is not going to win this war, it was never going to win this war.
Only if America steps in and fights the war for them, with full military effort, could Russia be defeated. That would require WWIII.
Honestly, at this point, I would have no sympathy for the people of the EU if WWIII did break out, they have allowed their governments to support, fund, arm, and agitate this conflict.
Never forget, there was the Minsk Agreements.
https://press.un.org/en/2015/sc11785.doc.htm
https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacema … ent_en.pdf
Ukraine did not implement them.
When Zelensky was elected he not only spit on them, by 2021 he put into legislation that Ukraine would take back Crimea by force... nothing short of a declaration of War against Russia.
https://archive.kyivpost.com/ukraine-po … rimea.html
Crimea has been part of the Russian Republic since March 2014.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukra … YR20140320
This conflict could have been avoided, Zelensky, Biden, chose to pursue it, they will continue to do so it seems, no matter how many millions die or are displaced, no matter how much the economies of the EU suffer, no matter if it brings Nuclear War.
Don't follow Ukrainian propaganda narratives. Or not, ultimately you will be far more effected by an escalation into WWIII than we Americans."What Ukraine had going on for the last 20+ years is at best a Civil War." - PLEASE STOP issuing Russian propaganda disinformation.
As I have mentioned before, I also worked in the government in the defense department as a civilian and as an officer in the Army; I retired from both. I am fully aware of how our government works and it isn't what you claim.
Just so all readers will know
"At worst, it was the systematic effort to eradicate those with Russian sympathies and ethnicities. " - RUSSIAN propaganda
"Crimea seceded, the West does not want to accept that." - RUSSIAN propaganda.
"The Ukraine government at the time Crimea seceded, had no real authority, it was not an elected government" - RUSSIAN propaganda
"We are currently supporting a Ukrainian government that is as dictatorial and corrupt as Russia, if not more so."- HALF RUSSIAN propaganda (the part about Russia is true)
"Honestly, at this point, I would have no sympathy for the people of the EU if WWIII did break out" - THAT does not surprise me given your obvious pro-Russian orientation.
"When Zelensky was elected he not only spit on them" - THOUGHT YOU just said Zelenskyy was NOT elected.
"This conflict could have been avoided"- YES, THAT is what Putin said as well just before he pulled the trigger.What Ukrainian propaganda narratives to follow? I don´t understand.
I simply talk with the Ukrainians over here in G., in my city. Face to face, no media, no Ukraine state publications.
There are the middle school students from Chernihiv who continue remote learning with their teacher. Whenever there is an air raid alarm, the teacher takes shelter and lessons are interrupted.
There is the Chernobyl veteran from Rivne who was a Colonel in the Soviet army and served in the first waves of fire fighting in 1986.
There is the mining engineer from Luhansk who used to live in Charkiv and stayed in G. after the war started.
There is the dentist with his family from Kiev who fled in March with 4 children.
I could go on..
They all have relatives in Russia and Belarus. They want everything else but a war and destruction of their country. But they insist on their freedom to live without Russian oppression.
As the guy from Charkiv put it: "We all share the same Soviet heritage, a mafia structure ruled with strong corruption and suppressed by central Moscow. We can´t get rid of all oligarchs and corruption, but we can at least get rid of Moscow."
Everything else is Russian propaganda. Everything else is Russky Mir.
As a speaker of Russian, it was amazing for me to listen that all Ukrainians here in G. speak very clear Russian. There is no and was no suppression of Russian language in Ukraine. But that just is another false Russian narrative.That is the story of some Ukrainians that had to flee their country.
Yes, there is truth in that.
There is truth that Crimea had been part of the Russian Republic since 2014, and other than the ongoing battle in the Donbas, that should have ceased if Zelensky accepted the Minsk Agreement... there was peace.
The people of Crimea were getting along just fine.
The people of Ukraine, other than the Donbas, were getting along just fine.
And then Zelensky decided that Crimea had to be taken back... by force if necessary... making it Ukrainian law that they would do so in 2021.
That was a declaration of war against Russia.
And there is the TRUTH.
If Ukraine had accepted the Minsk Agreement, if they had tried for peace, rather than instigating for war with Russia, I would be supporting them.
But that's not what went down.
I am happy to continue to provide links here and elsewhere to the documented facts as to what really occurred. This war is a tragedy, to millions, it is a war we had no business supporting... but that is America, Ukraine is just one in a long line of nations we have destroyed lately.There you go again. Spreading your blatant lies about Ukraine.
I don't know what your connection is to Russia, but I am convinced you have one. One of the main reasons is you only provide Russian Propaganda in your responses. I look at your responses and tell myself that nobody could be this willfully ignorant.
"There is truth that Crimea had been part of the Russian Republic since 2014, and other than the ongoing battle in the Donbas, that should have ceased if Zelensky accepted the Minsk Agreement... there was peace."
NO, these territories were illegally annexed by Russia in 2014. This has been acknowledged by the United Nations. NO country just gets to go into another country and take what territory they want. In the civilized world, not the Russian world, this is unacceptable.
"The people of Crimea were getting along just fine.
The people of Ukraine, other than the Donbas, were getting along just fine."
This is another piece of Russian propaganda. The Ukrainian people in these areas were treated as second class citizens. They had their language and culture systematically removed. This is what Russia does when it conquers land. It is what they have always done. The Tartars of Crimea are treated especially harsh. If things are so great there you have to as yourself why there is so much sabotage occurring against the Russian military in Crimea?
"And then Zelensky decided that Crimea had to be taken back... by force if necessary... making it Ukrainian law that they would do so in 2021.
That was a declaration of war against Russia."
Yes, the president of a country who had its territory illegally annexed by another country is willing to fight to get it back. Invading another country is actually a deceleration of war.
Again, this is more of your Russian propaganda.
The United Nations supports Ukraine fighting to get its territory back.
Try telling the actual truth and not spewing forth Russian propaganda.That's your truth Mike.
Its not the world's truth.
It's not Russia's truth.
Ukraine has lost hundreds of thousands of lives.
Ukraine is not taking Crimea back unless America goes and fights that war.
That was always the case, it will always be the case, the escalation of this war is because we have insane warmongering idiots running America and Ukraine willing to destroy millions of lives.No, it is the world's truth. I am in agreement with Mike for a change (well not that last part). The only Truth about Russia is it is an aggressor nation who has no problems committing war crimes to get its way.
There is no "escalation" to the war other than by Russia. Since Ukraine has the right to take back all of its territory that was stolen by Putin, it is full on war. How they can execute it depends on how much the West is willing to support it.
Ukraine is a democratic nation that was invaded by an asshole. The West has a responsibility to support it.I think you would find the majority of the world, outside of the Western Nations (and perhaps a few of them as well), find that the only aggressor nation they are really concerned about right now is America.
America's reputation has taken a massive hit, the speed at which the Non-Western world is turning away from America right now is something I believe few ever thought possible.
Those that are more objective, those that are not tied into Neo-Con or NWO ideology, are able to see the growing divide in the world today.
And that stems from our 'Democracy building' efforts in Ukraine more than anything... well that and the effort to sanction Russia into oblivion.
Those efforts are unifying a considerable number of countries against America.UN condemns Russia over Ukraine war, calls for withdrawal
Some 141 members of the UN General Assembly back resolution, a year after Russia invaded its neighbour.
The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has voted overwhelmingly in favour of a resolution demanding Moscow withdraw its troops from Ukraine and end the fighting, a year after Russia launched its invasion.
The resolution (PDF) urged a “comprehensive, just and lasting peace” that it said “would constitute a significant contribution to strengthening international peace and security” and reaffirmed Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/2/2 … withdrawalI suspect Ken thinks the UN is part of the conspiracy to form a one-world government.
Does Ken subscribe to QAnon?
Besides allies of Russia like China and North Korea, name some. India doesn't think America is the aggressor even though they continue to support Putin's war effort. Syria and Iran probably fit your bill, but not many more.
BTW, what is wrong with Democracy Building? It leads to a friendlier world.
Do you have any non-conspiratorial support for your claim that the non-Western world who are not led by despots are turning away from America?
I will grant you they probably turned away from Trump, but when Biden was elected, they all breathed a sigh of relief.If your theory in your penultimate and ultimate paragraphs were true then the UK would be as despised as you say the USA is around the world e.g. apart from the USA, the UK has given Ukraine more weapons than any other country in the world; and the UK has provided the Ukrainian military, including fighter pilots and tank drivers, with more training than any other country in the world: And we are proud as a nation to be helping Ukraine fight for their freedom and democracy - According to opinion polls, over 60% of the British Public support's the UK Government's current role in the conflict in Ukraine.
A year ago, UK troops began to leave Ukraine, where they had been training Ukrainians since 2014, and we started to train Ukrainian troops in the UK instead. And now, a year later ten nations have joined forces to train Ukrainian recruits in the UK, providing them with skills to defend their homeland.
10 nations have joined forces to train Ukrainian recruits in the UK: https://youtu.be/Pd2-MZVOBcoI would also like to state the UK has also been very welcoming to Ukrainian refugees. Older people, women and children from Ukraine have been treated very good by the UK.
If your theory in your penultimate and ultimate paragraphs were true then the UK would be as despised as you say the USA is around the world e.g. apart from the USA, the UK has given Ukraine more weapons than any other country in the world; and the UK has provided the Ukrainian military, including fighter pilots and tank drivers, with more training than any other country in the world: And we are proud as a nation to be helping Ukraine fight for their freedom and democracy - According to opinion polls, over 60% of the British Public support's the UK Government's current role in the conflict in Ukraine.
A year ago, UK troops began to leave Ukraine, where they had been training Ukrainians since 2014, and started to train Ukrainian troops in the UK. And now, a year later and ten nations have joined forces to train Ukrainian recruits in the UK, providing them with skills to defend their homeland.
10 nations have joined forces to train Ukrainian recruits in the UK: https://youtu.be/Pd2-MZVOBco
Sorry, that is REALITY.
Russia has lost hundreds of thousands of lives and continues to lose hundreds daily.
Ukraine liberating Ukraine is an eventuality.
Again, I see things a bit more clearly because I don't buy into russian propaganda and I've been there. As I said before, I have friends and relatives in Ukraine. I've been to Crimea, I know people from Crimea who live in Ukraine. It was a popular tourist destination for Ukrainians before russia illegally annexed it. You wouldn't believe what russia has done to it.
The war could end tomorrow if russian soldiers left and went back to russia and gave up their conquest to conquer lands. All of these deaths are the responsibility of the invaders NOT those who defend their land.
russia is an evil empire.
"Try telling the actual truth and not spewing forth Russian propaganda"
Why are you so adamant about saying these things against his right of free speech? That is no different than the tactics used by the woke crowd to condemn anyone they claim is a fatphobe or a transphobe.
You can tell us your side of the story without calling him a Russian spy. You are aware of how the Democrats used that same tactic against Trump?Don't we have a free speech right to ask someone to stop lying and spreading disinformation/misinformation that is harmful and can ultimately get people killed?
i bet you have no clue what "woke" is. It is something all good people want to be.
The Democrats never called Trump a Russian spy. We did ask the question though because of his character and deep involvement with Putin whether it was possible that 1) they were trying to turn him into a spy and/or 2) Putin has something on Trump. I go with the latter
And why shouldn't people who discriminate or worse against fat or trans people be called to task and identified?
Isn't that the whole point of "woke" - to push against socially bad behavior?This comment was not directed at you but I did notice your personal attack against the same person earlier in this thread so am not surprised that you are trying to justify your abuse. You do have a right to comment wherever you want but do not need to make claims like that, and that "spreading disinformation" comment is another tactic the wokists are using to try and extinguish free speech.
I am not surprised that you support the leftist cancel culture. Woke used to be a phrase that meant awareness of social differences but it has now become people shoving their views down everyones throat and squashing free speech.
Calling someone who does not view obesity as unhealthy is not fatphobic. Those people are not afraid of fatphobic. Phobia is a fear, and people that point out that obesity is not healthy are not afraid of fat people. Maybe you could look at the source of the word?
Or you could just remain ignorant and try to cancel others who do not agree with you.Why is pointing out somebody is lying (and providing the evidence to back it up) considered an "attack" by you?
The left does not have a "cancel culture". It is the right that does with the leader being Ron DeSantis.
BTW, I don't make personal attacks. Show me one.
Why is telling the truth being "woke" to you?
"Woke used to be a phrase that meant awareness of social differences but it has now become people shoving their views down everyones throat and squashing free speech." - YES, THAT is the true definition of "woke" and one the left follows. It is people like DeSantis that have weaponized it and are trying to cancel the whole gay and black communities.
FYI, 1)Weight bias, sometimes also called fatphobia or weight stigma, describes the negative attitudes and stereotypes surrounding and attached to larger bodies. 2) Further, fatphobia is an abnormal and irrational fear of being fat or being around fat people.That comment about DeSantis is about as accurate as saying that Biden supports castrating little boys and chopping off the breasts of teen girls.
FYI, people that find obesity an unhealthy lifestyle that should not be promoted as a healthy alternative are not suffering from a phobia. You are very incorrect.Agree, so well put. Doc, I think you may have forgotten --- Liberals have turned all upside down. What was good is now bad; what was right is now wrong; what was factual is just not factual anymore.
I think we both know being overweight is unhealthy, and science tells us factually being overweight contributes to many very serious
health risks.
"Overweight and obesity
Overweight (defined as a body mass index (BMI) is 25 kg/m2 or higher, but under 30 kg/m2), obesity (BMI is 30 kg/m2 or higher, but under 40 kg/m2), or severe obesity (BMI is 40 kg/m2 or higher), can make you more likely to get very sick from COVID-19. The risk of severe illness from COVID-19 increases sharply with higher BMI." CDC
Overweight and obesity
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc … OVID%2D19.That is a fact.
I was in supreme shape when younger, triathlon, Army Ranger, in shape.
Then in my 40s and 50s I let myself slide, and eventually ballooned up to 268 pounds. Fatboy. With the high blood pressure, aches and pains, to go with it.
Then I changed my diet, eating habits, and lost 80 pounds.
I feel better at 55 than I did at 45. Physically, Mentally, Emotionally.
Obesity is a disease. Poor eating habits, poor sleeping habits, poor diet.
We now have a MSM that tells you fat is beautiful, that tells you there is something wrong with men who do not want to date transgenders, that tells you it is ok to mutilate children.
What do you think of a media and government that is pushing those things onto society?
What is being told to you is "don't treat fat people like conservatives treat gay people or black people or anybody that doesn't look or act like them"
Do any of you here, who approach all subject-matter from the left, see that this 14 year old child has been repeatedly let down by radical leftists, adults, who have conditioned her to think she is a mistake?!
Then, to add insult to injury, she begins to question and have doubts... and her Parent, the one person who should be in her corner, is stabbing her in the back!?!?
This reminds me so much of when we were so misled in '73 by radical leftists, adults, who pretended to know best, but were as clueless then as they are today! When it came to abortion, they didn't care, they still don't care the number of lives ended and the number of young lives permanently screwed up!!! Nowadays they are just into more morbid and horrific things.
And what really stuns me is how the leftist will freak out over the fact that a Christian or a Conservative walks among them, but not think twice about killing fully developed babies or mutilating the bodies of teenagers.
It sickens me.No. And even if true in THIS instance, where are the other 10,000 examples you need to begin to prove your point?
What sickens me is the conservative war on Democracy, Blacks, LGBTQ+, and so on and so on.
Give me even one instance where a viable fetus was aborted for no good reason. It also sickens me that people lie about such things.
Give me even on instance where a teenager had a sex change operation without their consent and a full, exhaustive medical and psychological evaluation. It also sickens me that people lie about such things.
I guess another thing you are proving is that conservatives don't think parents know what is best for their children.I knew they deserved LIFE and would have never taken that away from them and I would have never condoned or allowed experimental drugs and/or a mutilation of their bodies!!! IF that makes me the bad guy...in your eyes, so be it, I plead guilty!
This is sick stuff and I think, because you're human, deep down, you know that."I would have never condoned or allowed experimental drugs and/or a mutilation of their bodies!!! " - NOBODY ELSE does, so what's your point?
What's my point?
This was your response to me:
"I guess another thing you are proving is that conservatives don't think parents know what is best for their children."
My response in turn:
This Parent, this conservative, knows that what is "best", is for a Parent to first recognize LIFE -
then, it is to protect that LIFE from all evil and harm!
This era of using experimental drugs and mutilation on....oh let's just say a 14 year old....is as EVIL and as harmful as it comes and yes any so-called "Parent" condoning and participating in it, is equally, EVIL.I assume This Parent is you. What makes you think you know better than That Parent?
As to your manufactured example of experimental drugs, et all. Where is you evidence that this is done except by nut jobs. You have none, so why do you keep pushing such disinformation?
Why would I be wrong in saying that any person, let alone parent, who forces a child to live in misery because their gender identity, which is very real to them, is being forcibly denied to them by those who think they know better isn't EVIL?"What makes you think you know better than That Parent?"
You mean "That Parent" who is intentionally giving a dangerous, life-altering drug to their child, without the child knowing about it?
YES, I know better!!!
A 15 or 16 year old cannot even give consent, which is why they are not able to go out and buy alcohol or vote. You think it is okay that they "consent" to an elective medical procedure that will lead them to permanent changes?
Lets be more accurate, permanently mutilated for life, irreversibly.
"A 15 or 16 year old cannot even give consent, " - BUT THERE parents can - but I forgot, conservatives don't believe in Parental Rights.
And yes, I do think they can consent because at least in America, teens have minds that work. So long as there has been, and I will say it again so you won't miss it this time, extensive medical and psychological evaluations that affirm what the teen is feeling, they then in those few instances the medical procedures should be allowed regardless of whether it offends some strangers archaic beliefs.So if a 13 year old has an extensive discusion with a store owner you think it is okay to allow them to buy alcohol? Just because someone sits on a couch and tells a therapist that they feel like another gender that does not make it true, and certainly does not justify the use of those drugs on those people.
You might look into the drug used in children as "puberty blockers". It is the same medication used for chemical castration for sex offenders. THAT is not from FOX, not hyperbole, not nonsense, but of course those on the left support permanently castrating children.
Just wanted to let you know that even if you are on the lefts side on most issues it is still okay to accept reality from time to time and not parrot their position even when it is wrong.Since when did a "store owner" become a medical or psychological expert? Maybe in your world, but not mine.
Sitting on a couch - It doesn't make it UNTRUE either does it? So, we are to rely on just your unexpert, biased, religiously-based opinion. Is that the deal?
My diabetes drug also acts as a weight-loss drug. Your point, other than hyperbole and histrionics?A store owner can no more give a child the right to consent to purchase alcohol than a psychologist can give a child the right to consent to sexual genital manipulation. I realize that comparison might be a little difficult for you to understand but it is the same.
Maybe in your world a psychologist can tell a child that they are mature enough to make sexual decisions. In the real world that should not be possible.My, I just don't how to reply to such total nonsense. I guess all those years of experience and education they got studying such things (which have none of) was just a waste of time because they live in fantasy worlds.
I can't deal with nonsense, so I won't.I can understand that you cannot respond since so many leftists have come on talk shows and told us that children can consent to sexual mutilation.
Calling it nonsense does not mean it is not true. It means that it is indefensible and you are just avoiding the subject.Of course it is not true. Any thinking person can see that.
You have chose to align yourself to those in favor of child genital mutilation. That is the truth. You may not accept it but that is your personal choice.
And you have chose to align yourself with those who want to mentally torture teenagers. That is the truth. You may not accept it, but that is your personal choice.
BTW, you are as good as DeSantis in passing along dangerous disinformation such as this. He was more direct by saying ""But what it is, is they're literally chopping off the private parts of young kids, and that's wrong.""
He, and you, are just grandstanding because it doesn't happen. Let me repeat it doesn't happen. When the surgeries are performed - AND IT IS RARE - it is teenagers who want them, you know - 16 or 17.
I know you don't think people have a brain at that age, but almost every other person in the world does.
It is a shame you have a need to make people live to the way you see life.
That is why I like being a liberal. I believe people should be able to do whatever they want so long as they don't hurt others or the environment. Your side, on the other hand, what to take away people's freedoms so that they will conform to you.
Such a broad, unsupported statement. What have liberals turned upside-down or made bad that was good?
So, you are saying DeSantis cancelling important Black history in schools isn't an example of cancel culture? Interesting.
No, I am saying you are inventing things based on the biased lies you are hearing from CNN. Having a grasp on reality and science is not something people in your tribe are now known for.
Not to mention that DeSantis/Florida did no such thing, just more hyperbolic nonsense by the leftwing MSM.
Yes, they blantanly lie when they post about that person. Amazingly enough they usually get away with it and people that like that poster swallow all of those lies.
I am sorry, but we are not Fox News or other right-wing propaganda outlets.
I noticed in the link above that you had to prove your argument by adding the CNN liars. Anyone that reports the truth does not write that sort of thing.
No. I need to correct you. It is Fox liars and CNN truth tellers. When are you going to give some examples of CNN lying like Fox has???
If you can't, they your words are so much hyperbole and nonsense.Since you seem unwilling to accept reality, here is another left wing media source pointing out over 50 instances of lies from CNN.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_controversies
It does seem that everytime anyone mentions how CNN lies you say "Well, FOX lies" as if that bogus argument has anything to do with what was pointed out.Its not fair to say CNN lies.
It would be fairer to say CNN is propaganda and messaging that the FBI, CIA and Corporations want the masses to be inundated with.Sigh, more conspiracy theories without a scintilla of factual evidence.
That could be. Maybe they think every piece of BS that the FBI tells them is true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zji49V8BIoYes, many believe the BS because they want to. I mean many have been part of perpetrating the same lies for some years now, so facts mean little to some. The facts only make them look foolish for going along with all the lies and spreading them. So much easier to keep spreading the lies.
Is that why a third of the nation listen to Fox and other right-wing media?
Here's a great example of the messaging... note how these various clips are NBC, FOX, CBS across all MSM channels.
They do this for ALL narratives they push, not just the harmless ones like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TM8L7bdwVaAWhy did you have us watch an ad about tinnitus?
That said, it was helpful because it caused me look up whether tinnitus, which I have, really does shrink brain cells (it doesn't). But it can, if bad enough, distract and exhaust the brain.
You actually trying to prove something with that failed Durham report. The report that said the FBI should have opened up a preliminary investigation? The report that disagrees with the unbiased IG report? The investigation that was badly beat twice in court? The investigation that got a low-level FBI lawyer to plead guilty to making minor alterations to an email? The report that wasted untold millions of dollars and didn't prove a damn thing that wasn't already known (save for the lawyer).
That report? Come on, give me a break. Find something real.
So agree, I mean with all the many times facts show that they have guests that perpetrate pure lies, not to mention all we learned from the Durham investigation as well as the Horiwizt investigation they continue to present many of the same liars to spread more lies.
However, once they hear a lie they like --- they run with t, and will no matter if it is proven a lie, it is set in their brain for all time. I am proud I have kept a clear head in these past few years. I truely would not want to be part of this group that has adopted this strange mindset -- what is right is wrong; what is wrong is right.
But, CNN continues to tank in ratings so maybe some are sick of the propaganda.
"Primetime ratings for CNN have fallen 61% this month — the steepest dip in viewership among the big three cable news giants, according to the latest figures released by Nielsen."
https://nypost.com/2023/03/30/cnn-prime … lsen-data/"So agree, I mean with all the many times facts show that they have guests that perpetrate pure lies" - AND YET you still make unsubstantiated claims. You haven't even presented one (and I suspect you can probably find one or two, but not the hundreds that Fox is famous for.)
And you use the NY Post, also famous for passing on misinformation.
Did the Post report that CNN is changing its format and to have patience?Yes, they do have a new boss, and hopefully, he is on point with reporting all the news truthfully, and in its entirety. And perhaps get a few new talk jocks. As of late Adweek makes very little mention of CNN. Over all Fox is still number one. https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/category/ratings/
CNN has always reported all the news truthfully, and in its entirety.
Yes, Fox is the number 1 fabricator of mis/disinformation by their own admission.
I posted to Ken, I think, the latest ranking in trustworthiness. CNN was way down the list, but still well above ALL the right-wing outlets. Some of those had a negative ranking somehow.
Bottom line, right-wing media is not to be trusted and those who listen to it are being fed a bunch of BS.
Wikipedia is left-wing media? Now I have heard it all. It is an on-line encyclopedia where anybody can post, assuming they can verify what they are posting.
In any case, I am guessing you didn't even read your link. Nowhere in it does it say that CNN Lied or is Lying about anything. It actually proves my point that CNN strives to give an honest representation of reality.
Why do you refuse to admit that Fox lies - a lot?Did you read the link or are you just trying to spread more disinformation? Here is an example: WikiLeaks emails
"Further information: 2016 Democratic National Committee email leak
During live coverage of the 2016 elections, CNN anchor Chris Cuomo said that downloading the hacked and stolen Podesta emails from the WikiLeaks website was a violation of law and that only the media could legally do so. The statement was proven to be false. The statement drew criticism to the network.[15][16][17]"
I never brought up Fox. It is just more of a leftist attempt to divert the conversation from the real subject?
Is that a fact? NOT. Read the Don't Say Gay law DeSantis signed.
Headline - DeSantis defends banning African American studies course as Black leaders call for action
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/2 … %20origin.
I find it highly ironic and disingenuous for you to criticize truth telling MSM while right-wing media keeps getting caught in lies.
You can hear him defending blocking such teaching here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCVmM5-tHag
DeSantis rightly claims that Florida schools are required to teach Black history. What he doesn't say is it is a Whitewashed version of that history. (Much like what Putin does in Russia about his history).
https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/05/politics … index.htmlThat would be an impossibility, as DeSantis has never signed a Don't Say Gay law. No such thing exists. Just more hyperbolic Leftwing nonsense.
You are just playing a semantic game. And it is clear you didn't read the link.
What did I invent? Please be specific then I will send you the laws he signed to prove my well known point.
CNN is one of the most trusted news sources in the world.
As far as your last sentence goes, you are projecting what is true about conservatives on to everybody else.
Where you say "Don't we have a free speech right to ask someone to stop lying and spreading disinformation/misinformation that is harmful and can ultimately get people killed?" - In the UK we do, it comes under amongst other things the "hate speech" laws; something the American right-right wing detest (I wonder why?).
In the UK you don't have free speech.
Very thankful I don't live there, or in the EU. The idea that I could be arrested in the UK for voicing this opinion is... well.... for many Americans it would be worth going to war with our government over.
Just like those first Americans went to war against the UK to be free all those years ago. There is a reason why the 1st Amendment stated "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech" without the ability to speak your opinion, you really have no freedom.
Its a shame our current government tries to make us less free and more like the UK with each passing day.BTW Ken, do you yell Fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire simply because you can?
I have a great clip here, a discussion between Judge Napolitano and Ray McGovern. Its a good piece because it explains the hows and whys of why we have this conflict, and as a former intelligence agent he approaches it with a non-political bias... he just states facts as he knows them. As do I.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQzRtyqyIUk
In the UK we do have free speech: I can express any opinion I like; it’s just a case of phrasing my words so as to not harm, or incite others to harm, those who would be vulnerable to attack or abuse e.g. “expressions of hatred toward someone on account of that person's colour, race, sex, disability, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origin, religion, gender reassignment, or sexual orientation” – To be able to attack such people, I think is despicable.
Plus also, the about to be made law "Online Safety Bill", targeted to protect children and the vulnerable from harm is a very admirable law. What gives people the right to say things on the Internet that can cause harm to children?
Online Safety Bill - Day 1 in the House of Lords (last month); the Bishop of Oxford gives his support to the Bill: https://youtu.be/wi2CE-HSRNsUnfortunately, in the UK, a person can be arrested for silently praying. No speaking words, just silently praying. I would say this pretty much qualifies as a lack of free speech, or a lack of freedom to silently pray.
"UK woman arrested a second time for 'offense' of silently praying outside abortion clinic: 'This isn’t 1984'
A pro-life activist arrested for the second time only weeks after the court cleared her of criminal charges for silently praying near an abortion facility.
A pro-life activist was arrested for the second time Tuesday for the "offense" of silently praying in her head near an abortion facility in a so-called censorship or "buffer zone" in Birmingham, England.
Isabel Vaughan-Spruce's arrest comes only weeks after the court cleared her of criminal charges for breaking a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) which enforces a censorship zone around the abortion facility, according to an Alliance Defending Freedom UK press release.
Bail conditions for Vaughan-Spruce' prohibit her from entering the vicinity of the abortion facility which extends beyond the "buffer zone."
https://www.foxnews.com/media/uk-woman- … ion-clinicA good example of ‘fake news’:
If you Google Isabel Vaughan-Spruce you will find that her story is NOT reported in any news media that prides itself in ‘fact- checking’; and for good reason:-
It is not a crime in the UK to silently pray; the whole story by Fox News, the Mail, and others who are renowned for publishing ‘fake news’ is fabricated.
The offence that Isabel Vaughan-Spruce committed was to violate a PSPO (Public Space Protection Order): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_sp … tion_order
The true facts surrounding this case can be found in a local newspaper; link below:-
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/m … d-25794626
As you will see in the above link, a PSPO was granted by a court, at the request of the local government, following public consultation as part of their evidence to the court, to protect the area around Robert Clinic, to focus on ensuring people visiting and working there have clear access without fear of confrontation.
Any local government seeking to implement a PSPO must have robust evidence for the courts, for its introduction, which guides the conditions and location – this includes concerns and complaints received from the local community.
Therefore, when proposing a PSPO the local government published a map showing the area they intended to be included in the PSPO, which was used for the public consultation to seek the views and input from the local community - All contributions received from the public during the consultation period was included in the evidence given to the court, that informed the final scope and conditions.
During public consultation the local government received contributions from 2,105 people, in conjunction with a number of site events, public meetings and conversations with residents, local councillors and campaigners.
The evidence was collated and prepared by the local government’s legal department, to finalise the order’s conditions and area covered. The original area for toe PSPO proposed by the local government was reduced as none of the evidence submitted by the public supported the original wider map for enforcement; but overwhelming evidence from the local community supported the smaller area approved by the court.”Sorry, the Birmingham article you provided is from 12/20/22. Being arrested for silently praying occurred in March of 2023.
This is NOT fake news.
Here is an article from the UK Daily Mail with video footage to prove it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … linic.html
She clearly says in the video she is not protesting buy silently praying. In the US this would type of harassment from law enforcement against a person not causing any harm would not be permitted. People can stand anywhere they want and silently pray.
This is just one of many examples of how you don't have freedom of expression or religion in the UK. It's that attitude that drove so many people to leave Europe and come to the US.Your link supports what Nathan said - she was arrested for violating the PSPO. Are you suggesting religeous folk don't have to follow the law?
I noticed they didn't expand on why she wasn't found guilty for her first arrest. They just left it hanging?Show me where the PSPO states a person is not permitted to stand in one spot and silently pray. The video tells the entire story. She was simply standing there. She was not making a sound and praying silently to herself. She states and the officers agree, she was NOT protesting.
Again, where in the PSPO does it state a person can not do this.To me it is obvious, she was objecting to the clinic, but I'll let Nathan provide a much more cogent explanation.
Nathan, do they have loitering laws in England.
In America they state "Loitering is the act of remaining in a particular public place for a prolonged amount of time without any apparent purpose."Each PSPO comes with designated restrictions. There are some, for instance, that prevent people walking their dogs in certain areas. I have a friend who lives in Wales, and they have quite a few of them there that cause much disagreement among people.
"The Public Spaces Protection Order can be used to stop a group from using a public square as a skateboard park and at the same time discourage drunken anti-social behaviour in the same place by making it an offence not to hand over containers of alcohol when asked to do so. It can also be used to prevent dogs fouling a public park or being taken into a children’s play area within that park."
Again, I would like to see the restrictions of this particular PSPO and if it specifically states a person is not permitted to stand quietly, not make a sound, and pray quietly.
I wonder if there is a way to find this particular PSPO.
IF you know anybody in the UK, these PSPOs are a source of anger for many.
"Dover District Council created a PSPO in July requiring that dogs be kept on leads under threat of criminal prosecution. In Kensington and Chelsea, consultation is ongoing on an order that would make driving loud cars an offence, targeted at rich foreigners cruising the area in Maseratis and Lamborghinis. In Oxford, the council passed a PSPO that prohibits people under the age of 21 from entering a specific tower block, Foresters Tower. Bassetlaw District Council has created a PSPO that prohibits “under 16 year olds … gathering in groups of three or more”. Although PSPOs are often broad in spatial scope, they can be targeted directly at particular groups or activities."
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015 … s-freedoms
It's obvious the UK is not the freest of places to live. If the government tried this in the US, there would be HUGE push back. Can you imagine how the ACLU and other civil rights organizations would get involved? I bet people would take to the streets.In the UK loitering is only illegal if you are over the age of 18 and it’s for the purpose of prostitution.
Also, Jaywalking is NOT illegal in the UK.
PSPO - Public Space Protective Order. If the UK is similar to the US it means she cannot go within that space. Not to shout, not to scream, not to pray and not to stand quietly. Not for any reason can she visit that space.
"Not for any reason can she visit that space." - YOU DO realize don't you that that is a false statement. They can transit the space and they can go to whatever facility is being protected by that protective order. But, yes, they can't do those other things you list.
No I don't know. I did say IF it is similar to the US protection order, wherein a person cannot be near a home, business, etc. Is the UK law different? They are allowed to enter the business that has obtained a protective order against them? Or in this case a public space?
Yep, spot on, but obviously unless its for legitimate access, as pointed out by Scott in his subsequent post.
Duh - Same person, same location and same laws in March 2023, as in December 2022; Isabel Vaughan-Spruce using the same publicity ploy in her silent and lone protest against abortion.
It is ‘fake news’; the Daily Mail (like Fox News) thrive on ‘fake news’; which is why Wikipedia banned the Daily Mail being used as a reference source in its articles.
If you dissect and fact check the information with original sources in both links that you’ve provided about the same incident, originally to Fox News in your previous post and subsequently to the Daily Mail in this post, you will find that both articles point to ADF (Alliance Defending Freedom) as a source information for their news, and both news articles by Fox News and the Daily Mail try to give the illusion that the Public Order Act 2023 was in force (law) in March 2023: FYI the Public Order Act 2023 did not become law until 3rd May 2023.
If you follow the links from both the Fox News and Daily Mail back to ADF (Alliance Defending Freedom), ADF claim that silent prayer is an offence under clause 11 of the Public Order Act 2023; which is crap. Clause 11 of the Act is “Powers to stop and search without suspicion”. The Clause they should be referring to is Clause 9 “Offence of interference with access to or provision of abortion services”. And if you read Clause 9 (copied below in text and image), you will so no reference whatsoever to silent prayer being illegal.
FYI ADF (Alliance Defending Freedom), which both Fox News and the Daily Mail relied heavily on for their source information, is an American conservative Christian legal advocacy group that works to expand Christian practices within public schools and in government, to outlaw abortion and to curtail rights for LGBTQ people – Need I say more!
9 Offence of interference with access to or provision of abortion services
(1) It is an offence for a person who is within a safe access zone to do an act with the intent of, or reckless as to whether it has the effect of—
(a) influencing any person’s decision to access, provide or facilitate the provision of abortion services at an abortion clinic,
(b) obstructing or impeding any person accessing, providing, or facilitating the provision of abortion services at an abortion clinic, or
(c) causing harassment, alarm or distress to any person in connection with a decision to access, provide, or facilitate the provision of abortion services at an abortion clinic, where the person mentioned in paragraph (a), (b) or (c) is within the safe access zone for the abortion clinic.
(2) A “safe access zone” means an area which is within a boundary which is 150 metres from any part of an abortion clinic or any access point to any building or site that contains an abortion clinic and is—
(a) on or adjacent to a public highway or public right of way,
(b) in an open space to which the public has access,
(c) within the curtilage of an abortion clinic, or building or site which contains an abortion clinic, or
(d) in any location that is visible from a public highway, public right of way, open space to which the public have access, or the curtilage of an abortion clinic.
(3) No offence is committed under subsection (1) by—
(a) a person inside a dwelling where the person affected is also in that or another dwelling, or
(b) a person inside a building or site used as a place of worship where the person affected is also in that building or site.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) is liable on summary conviction to a fine.
(5) Nothing in this section applies to—
(a) anything done in the course of providing, or facilitating the provision of, abortion services in an abortion clinic,
(b) anything done in the course of providing medical care within a regulated healthcare facility,
(c) any person or persons accompanying, with consent, a person or persons accessing, providing or facilitating the provision of, or attempting to access, provide or facilitate the provision of, abortion services, or
(d) the operation of a camera if its coverage of persons accessing or attempting to access an abortion clinic is incidental.
(6) In this section—
“abortion clinic” means—
(a) a place approved for the purposes of section 1 of the Abortion Act 1967 by the Secretary of State under subsection (3) of that section, or
(b) a hospital identified in a notification to the Chief Medical Officer under section 2(1) of the Abortion Act 1967 in the current or previous calendar year, and published identifying it as such, where “current” or “previous” are references to the time at which an alleged offence under subsection (1) of this section takes place;
“abortion services” means any treatment for the termination of pregnancy;
“dwelling” has the same meaning as in section 1 of this Act (offence of locking on).
You might want to rethink, or rephrase, your last sentence?
FYI: Last year –
• Net migration to the USA = 1.01 million
• Net migration to the UK = 0.61 million
Therefore, in spite of the fact that the USA’s population is 5 times greater than the UK, net migration in the USA was only 60% greater than the UK!
Net migration to the UK last year was more than double 2019, which is a great embarrassment to the UK Conservative Government who pledged to their hard-line supports in 2019 that Brexit would enable them to bring immigration down.Nathan - not to switch subjects, but you had commented quite awhile ago that Conservatives were going to get a drubbing in the next election. I read a little while ago that that actually happened just recently at the local levels.
Further, it looks like the Conservatives are imploding as I write this and Labour will return to power in a year or two
I don't know if I like that idea either because my "impression" is that Conservatives, while not as bad as MAGA, aren't that far away and that Labour is much like our most active Progressives like AOC.
Where is the happy medium like Biden? lol.
BTW - my wife and I are coming to England in August to take a cruise to places like Wales, Ireland, Scotland and the like. That will be my second time in England and her first.Yeah; as things are going, the Conservatives are heading towards a humiliating defeat at the next General Election in 18 months’ time.
It is most likely that Labour will win the next General Election, but with our ‘first past the past’ election system in a multiparty country there is no guarantee at this time that Labour will necessarily win an outright majority - it could be a hung Parliament, where Labour has to form a coalition Government with one or more other political parties e.g. the Liberal Democrats.
I had to look up MAGA & AOC on Wikipedia to fully understand your statement; and yes as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) told Anderson Cooper (American broadcast journalist) she favours policies that "most closely resemble what we see in the UK, in Norway, in Finland, in Sweden".
As a socialist I would fully welcome a Labour Government, it was a Labour Government in 1948 who launched the NHS (Free universal healthcare for all at the point of use), and the social welfare system that we enjoy to this day.
Labour also supports free education and affordable social housing (Council Houses) and Nationalisation of Public Utilities e.g. public transport, water, electricity, gas, coal, sewage etc. nationalisation being where the Utility is State Owned and State Controlled.
The handling of the Railways has turned out to be an embarrassment to the Conservatives:
• Labour nationalised the railways in 1948, and called it British Rail.
• Conservatives privatised the railways in 1992, splitting it into two business sectors –
(a) Management of the railway tracks, signals and train stations, and
(b) Operating the trains. The train services were divided, allowing private companies to bid for the franchises once every 3 years.
In 2002 the private business managing the rail tracks, signals and train stations went bankrupt, so Labour took that part of the business back into public ownership (nationalisation).
However, whereas before privatisation rail travel was cheap, since privatisation the cost of rail travel has got ever more expensive yearly, and services have deteriorated as private rail operators cream off the profits for their shareholders, and underfunded the train services.
In 2018 the situation got so bad that 64% of the British Public supported renationalising of the rail service. Consequently, the Conservative Government has since done an embarrassing U-turn and announced that the train services will be brought back under State Control (as each franchise expires) e.g. re-nationalisation – and the Conservatives have named the ‘new’ nationalised train service ‘Great British Railways’.
The National Grid (electricity supply) was nationalised by Labour in 1947 and privatised by the Conservatives in 1990. However, the current Conservative are currently in the process of re-nationalising the National Grid by 2024, specifically so that they can then better manage the Government’s own legal requirement to make the UK carbon net neutral by 2050!
If you want a “happy medium like Biden” then a coalition Government with Labour in power, but with the Liberal Democrats holding the ‘balance of power’ would be your happy medium e.g. Labour wouldn’t be able to anything without the consent of the Liberal Democrats.We never actually "nationalize" anything over here, although the Conservatives would like you to think so. The closest thing we might have to that is Amtrak, our national passenger railroad system.
What we have done in the past under both Republican and Democratic governments is "regulate" the hell out of critical infrastructure, mainly airlines, telecommunications, and energy distribution systems (I don't think we had the same type of regulations over oil and gas producers.)
Reagan did away with all that in the 1980s. The same thing happened here, service went to hell and prices rose. Service was one of the few aspects those businesses could compete on since prices, to a large degree, were regulated.
Personally, I am more for the Reaganesque model but with more regulation than we currently have. But the regulation would deal with safety, environment, unfair competition, predatory consumer activities, and price gouging, but not service (as terrible as that is) and prices, other than gouging.
I am hoping MAGA has created enough rope where they will hang hang themselves across the board in 2024. Unfortunately, because of gerrymandering (fixing the election through drawing boundaries) and self-selection, America has large swaths of distinctly Red and Blue areas with very few purple ones to balance things out.
What is different about 2024, is Conservatives have really, really pissed off a lot of women by taking their rights away from them. As a few states have already seen, that could really hurt them, even in rural areas. Of course, there is the fact that they will probably nominate (whether the majority wants to our not) a single term, twice impeached, convicted sexual offender (civil), currently under felony indictment failed former president who will probably be under three more felony indictments before the election.
That certainly tells you a lot about how far a third of Americans have fallen that they would ever consider putting a man like that back into power. But as other dictators and autocrats well know (and what our framers most feared) it is easy to pull the wool over some peoples eyes whose character matches that of their leader.Thanks for the summary of American politics; educational.
I guess that when it comes to the idea of nationalisation (State owned and State controlled) a fundamental difference between perception in the USA vs UK, is that in the UK we’ve “Been There, Done That”, so we know in the UK from personal experience that nationalisation is not the ogre to be feared!
Short of nationalisation, UK Governments will, as you describe for America, Regulate heavily where and when they see fit; but another tactic British Government employ is offer of self-regulation with the threat of Government Regulation if the Business Sector in question doesn’t self-regulate to the Government’s satisfaction.
For example, currently the UK Conservative Government is asking the Supermarkets (Food Stores) to ‘Self-Regulate’ price capping on ‘essential’ food items e.g. milk, eggs and bread etc. That request has gone down like a lead balloon with the Supermarkets, so it will be interesting to see if anything does come of it, and or whether the UK Government will take further action to enforce price capping on essential foods, or adopt a different strategy/policy?
Cost of living: Supermarkets encouraged to introduce voluntary price caps on some foods https://youtu.be/I27alsLuHFk
Yes it is easy to pull the wool over some people’s eyes; something Boris Johnson (our elected Prime Minister in 2019) played on to his advantage for a while, but his lies and deceit came back to bite him hard, causing him to be kicked out of Office by his own Party. At least in the UK we can get rid of Prime Ministers easier than you can get rid of Presidents in the USA e.g. we’re now on our third Prime Minister since the last General Election in 2019, and Liz Truss only lasted as Prime Minister for just six weeks.I presume the Labour Party is own board with "self-regulation" as well? I don't know what MAGA believes over here (I doubt they know either) but your Conservatives and our conservatives would part company on the second half of self-regulation. Ours are all for it, but without the hammer.
We call the supermarkets as well.
One difference between Johnson and Trump is that Boris paid the political price for his corruption. Our far-right gets even more excited and dedicated when Trump violates the law. (Fortunately, there are enough "not so" far-right who will not vote or vote against him that we will have a repeat of 2020 - which Trump is still whining about.)Yeah, the Labour Party is on-board with ‘self-regulation’. A flag-ship example of good and effective ‘self-regulation’ in the UK is the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority). The ASA, which operates independently of the advertising industry, but which is financed by the advertising industry, was created by the advertising industry itself in 1961.
The prime objective of the ASA is that ‘all’ adverts in newspapers, on-line and on TV & Radio etc. must be “Legal, Decent, Honest and Truthful”, and the ASA has the power to ban any advert in the UK that doesn’t meet it’s ‘advertising standards’.
And although the ASA doesn’t have the power itself to prosecute because it’s only a private body, it works closely with Ofcom (Office of Communications) which as an independent Government body and thus does have the power to prosecute.
Advertising Standards Authority: Every UK ad a responsible ad https://youtu.be/0xjTJoLklvs
Labelling of food products in the UK by the food industry is another good example of where ‘self-regulation’ works e.g. food labelling. In the UK all packaged food must clearly provide full details of:
1. Contents, including the percentage of each ingredient, and list the ingredients in descending order by volume e.g. if water is listed as the first ingredient then you know that water is the main ingredient.
2. Full nutritional details, including the calories, fat (types of fats), sugars (types of sugars), salt, and the vitamins and minerals, giving the amount of each and the percentage of each in relation to the ‘Daily Recommended Intake’.
3. Clearly warn buyers if the food product is high in ‘fats, salts and sugar’; most food manufacturers prefer the ‘traffic light’ system e.g. if a product is high in saturated fat, moderate sugar and low in salt then ‘fat will be highlighted in ‘red’, sugar marked in ‘amber’ and salt marked in ‘green’.
Label reading - traffic light system https://youtu.be/7O-W6n7F75A
Yeah, I have noticed from a distance (across the pond) on how the far-right in the USA gets “more excited and dedicated when Trump violates the law”; that seems to highlight another subtle difference between British and American politics, in that in the UK there is still a certain level of honour in politics, and politicians will generally resign if they breach that honour e.g. the ‘Parliamentary code of conduct’ for MPs, and for Government Ministers, the ‘Ministerial code of conduct’.That is also true on the Democratic side of the aisle (and used to be on the Republican as well). But with the advent of Trump and MAGA, honor has no place in their Party.
Scott,
I hope you enjoy your cruise to the UK in August; is it just a cruise (ship) or will you be travelling inland by coach tour or private car hire?
If you’re hiring a private car to explore inland, Bristol (where I live) is just a 20 minutes’ drive from the Welsh border; and provided I’m not in Portsmouth at the time (I’m planning to nip to Portsmouth for a week early August to help a friend with his DIY projects) then you are most welcome to drop in for a cup of coffee/tea and a social chat with the family – and if you and your good wife wanted to stay overnight, you’re most welcome.
ArthurAND in Wales, they have one of the longest and fastest zip lines in the world. I tried it when I was there and it was quite an experience. If you want a real rush of Adrenaline, this will do it. I thought it was great.
I am disappointed, they don't have any excursions offered in Hollyhead
I do like zip lines though. The longest one I tried was in Costa Rica many years ago (we are still growing some coffee plants from seeds we were given there). I will have to look it up if we have any time in port.Here is a link to it.
I recommend it, especially if you like zip lines.
https://www.zipworld.co.uk/adventure/velocityIf I can get to it, I will do it. Thanks. It looks like it is about 30 - 60 minutes from Holyhead, where we dock for 9 hours. For some strange reason, Carnival doesn't have any excursions for that port.
Then you have to come to PR and check out Toro Verde Park.
Do long as there are no mountains I have to climb, lol. A friend and I tried one in Cabo San Lucus and I had to skip several of them because I simply ran out of steam. The guy with me is older, but had no problem, but then he was a mailman.
I did get to do repelling there and that was more fun than I thought it would be.Im afraid of heights, so not for me. LOL
But the park is great. There are different ziplines, and activities. Including the 2nd longest zipline in the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiUdg4tcKqI
Jimmy Fallon almost dying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-A2Nv9fvaYI guess you won't join me in skydiving then, lol.
I'll cheer for you from the safety of the ground.
So did my wife, lol. I can't believe how out of shape I am. I use to skydive when I was in college 55 years ago. I talk about it every once in awhile so my wife got me a tandem jump two Christmases ago. I finally used it last Oct on (or near) my birthday.
I hadn't jumped higher than 4,000 feet before, but those had been solo. Here, they took me to 10,000 feet - it was beautiful up there. The jumpmaster hooked me up to him and out we went. There was a lady with a camera who went out before us to film.
Even though I wasn't doing much, I still got somewhat exhausted and when we landed and guy unbuckled me, I sort of sunk to the ground. But that wasn't the embarrassing part. When I tried to get up, I acted like a drunk sailor - but I was too tired to care, lol.
If you want (and I can find it) I'll send you the video.A drunk sailor LOL
That's a good wife!
Im sure it must be an incredible experience. One of my sister is dying to do it. She did bungee jumped once.I am actually afraid to bungee jump. I am really afraid of it pulling my legs off. Stupid, I know, but there it is. If it is in a harness attached to my shoulders, maybe I will give it a shot, lol.
Cool
- According to Google that's at Penrhyn Slate Quarry - is that the one you was thinking of?
We've been to several slate quarries on our holidays in Wales, but I don't thing we've been to that one.
We actually fly over to Heathrow and board a ship in Dover (white cliffs and all). From there we visit:
Hollyhead, Wales
Glasgow for two days
Belfast
Liverpool
Dublin
Cork
We haven't purchased any excursions yet, but that is how we will see the sights.
I appreciate the invite, for I would truly like to meet you, but time will be a premium, save maybe for Glasgow. We are planning on spending an extra day or so in Dover on the front end and in London on the back end.Cool
– Obviously “time will be a premium” on your visit – but my philosophy is “if you don’t ask, you don’t know”.
As you plan to spend a little time in Dover, I can recommend a visit to Samphire Hoe.
Samphire Hoe is a country park just 2 miles west of Dover; it was created in 1997 by dumping the spoil from the excavation of the Channel Tunnel to France.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samphire_HoeSamphire Hoe it is, thanks. Do they have Uber or Lyft over there?
We don’t have Lyft in the UK. We do have Uber in the UK although it’s not as well established as in the USA because under UK Juridical law Uber drivers are employees of Uber (not self-employed) which means that Uber have to pay their drivers the legal minimum wage, give them six weeks paid leave per year, maternity leave and sick leave etc.
In the UK Taxi services are common place; and in London are exceptionally good (the famous London Black cab). In London, the taxi drivers are self-employed, but you can’t get a licence to operate in London as a taxi driver without passing ‘The Knowledge’ exams. The ‘Knowledge’ exams and the issuing of taxi driver licences in London are all done by the London local government.
To pass the ‘Knowledge’, in order to become a self-employed taxi driver in London (black cab) requires remembering off by heart over 25,000 London streets, and the shortest route between any two streets. It takes most people, studying 35 hours a week, between 2 and 4 years to acquire enough of the ‘Knowledge’ to be able to pass the tough exams set by the London local government. And only after they’ve passed the Knowledge can they get their licence and become black cab drivers in London.
The People Who Have to Remember 25,000 Streets | The Knowledge: The World's Toughest Taxi Test https://youtu.be/u7gp8KBP7ak
But like the yellow cabs in New York, generally, if you want a black cab in London, you just stick out your arm, and usually a black cab will pull-up next to you almost immediately.
As you intend to spend a few days in London, you need to be aware that you can’t use cash on ‘public transport’ in London; you need to use the Oyster Card, which can be used on ‘all’ public transport in London e.g. the tube (train underground), buses and even ferries.
However, notwithstanding my comments in recent posts about privatisation of public transport in the UK in the 1980s; for whatever reason, the public transport in London was never privatised – it’s all owned and controlled by ‘Transport for London’ (London local government). Thus, public transport in London is the cheapest, most efficient and most integrated public transport system in the UK.
Once you’ve bought an Oyster Card you can travel as often and as far as you like in London without worrying about racking up the costs in that your daily fairs are capped e.g. once you’ve reached the daily cap all subsequent travel on public transport is free.
This website gives all the latest details and prices on the Oyster card.
https://www.toptiplondon.com/transport/ … yster-card
How To Travel Around London and Buy an Oyster Card - Important Tips! https://youtu.be/LlZ_xDx2Zl0
Also, if you’re spending a few days in London you’re quite likely will want to use the tube (train underground), which is a quick and efficient way of getting around London e.g. trains run every 2 or 3 minutes to most destinations.
How to take The Tube in London https://youtu.be/EOVX4eUYJ-4Thanks for the tips. i hadn't really thought about getting around London while we were there.
A few years ago (2019) our Australian cousins did a three months tour of the UK, and en-route to the West Country they stayed over with us for a couple of days – so we were able to give them a guided tour of Bristol and give them a traditional ‘Full English Breakfast’.
Similar to your intent, at the tail end of their tour of the UK they spent the last week in London.
Prior to their tour of the UK they’d done a lot of research of where they wanted to go and what they wanted to see; and being Harry Potter fans, high on the list was to:-
• Take a ride on the Jacobite Steam Train in Scotland (84 miles round trip by steam train), the steam train railway line as featured as the ‘Hogwarts Express’ in the Harry Potter films, and
• To take selfie photos on Platform 9 ¾ at King’s Cross Station, London, which also featured in the Harry Potter films.
Links (and info) to both the above are:-
https://westcoastrailways.co.uk/jacobit … train-trip
https://freetoursbyfoot.com/harry-potter-kings-cross/
We could use a PSPO in the States given the violent nature of the anti-choice crowd.
Methinks Ken needs to go back an reread American history.
1. America started the revolution only as a very last resort because they wanted a voice in their fate. Beyond that, they were happy to be British citizens. But, as I like to say, the King screwed the pooch (although there is some analysis that is saying it wasn't really him.) In fact, the powers that be, save for a few firebrands like Samuel Adams) were still trying to find a way to not have a revolution even while preparations were being made to have one.
2. The original Constitution did not have the Bill of Rights attached. They were forced to be added by Conservatives before they would ratify the document.
2a. The speech part was in reaction to the British suppressing speech of the colinists.
2b. The assembly part was in reaction to the British preventing assembly to protest their unfair laws
2c. The religion part was because A. England had a state religion and we didn't want anyone telling us what religion to have (much like what social conservatives are trying to do today) and B. Because several states (Virginia included) imposed a state religion. It was the Framer's intent to have a secular nation free of the what some thought of as the malign influence of organized religion.
Well, Dr. Mark,
Thanks for you comment.
My relative and grandparents are from Ukraine and I've been there many times. I know Ukraine and I know how russians operate. I visited Ukraine when it was a member of the USSR.
The russian media and its government have a long and well documented history of spreading propaganda as part of their effort to control or influence other countries.
Ukraine and russia are engaged in an all-out war. The propaganda they are spreading about this is blatant and intentional.
If you had someone tell painfully obvious lies about your country by the nation it was at war with for purpose of changing the facts, history and the perception of reality, what would you do?
In my mind, these lies and mistruths must be addressed and revealed for what they are and that is propaganda. It is not a mistake, it is not an opinion, it is an intentional effort to misrepresent history as well as the present.
Yes, people have a right to free speech, I also have a right to free speech. We must not forget such a thing.
When you read russian propaganda talking points and mistruths that are repeated in a thread, I feel a need to correct it.
Where would the influence come from to spew forth russian propaganda?"In my mind, these lies and mistruths must be addressed and revealed for what they are and that is propaganda. " - IN SOME quarters, that is called making a personal attack, lol.
What state do you live in? What if Russia had invaded and annexed that state 9 years ago. Would you be saying?
If you don't follow them, why do you repeat them so often? Is it because you think Putin (like Trump) speaks only the truth and everybody else lies?
It is well known that Putin is a paranoid.
SOMEBODY attacked the Kremlin in early May, just before their May 9 "Victory Day" celebrations (for which they don't have enough military hardware to put on display). Who was it.
Putin says it was Ukraine trying to assassinate him even though he wasn't in the Kremlin.. Zelenskyy says they fight in their own territory and not Moscow. Besides, many doubt the drones they have can even reach Moscow.
Others say it is another Putin False Flag operation to justify doing something to Ukraine that they aren't already doing or have tried. That leaves going nuclear or biological. Maybe, but I don't think likely.
A couple of people suggest Russian partisans (which I didn't know they even had an organized group of them) trying to embarrass Putin. Among the three, I like this one the best.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/04/europe/k … index.html
One can hope it was a signal of the long-awaited counteroffensive by Ukraine.FINALLY, PUTIN'S WAR is being carried to the Motherland, not by Ukrainian soldiers but by Russian citizens who want to free Russia from Putin's rule.
I support their effort so long as they keep their attacks limited to military and government targets. They claim to have "liberated" a village inside of Russia. I doubt it, but it would be nice.
In any case, this will help the Russian people understand the terrible thing Putin has done.
https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ru … index.htmlPutin's own people know this is wrong. I've had more than one russian person come up to me and tell me how badly they feel about what their country is doing to Ukraine. In Ukraine, there really isn't a dislike for the russian people, but their government and military. Here is something interesting to know.
"Putin Defectors Say They've Seized Belgorod Towns, Vow to 'Liberate Russia'
Russian fighters serving in the Ukrainian Armed Forces say they have seized settlements in the Belgorod region, located near to the Ukrainian border.
The Freedom of Russia Legion—formed weeks after Russia's invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022—aims "to liberate Russia from Putinism," Ilya Ponomarev, an exiled Russian politician, who says he is political representative for the group of fighters, told Newsweek on Monday of the latest developments.
The Legion was declared a terrorist organization by Russia's Supreme Court in March. The group claimed on its social media channels on Monday that it had, alongside the Russian Volunteer Corps (RVC), "completely liberated" the settlement of Kozinka in Belgorod, and that its units had entered Graivoron.
Ponomarev, who was the only member of the Russian parliament to vote against Moscow's annexation of Crimea in 2014, told Newsweek that the legion and RVC had "liberated" both Kozinka and Graivoron.
Belgorod Regional Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov announced that "a sabotage and reconnaissance group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine" had entered the territory of Graivoron.
The events in the Belgorod region and other border areas are the result of a full-scale invasion and aggressive war of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin's Russia against Ukraine. Yes, citizens of the Russian Federation, namely the forces of the [RVC] and the Legion took responsibility for these events," said Andriy Yusov, a spokesperson for Ukraine's military intelligence agency GUR.
"I think that we can only congratulate the decisive actions of the opposition-minded citizens of Russia, who are ready for an armed struggle against the criminal regime of Putin," he continued.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/pu … &ei=11"Putin's own people know this is wrong. " - I WISH that were true, but from what I read, most of the Russian population is as brainwashed as MAGA is in America. They have been fed a line of consistent BS and there is no counter-view allowed.
In my mind, that makes MAGA worse because they have alternative news sources other than the right-wing propaganda they chose to listen to. The average Russian doesn't have a choice.
I wonder if there is much armed resistance in Russia beyond these Freedom Fighters.
What their incursions show, with armored vehicles no less, is that Russia has not manned its borders. Now they will have to pull troops off the front lines to protect the Motherland.
I get it Mike! I think the biggest gripe I've personally heard is the amount of money being sent to Ukraine by the U.S. Also, the fact that some in our Government, profit in times of war.
You have deep roots in Ukraine and I know that all of this death and destruction are tearing you apart.
I pray it ends soon!!The problem is, my points are not Russian propaganda.
That is why I link to the sites. proving what happened and why, repeatedly.
My sources are sound, if i say that the Ukrainian's are taking massive casualties, it is because it has come from more than one source that I trust that is informing me of this information.
I keep stressing, it doesn't matter what the West's perception of this war is.
This was is being fought on Russia's border. Just south of Moscow.
Crimea was accepted into the Russian Republic March 2014.
For Russia and all Russians... Crimea is Russia... period.
Trying to take Crimea is declaring war on Russia.
We DO NOT belong fighting this war. America, if it does, will pay a terrible price... the arrogant fools in DC are dooming us all with this idiocy."Crimea was accepted into the Russian Republic March 2014."
This is a blatant lie. It was illegally annexed by Russia during March of 2014. This is propaganda that russia has tried to spew forth since March 2014. I don't know how many times I have to prove you wrong on this. It's getting to be pretty routine.
"UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. General Assembly approved a resolution Thursday affirming Ukraine’s territorial integrity and calling the referendum that led to Russia’s annexation of its Crimean Peninsula illegal, sending a message to Moscow of surprisingly strong international opposition to its military takeover of the strategic Black Sea region.
The vote on the Ukraine-sponsored resolution was 100 countries in favor, 11 opposed and 58 abstentions."
https://nypost.com/2014/03/27/un-russia … s-illegal/
"Trying to take Crimea is declaring war on Russia."
Another statement right from the russian propaganda playbook. The truth is when russia illegally annexed Crimea that was a declaration of war. Trying to liberate territory from an invader is the right of every sovereign nation.
"This was is being fought on Russia's border. Just south of Moscow."
I'm going to believe your map reading skills have probably lessened since your time in the US Army. The war's front is more than 600 miles from Moscow.https://www.reuters.com/article/ukraine … GF20140317
Crimea became part of Russia, the Russian Republic March 2014:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukra … YR20140320
Russia’s lower house of parliament overwhelmingly approved a treaty to annex Crimea from Ukraine.
It really doesn't matter if the UN or Ukraine or America doesn't like it, or doesn't want to accept it.
Its done.
Crimea no longer is part of Ukraine, its part of Russia.
The Russians believe this, they are willing to go to war over it.
Ukraine CAN NOT WIN a war against Russia.
Ukraine HAS NO CHANCE against Russia.
This is a military reality. Its fact.
Only America/NATO fighting this war can do that.
If WWIII breaks out... which is the goal of those running the Biden Administration and has been all along... they want to carve Russia up... they are warmongering lunatics, but that is their goal.
They will fail, Americans will pay a terrible price... the people of EU a far far worse price.
Crimea is part of the Russian Republic whether you or anyone else likes that or not. And only going to war against Russia and defeating the entire country can change that.
Fact.
Reality.
I don't say this because I care one bit either way. I say this because I am an American that has no interest in seeing WWIII break out.
So SOMEONE has to speak TRUTH.
Russia is NOT going to back down.
Russia is NOT going to give up Crimea.
Ukraine CANNOT defeat Russia.
So its time this REALITY starts being spoken so we can AVOID WWIII.You go ahead and keep believing that nonsense, that is certainly your right.
AB,
I have heard that gripe as well. When I hear it I like to point out that Ukraine has used the money it has received to significantly degrade the russian military. The russians are closing in on losing 200,000 soldiers. Those are numbers that haven't been seen in a war since WWII. They lost so many planes, tanks, armored personal carriers, etc. It is estimated it could take more than a decade for the russian army to recover from this.
The money given to Ukraine by the US has resulted in one of the biggest military threats to the US being significantly decreased. russia only has a small amount of the ability to wage war as it did before it invaded Ukraine. The money given to the Ukraine by the US has made the world safer for those in the US by providing the ability to destroy so much of the russian military.I have https://u24.gov.ua/ permanently up on my browser. Every once in a while I visit the site and donate more money to one of the three funds that are available.
I speak for myself and I'm sure many Ukrainians in thanking you for your contributions and support in the effort to liberate Ukraine.
As one former solder to another I thank you.
It is so nice to see the anti-Putin Russian's taking the war to Russia. That said, I do not like their choice of targets - maybe it is a Russian thing. They need to keep the targets military or, if they want to shake civilians, a demonstration in some field (meaning remove the top two feet of dirt with explosives)
https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ru … index.htmlHEADLINE - "Ukrainian forces appear to be focusing on creating an asymmetrical attrition gradient that conserves Ukrainian manpower at the cost of a slower rate of territorial gains, while gradually wearing down Russian manpower and equipment."
Smart, as usual, and makes sense to me. Russia will need a lot more than 180,000 additional untrained and scared troops to feed the meat grinder called the Ukrainian armed forces.PUTIN'S WORST NIGHTMARE!!
"The Group of Seven (G7) Coalition and NATO signed agreements to offer Ukraine long-term security commitments during the NATO Summit in Vilnius on July 12. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced that NATO has agreed on a three-part package that will give Ukraine a multi-year program of practical assistance, create a NATO-Ukrainian coordination council, and commits NATO to allow Ukraine to join the alliance without going through a Membership Action Plan (MAP).[i] G7 members Germany, Japan, France, Canada, Italy, Britain, and the United States signed a general framework document called the “Joint Declaration of Support for Ukraine” aimed at offering the Ukraine military, financial, and intelligence support and stated that each member of the G7 will enter into bilateral security negotiations with Ukraine regarding the document.[ii] The Group of Seven (G7) Coalition and NATO signed agreements to offer Ukraine long-term security commitments during the NATO Summit in Vilnius on July 12. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg announced that NATO has agreed on a three-part package that will give Ukraine a multi-year program of practical assistance, create a NATO-Ukrainian coordination council, and commits NATO to allow Ukraine to join the alliance without going through a Membership Action Plan (MAP).[i] G7 members Germany, Japan, France, Canada, Italy, Britain, and the United States signed a general framework document called the “Joint Declaration of Support for Ukraine” aimed at offering the Ukraine military, financial, and intelligence support and stated that each member of the G7 will enter into bilateral security negotiations with Ukraine regarding the document.[ii] "
https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysi … 9482cb0210It seems MAGA has joined Putin in his war to crush Ukraine. SAD.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1579288/Your link is referring to --- Drug Testing in Oral Fluid.
Thank you. It should have been this https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/03/politics … 2Dstarter.
Ukraine and Israeli aid is tied to talking the Republicans into accepting money for border security.
In case you interested in useless information, that first link I provided was some research I was doing on if oral fluid drug testing test for THC or THC metabolites. CA and WA, starting the beginning of year, ban using the results from metabolite (urine) testing in hiring and firing decisions. Many of my company's clients in CA and WA use urine testing for non-DOT drug testing.I have been tracking Ukraine's progress using https://deepstatemap.live/en#11/47.4207/35.9435
It is easy to tell the impact of the Republican blockade of additional military aid to them. The Russians, sadly, are slowly gaining back the territory they lost during the Summer and Fall.It's evident that the House is firmly supporting the HR 2 proposal concerning border issues. The two sides advocate for contrasting solutions to immigration reform. One side aims to enhance efficiency, making it easier for individuals to enter the United States illegally and seek asylum. This approach seems to be an open invitation for illegal immigration. Conversely, the opposing side aims to reinstate stricter rules to discourage migrants from attempting the journey.
On May 11, 2023, the House approved the Secure the Border Act of 2023 (H.R. 2), a bill that proposes significant changes to federal immigration laws related to border security, asylum, and detention. It is crucial for more people to take the time to read the contents of HR2 before engaging in discussions about sensible solutions for our border situation. The bill is very common sense https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59151
The matter is not as straightforward as Republicans withholding support and leveraging aid to Ukraine and Israel. The consensus is that there is a need to address the influx of migrants into America, especially considering the challenges of managing court dates for asylum cases. Both major and border cities are grappling with the overwhelming number of migrants, leading to various associated problems.
While I align with the House's position, I believe it is essential not to make the border more attractive to migrants. There might be a need to temporarily close the border to asylum seekers until we can efficiently handle the millions awaiting their court dates. We truely need a solution to the problem at the border.
I prefer not to share my thoughts on aid to Israel and Ukraine.I can see why not to share your thoughts about Ukraine with Israel combined getting 450 billion aid from the US. When 20 billion would fix homeless and much of poverty at home. Only 1% Muslims or less 1% Russian are getting cross US boarder legally into the US. Must be they are happier at home, than other countries struggling with a world economy crisis. The new BRICS member will make up half of the world population and dominant all energy resources, where wars solves nothing. Only 10% of life is bad situation like in Iraq and Gaza, why because of wars? I'm lucky to be able to move to my house in Belize or Trinidad with greater pleasure. Rather than struggling with Governments and bankters having us coming and going.
I did prefer Trumps approach on how China and Mexico are killing us in economic growth. At least Mexican were moving back home where things are better. Mexican drug cartel only charge 10% tax, Where US drug cartel is one third of the economy, plus much higher tax. to keep them numb. Covid Vaccines for example and climate change are fake crisis for most part."I did prefer Trumps approach on how China and Mexico are killing us in economic growth." - Do you have data to back that up?? Mine shows that we are doing much better than China or Mexico.
Trump
“When do we beat Mexico at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity,” Trump said as he announced his candidacy on June 16, 2015. “And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they’re killing us economically. The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems.”
The plandemic really ruin me and many small businesses. If Biden shows economy growth from his properganda machine, where it's all getting better. It would only be getting better from the worst times within our lifetime over covid Maddness. When they stopped vaccines and this Biden 100% covid vaccines approveal that it won't cause harm to anyone. Yet it was the worst economy and social collapse in our lifetime. That's to cover the fact that the US fiat US currency and Pedro dollars are collapsing and the BRICS will dominate most sources of energy in the world. Ask most of the US economic agents , 2024 will keep going down.
Many of the smaller countries and third world countries GDP growth are much faster than the USA. China GDP faster than USA although China may end separate into smaller countries because smaller countries are doing best. Just a chance.Not true. Biden's economy is doing better than before the pandemic.
Also:
China gdp per capita for 2022 was $12,720, a 0.81% increase from 2021. US 8.8% Biden, MX -3.2%
China gdp per capita for 2021 was $12,618, a 21.22% increase from 2020. US 10.5% Biden, MX 5.2%
China gdp per capita for 2020 was $10,409, a 2.61% increase from 2019. US -2.4% Trump, MX -9.4%
China gdp per capita for 2019 was $10,144, a 2.41% increase from 2018. US 3.7% Trump, MX -1.1%
Now do you claim US growth is worse the China or Mexico?Of course the economy is better since the stopage of the vaccines mandates and lockdowns that has crippled the world and billionair are laughing to the banks. They have plenty of more weapons of mass distractions to come, to no matter of left, right, left, right match they whitewash many to over obey.
The Chinese economy is on track to meet the government's 2023 growth target, reflecting a strong post-COVID recovery. Real GDP is projected to grow by 5.4 percent in 2023. The US GDP growth is 4.9 and enen that is very hard to believe. Mexico is lower now, yet they don't pay three to four times the taxes. The Mexican drug cartel keep the people from fearing their Government. The greatest complaint is in Canada and US is its very difficult to make financial ends meet. Trinidad or Belize is more financial and socially stable for me now. About half my family lives in Mexico. As we Canadain keep looking at the ground half the time. Wail my images of Mexican are alway smiling.Let's face it, you claimed our economy was worse than China's and Mexico's. It isn't, so you were wrong in your assessment.
The rest is just red herrings.I'm not saying the US doesn't have the wealthier economy in the world. Even though Asia has most billionaires over North America. I look at future potential more at countries with much greater GDP growth potential and the BRICS set up with half the world's population and dominant on all energy fronts. Certainly the west 100 trillion dollars to change the worlds temperature by 1 degree by 2050 is most important to them. Or men can have babies will not save the planet species, probably decease population.. Or US currency turning to toilet paper in the east, will bring anyone to a friendlier and kinder world.
Show me the money for the future?
"One side aims to enhance efficiency, making it easier for individuals to enter the United States illegally and seek asylum." - I HAVE offered multiple examples of policies that debunk that Republican myth. Shall I find and repeat them?
"This approach seems to be an open invitation for illegal immigration." - Please provide PROOF of the "open invitation". CAN YOU point to the specific policy(s) that do what you claim? I can (and have) shown you policies were the exact opposite is true.
H.R. 2 is very anti-American values.
One way to make our border less attractive to immigrants is for the Republicans to stop lying about it being open. It is no more "open" than under Trump (since the border policies are mostly identical - why is it you have never refuted that claim the many times I have said it?
The solution you seek is for the Republicans to get on board with a comprehensive immigration policy. (Of course, if they do that, then they lose political leverage.) You know, like the one the Senate had and the Republicans in the House killed in 2015 or 2016.
And while the Republicans are fighting against more money for border security, they are simultaneously throwing Ukraine under the bus and inviting mass slaughter of Ukrainian civilians.Nearly 6 million refugees fleeing Ukraine are recorded across Europe, while an estimated 8 million others had been displaced within the country by late May 2022 Imagine by now in 2024. Continues. Canada is flooded with Ukraine refugees living under bridges and on the streets. Wail housing has more than double in
cost since Trudeau communism. We built houses faster in 1970s than today and those cost have gone up 30 times. Give Ukraine 250 billion dollars and now they are sending Ukraine women and children because the men have been used up in the Russian meat grinder. With a decent economy to backed them up with the BRICS. It only cost 20 billion to fix homelessness or for many of us, may end up like Palestinians and Ukraineian at this rate.
US will fight the world like the Roman did Europe before their collapse. With only 4% of the world's population, yet with half of the world's war budget. At lease that makes more sense than to spend 100 trillion dollars to change the world's temperature by 1 degree by 2050. If that doesn't work, I'm sure they will have a environmental vaccine to cure that. Hope it's better than the success rate of 2.1 reported in US medical journals of how chemotherapy works wothin 5 years of cancer remission. Cancer thrive on sugar to fatten them up for the kill. It's why I'm my own best doctor, best self government and leader for my circle.
Related Discussions
- 714
What to do About Russia and Ukraine?
by Scott Belford 10 days ago
The consequences of how this aggression by Putin unfolds are enormous. The worst, of course, is the possibility of nuclear war. The best (which would be negatively consequential to Putin) is that Russia has an epiphany and removes its troops from the Ukrainian border. Any move at...
- 32
NATO And The Soviet Union
by Sharlee 2 years ago
NATO serves as a political and military alliance for its 29 member states spanning Europe and North America. Founded in 1949 to provide collective defense against the Soviet Union, the alliance seeks to balance Russian power and influence.Your thoughts, how do you think they are doing on their...
- 55
Russian missiles cross into NATO member Poland, kill 2 senior US intel
by Readmikenow 17 months ago
It looks like the war is spreading.Russian missiles cross into NATO member Poland, kill 2: senior US intelligence officialBiden has promised to defend 'every inch' of NATO territoryBy Liz Friden , Caitlin McFall | Fox News Russian missiles flew over NATO territory and killed two people in Poland on...
- 84
America Ready to Enter Into War with Russia - After November Elections
by Ken Burgess 17 months ago
The U.S. Army's 101st Airborne Division has been deployed to Europe for the first time in almost 80 years amid soaring tension between Russia and the American-led NATO military alliance. The light infantry unit, nicknamed the "Screaming Eagles," is trained to deploy on any battlefield in...
- 80
War Crimes Have Been Committed In Ukraine, U.N. Experts Say
by Sharlee 18 months ago
Russian troops are committing atrocities in Ukraine, such as unprovoked executions, raping, and torturing, of adults as well as children.in “large numbers, according to the United Nations I legal experts.The investigation that was set up by the U.N. to probe the conduct of the war, the Independent...
- 34
Biden says Putin a killer, will pay a price for election interference
by PrettyPanther 3 years ago
https://www.cnbc.comPresident Joe Biden says he believes Russian leader Vladimir Putin is a killer with no soul.Biden vowed that Putin soon “will pay a price” for interfering in the 2020 U.S. presidential election and trying to boost the reelection chances of then-President Donald Trump.Trump for...